- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Doesn't it strike you as awfully coincidental? (Science vs Religious Belief)
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:55 am to Vegas Bengal
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:55 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
There simply is no reason today to continue believing in Adam and Eve.
You've told me on more than one occasion that you believe the teachings of Jesus. Jesus himself spoke of Abel, Adam and Eve's son. Jesus spoke of other Old Testament stories like Noah and the ark and Jonah and the whale as very real, literal people. How do you reconcile the obvious inconsistencies of you saying you believe his words and yet denying the real existence of these beings? How does anyone who calls themselves a Christian in fact do so? Surely God's son would know if these people were real or not?
This post was edited on 1/2/14 at 11:58 am
3
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:55 am to TK421
quote:
No, you committed a logical fallacy and you are not nearly as intelligent as you think you are. This is a common trend with posters who start threads like these.
Lol sorry buddy, but pot and kettle.
My argument was not intended to prove global warming is true(which would make your point valid), but instead it was a use of an extreme to prove that humans CAN drastically alter the environment. That makes your point invalid. You do not seem to be as smart as you think you are.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:57 am to Revelator
quote:The two are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to believe in his teachings yet not believe every word the bible states that Jesus said.
How do you reconcile the obvious inconsistencies of you saying you believe his words and yet denying the real existence of these beings?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:57 am to Revelator
quote:
Jesus himself spoke of Abel, Adam and Eve's son. Jesus spoke of other Old Testament stories like Noah and the ark and Jonah and the whale as very real, literal people.
Did he though? He also frequently spoke in parables. I'm not saying you are right or wrong, I respect you in many ways, but I do think there is room for some ambiguity.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:59 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
Indeed. For all the back-and-forth on evoltuion vs. religion on this board... I've never seen an original-thought scientific argument presented. Only agument from authority (at best), but mostly its simple bandwagoning.
LOL, but unless you are a climate scientist, what else do you have but climate science consensus? The more potent question in my mind is how, if you do NOT have a degree in climate science, can you defend going against climate science consensus? Sure skepticism is great, but lots of people move WAY beyond that.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:59 am to AUbused
quote:
but instead it was a use of an extreme
Also known as reductio ad absurdum since you used it incorrectly.
Again, what is your profession? Do you have any degrees in a field of science?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:00 pm to Jay Quest
quote:
I don't know a single Christian who is anti science. Some accept evolution and some don't. Why not just allow them to believe what they chose to believe without ridicule?
That about sums it up for me.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:01 pm to AUbused
quote:
LOL, but unless you are a climate scientist, what else do you have but climate science consensus? The more potent question in my mind is how, if you do NOT have a degree in climate science, can you defend going against climate science consensus? Sure skepticism is great, but lots of people move WAY beyond that.
That's my contention as well. If you aren't a climate scientist why would you want to play amateur detective and try to disprove something that you don't have any credentials to evaluate?
NC Tigah seems to think he's got it all figured out of course.
I'm sure he loves karaoke too
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:02 pm to TK421
quote:
Did he though? He also frequently spoke in parables. I'm not saying you are right or wrong, I respect you in many ways, but I do think there is room for some ambiguity.
Jesus talked about righteous Abel's blood crying from the ground and obvious reference to his brother Cain killing him. He spoke about the prophet Jonah more than once and even mentioned," Jonah and the whale." Jesus also spoke about Noah. All of these are very real Old Testament people and Jesus referred to them in context. How is this in any way, ambiguous?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:03 pm to AUbused
quote:Well, you have . . . < wait for it > . . . actual SCIENCE !
but unless you are a climate scientist, what else do you have but climate science consensus?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:05 pm to TK421
quote:
Also known as reductio ad absurdum since you used it incorrectly.
Guess we'll just what to agree to disagree on that definition.
quote:
Again, what is your profession? Do you have any degrees in a field of science?
Why? You wouldn't be looking to go all ad hominem on me would you? If I told you that I had a degree in science would you even believe me? Nah, how about we just stick with you arguing against the words I present here in the thread.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:05 pm to AUbused
quote:I believe that's called faith. You just have different apostles.
unless you are a climate scientist, what else do you have but climate science consensus?
If consensus proves something... God is real. Because most priests are convinced God exists.
quote:First, why do you think earning a degree is the only way to gain subject matter knowledge?
The more potent question in my mind is how, if you do NOT have a degree in climate science, can you defend going against climate science consensus?
I'm perfectly fine if you can make a case for the origin of man yourself. Go ahead. Tell us how it happened...
Secondly, many of the modeling techniques used by climate "scientists" are ubiquitous and used in many industries--the limitations are well known, and easily to see.
Third, there are multiple websites with actual emails of what the IPCC cabal said in their own words, and the data they provide.
This post was edited on 1/2/14 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:06 pm to Revelator
If, for instance, the story of Jonah and the large fish was always intended to be interpreted as allegory, Jesus referring to it by name would not contradict that interpretation. In a similar way, modern preachers might reference the prodigal son while everyone agrees that he wasn't a real person.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:08 pm to Taxing Authority
I cant post it right now, but if you want to hear something interesting, goggle "if i were the Devil" Told be Paul Harvey. Its pretty shocking everything thing he talks about. Worth the effort to listen to.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:08 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Well, you have . . . < wait for it > . . . actual SCIENCE !
Yes, you're right, the whole thing is a pseudo-scientific sham perpetrated by large swaths of the worlds intellectuals. Its a big coordinated gag.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:08 pm to Taxing Authority
One of the properties in physics is that all matter goes toward chaos. Things go from organized to unorganized, not the opposite. Ex: If you put a gas into a box it will move until it is spaced out equidistant. If you leave your yard unattended for the summer, it will not be neatly manicured but overgrow and random. The only reason that my yard looks well kept is because of a purposeful outside force, my lawn man.
The complexities of human beings are far greater than the two examples above. Therefore, I must conclude that there has to be a creator to have designed and built us. Science strengthens my belief in God.
Believe what you want but only fools think that man can explain everything in the world. Think bigger...
The complexities of human beings are far greater than the two examples above. Therefore, I must conclude that there has to be a creator to have designed and built us. Science strengthens my belief in God.
Believe what you want but only fools think that man can explain everything in the world. Think bigger...
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:09 pm to AUbused
quote:
Why? You wouldn't be looking to go all ad hominem on me would you?
I don't think you know what this term means. Ad hominem arguments refer to personal traits that are unrelated to the topic. An example would be those in this thread that would discount my knowledge of science based on the fact that I am Christian. Your knowledge, or lack thereof, is very much pertinent to this discussion.
quote:
about we just stick with you arguing against the words I present here in the thread.
What point would you say you have made in this thread?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:10 pm to AUbused
quote:This is how I know you are ignorant on the issue. Climate "science" is a very incestuous group that has endeavored to keep contradictory data from public view. The large swaths come from... wait for it... consensus...
Yes, you're right, the whole thing is a pseudo-scientific sham perpetrated by large swaths of the worlds intellectuals.
This post was edited on 1/2/14 at 12:13 pm
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:10 pm to TK421
quote:
If, for instance, the story of Jonah and the large fish was always intended to be interpreted as allegory, Jesus referring to it by name would not contradict that interpretation. In a similar way, modern preachers might reference the prodigal son while everyone agrees that he wasn't a real person.
First off, the bible says that Jesus as the word was always with God and is directly attributed with creation in John 1:3 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Do you think it's logical that Jesus as the word created the world and it's first inhabitants, Adam and Eve, and yet somehow not know if they were real?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 12:11 pm to AUbused
quote:I do consider it a soft science. It is the same thing as meteorology, but on a larger scale. It is also less accurate than meteorology.
Yes, you're right, the whole thing is a pseudo-scientific sham perpetrated by large swaths of the worlds intellectuals. Its a big coordinated gag.
Page 6 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News