 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 7005
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 7:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | The discussions are about a clash between scientific methodology and faith in Genesis. These are not paradigms. One is faith and the other is a method of mounting knowledge which grows in clarification. |
at their core these discussions are about conclusions, not methodology. Creationism asserts that life was created and that mankind was a special creation. Evolutionary theory asserts that life happened and mankind evolved from lower forms of life. There are definitely two disparate paradigms at work here (two different world views, one with a Creator and one without).
| Quote: | | Fundamentalists blame mainstream scientists for thier failure to meet scientific standards. That is simply sour grapes. |
I disagree. For the most part, creationists point out that 'mainstream scientists' fail to adhere to the scientific standards which the scientific community has put in place when considering the evidence. Their definitions change, their hypothesis' change, everything changes except for the conclusion - they do whatever they have to do to make everything fit into their pre-formed conclusion.
That isn't 'sour grapes', it is pointing out that they don't follow their own methodology consistently and they do not view the evidence objectively.
| Quote: |
Do you envy science because it can demonstrate change with evidence that can be tested? |
Not really as I, and everyone else understands that things change - so it really isn't an issue.
| Quote: | | Creationism rejects the idea that life has evolved from simpler organisms to complex ones over millions of years. |
You got me on this one. Creationsim, and creationists do indeed reject the idea that the unproven assertion of the whole 'goo to you' debacle.
| Quote: | | Creationism rejects carbon dating. |
No it doesn't. Some 'creationists' do, particularly YEC proponents.
| Quote: | | Creationism rejects scientific conclusions of anthropology, archeology, astronomy, chemistry, geology, linguistics, physics, psychology..etc. |
No it doesn't, not at all.
| Quote: | | The Theory of Evolution is the result of observation and successful testing. What is Creationism the result of? |
True, TOE is a result of observation and testing. However, it's conclusions are not objective considering the evidence, and the nuts and bolts of the theory itself continues to be reworked and revised to accomdate evidence that does not fit its paradigm, ultimately the entire theory is up for grabs as long as the conclusion remains the same.
Creationism is the result of the Truth of the Word of God: There is a Creator, this world we know had a created beginning and mankind was created separate from the animals.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1267
Location: US
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | Quote: | | He often disagrees with others. He states his points very succinctly but I (personally) have never seen him stoop to name calling or making belittling comments to others. This, in my book, is his most admirable quality. |
I agree that he is intelligent and he does make his points very succinctly (sometimes a bit esoteric though).
I have, unfortunately, seen him stoop to name calling and make belittling comments, although I do not understand what this has to do with the current discussion... |
What do the comments about his intellect have to do with the current discussion?
Isn't the purpose of this thread to determine why FFT & Trinity keep going at it even though they have different points of view and neither is ever going to sway the other to their way of thinking?
I have to wonder about 2 things here:
1) Why FFT & Trinity? Or is this a question aimed at all the 'FFT/Trinity' couplings on this forum? There is, for example, one person on this forum that I will never see eye to eye with on much of anything (and visa-versa). We're like oil and vinegar but we keep going at it. Why? I don't know why. He draws me in to these insane and sometimes inane arguments (and visa-versa). There are many such couplings on this board and some that were on this board that are no longer.
2) I wonder why it bothers you that I complimented FFT. In my experience, he has always been a gentleman even when he whole-heartedly disagreed with my views.
Luv
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 7005
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1) I think the OP addressed FFT and Trinity because they do go round and round in their creation vs. evolution discussion. Although I agree that the spirit of the question has a much broader application than FFT and Trinity.
2) I don't think you understood my meaning. I have/had no problem with you complimenting FFT. If you reread my post it was directed at the comments you made about 'name calling' and belittling.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Big Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 959
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | I see both as paradigmaticly limited. Both view the evidence discussed within the parameters of their chosen conclusion, and thus both interpret the evidence in such a way as it only leads to those pre-formed conclusions. |
Yeah Rev,
I can see your point, to a certain extent, but Trinity's parameters transcend that of his opponent. It's an unfair match-up really.
Now if we want to talk in a broader sense about religious folk in general....yeah....there are many religious groups who set up boundaries similar to that of FFT's.
If we are to determine that Trinity's belief in God limits him from not believing in God........well then we are in some sort of a paradoxical false logic rational situation.....basically......you can't go there.....it only serves to confuse.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ana
King of the Jungle
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1566
Location: BC
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dust wrote: |
I can see your point, to a certain extent, but Trinity's parameters transcend that of his opponent. |
If FFT used to be in Trinity's position but isn't anymore, then he's experienced things from both sides of the coin, so to speak. If Trinity, on the other hand, hasn't experienced FFT's position, but merely his own, then how can you say his parameters are broader than FFT's?
_________________
Truth doesn't care about theology, and theology doesn't care about truth.
Ana's Bananas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Big Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 959
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I highly doubt that FFT was ever in Trinity's camp, however FFT may have had some prior religious experience, of which he pulled back from for probably legitimate reasons, but that's just educated speculation on my part. Even if FFT acted at one time outside his current bounds, he now has accepted those bounds. Trinity operates with-in those bounds and beyond.
From my particular view of course.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Honestly I don't get how going "hey, this makes a lot more sense" is accepting some sort of boundary on whatever it is we're talking about.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Big Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 959
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
The boundary is that which is between the physical and the metaphysical. This boundary is transcended at varying degrees and levels both consciously and unconsciously by all men.
One who accepts the physical, as well as the metaphysical, as substantiative, is potentially without bounds, as the metaphysical itself....as it were....is without bounds.
As it pertains to the OP, the discussions on this subject (as well as various others) seem fruitless for the most part, but still, what is alive in the discussions.........is hope. And, as it is.......I think some change actually does and/or can occur.........over time  .
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dust wrote: | | The boundary is that which is between the physical and the metaphysical. |
Between "real" and "not real," got it.
I'd accept metaphysical nonsense if I felt it actually had any merit but it's just a bunch of people claiming different things and none of which with any evidence beyond at best their own experience. To claim that because I don't accept things without evidence is some sort of boundary? I'd rather have that boundary, honestly. Keeps me from believing things that are ridiculous.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin
Beloved Admin
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1813
Location: Macau, China
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am truly amazed by many of the comments on this thread. I guess the phrase that summarizes it is: "Perspective is unique."
_________________
Cybermonsters (Most Beloved Admin)
Favorite Octopus Video! - My Site - Studio
Have a question or need help with your account? E-mail: forum @ askland.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dust wrote: | | Trinity operates with-in those bounds and beyond. |
Trinity simply lacks knowledge on the subject and has a narrow view of that which he cannot understand. I think that's very human. I allow for that as I try to enlighten him on the subject.
FFT, on the other hand seems to easily grasp the subject and is struggling within himself to reach a conclusion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ana wrote: | | Dust wrote: |
I can see your point, to a certain extent, but Trinity's parameters transcend that of his opponent. |
If FFT used to be in Trinity's position but isn't anymore, then he's experienced things from both sides of the coin, so to speak. If Trinity, on the other hand, hasn't experienced FFT's position, but merely his own, then how can you say his parameters are broader than FFT's? |
I'm trying to figure out how Dust can say that Trinity operates within the same bounds that he operates beyond. I'm not sure Dust has a handle on what he's talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Big Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 959
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | | I'd accept metaphysical nonsense if I felt it actually had any merit but it's just a bunch of people claiming different things and none of which with any evidence beyond at best their own experience. To claim that because I don't accept things without evidence is some sort of boundary? I'd rather have that boundary, honestly. Keeps me from believing things that are ridiculous. |
Well there you go......How can there possibly be any movement towards a particular position, or an understanding of the other side of the discussion, if one does not have a heart for it.
| Scorp wrote: | Trinity simply lacks knowledge on the subject and has a narrow view of that which he cannot understand. I think that's very human. I allow for that as I try to enlighten him on the subject.
FFT, on the other hand seems to easily grasp the subject and is struggling within himself to reach a conclusion. |
Scorp, is it possible that you simply cannot grasp Trinity's position....that perhaps you do not have the heart to understand it, let alone accept it?
| Scorp wrote: | | I'm trying to figure out how Dust can say that Trinity operates within the same bounds that he operates beyond. I'm not sure Dust has a handle on what he's talking about. |
tran·scend - to rise above or go beyond; overpass; exceed: to transcend the limits of thought; kindness transcends courtesy.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:53 am Post subject: Morning Dust. |
|
|
| Dust wrote: | | Scorp wrote: | Trinity simply lacks knowledge on the subject and has a narrow view of that which he cannot understand. I think that's very human. I allow for that as I try to enlighten him on the subject.
FFT, on the other hand seems to easily grasp the subject and is struggling within himself to reach a conclusion. |
Scorp, is it possible that you simply cannot grasp Trinity's position....that perhaps you do not have the heart to understand it, let alone accept it? |
If I did not "grasp" Trinity's position, rather than refute him, I would be asking him to clarify his comments. I make it a habit to not refute that which I cannot "Grasp".
| Dust wrote: | | Scorp wrote: | | I'm trying to figure out how Dust can say that Trinity operates within the same bounds that he operates beyond. I'm not sure Dust has a handle on what he's talking about. |
tran·scend - to rise above or go beyond; overpass; exceed: to transcend the limits of thought; kindness transcends courtesy. |
My question to you is how can Trinity both transcend and remain within the same bounds at the same time? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dust wrote: | | Well there you go......How can there possibly be any movement towards a particular position, or an understanding of the other side of the discussion, if one does not have a heart for it. |
Surprisingly easily, actually.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
