[Elmer G. White]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

This is an important question. I guess you already know that Catholics rely on Tradition, Biblical experts and common sense to help solve this issue.

Yes, I know.

You thus rely on modern science when it comes to the Genesis not being literal history. OK. This is acceptable. I don't endorse it and I think that it is perilous to your soul and to Christianity based on the issues I tried to make you assess (suffering and eschatology).

When it comes to choosing the parts that you like, however, you do not rely on modern science. OK. Your choice. Instead (from the perspective of methodological naturalism that is OK with Genesis) you choose to believe...

• Tradition (the ad traditionem fallacy, things don't have to be right even if many people used to believe them).
• Biblical experts (the ad verecundiam/appeal to authority fallacy - an issue can be wrong even if promoted by a prestigious figure, you might want to check the Nobel-Prize winner Montagnier and his opinions on water memory, if you're interested; and you could rely on the Bible instead of someone else's opinion on it).
• Common sense (the appeal to reason fallacy, for instance, QM and the theory of relativity and totally against common sense yet in those cases they're OK).

Verily, this is what I called special pleading earlier on. Different criteria to assess different issues. Still, please let me say that I appreciate your sincerity and our discussion, as you clearly have been forced to step out of your comfort zone. I urge you to re-assess the positions of tradition, your own musings (our cognitive faculties are notoriously unreliable) and reliance on authority and then think over the things we discussed. I am afraid that I'm seeing precedents of all this in the Bible.

1 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

I don't think I need to say more at the moment. I'm praying for you.


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Do you still think that this is about the approximation of Pi (the Babylonians did that in your opinion better than God as they used 3.125 - you can look for the references yourself)?

I thought that a tablet from the Yale Babylonian Collection known as YBC 7302 had the value of pi as 3? It is true that later tablets had the value as 3.125.The fact is that any value of pi is going to be inaccurate. The closest value is given to about 3 trillion digits.

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Now, could an omnipotent God ...

I already said that I don't believe that your concept of omnipotence is correct. I don't believe that God can create a set of all sets which do not contain themselves as members.BTW, I am still getting cited for infractions, so I am not sure how long it will be before I am banned.

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

How do you choose which parts of the Bible are literal and which are not?

This is an important question. I guess you already know that Catholics rely on Tradition, Biblical experts and common sense to help solve this issue.

[Elmer G. White]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

As I already said, the Bible was correct about the value of pi to the nearest integer. There is no known value of pi because pi is a transcendental number and I don't think that anyone knows the value of pi beyond four trillion digits.

Do you still think that this is about the approximation of Pi (the Babylonians did that in your opinion better than God as they used 3.125 - you can look for the references yourself)? It is about trusting the Bible. Which are the parts that are reliable and how can you tell if you think that, e.g., the Genesis did not understand the Creation very well? Could the uneducated peasants of 33 AD then understand what happened during and after the Crucifixion?

How do you choose which parts of the Bible are literal and which are not? Jesus Himself emphasized the importance of Scriptures (OT) when it came to understanding His Resurrection.

John 2:22
When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[Elmer G. White]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Fixsen,D. J. (2009). "The Temperature of the Cosmic MicrowaveBackground". TheAstrophysical Journal. 707(2):916–920.

White,M. (1999). Anisotropiesin the CMB. Proceedingsof the Los Angeles Meeting, DPF 99. UCLA. arXiv:astro-ph/9903232 

Nice.

Now, could an omnipotent God have fixed these transfirmamental temperatures to show those values in the instruments without having to go through all the mess of the Big Bang? If He can fix the parameters of the Big Bang to unravel into this universe, why bother, as He could do all it is six days as easily? What kind of God is this (back to mindless suffering and eschatology that you have not assessed yet)?

Does the background radiation falsify a God who did it ex nihilo to look like that? Are these the only two options or are there more?

Matthew 21:42
Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

If the Bible was wrong about the value of Pi,

As I already said, the Bible was correct about the value of pi to the nearest integer. There is no known value of pi because pi is a transcendental number and I don't think that anyone knows the value of pi beyond four trillion digits.

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

As we have already established many posts ago, nobody cares about quotes that Someone Important said over coffee.

Let me repeat that: in science, nobody cares about quotes of famous people.
Nobody.

Here is the surprising fact about science: it is all about interpretations derived directly from data, presented in peer reviewed publications which also contain - wait for it, wait for it - supporting rigorous data.

Therefore, please refrain from posting anecdotes about people with high index of name recognition. Because nobody cares. Really. NOBODY CARES.

Please cite a specific article, not the entire damned database! Have you ever written a source-based paper in college? I guess the more important question is, have you ever made it to college? Seriously, backing your claims up with data is not that hard, assuming that such data actually exists!

Fixsen,D. J. (2009). "The Temperature of the Cosmic MicrowaveBackground". TheAstrophysical Journal. 707(2):916–920.


White,M. (1999). Anisotropiesin the CMB. Proceedingsof the Los Angeles Meeting, DPF 99. UCLA. arXiv:astro-ph/9903232 

[Didymus Much]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

...You'd think that he would be able to learn something when others used peer reviewed publications to support specific claims...

I'm not even asking for anything that rigourous, just something beyond his say-so. That's part of what I love about this place: when the True Christians™ claim that the Bible directs them to some behaviour that has everyone going WTF, they pull out the Scripture (IN CONTEXT) that supports it.

...he just stops pushing when he realizes that someone else actually knows more about the given subject and goes back to the same pseudo-scientific babbling, ignoring all of the evidence that was provided....

Oh, you should dig through the Landover archives. Some wonderfully foil-hatted characters find their way here (cursing my poor memory for failing to summon any specific names atm, let me get back to you).

[Elmer G. White]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Scientific accuracy, such as the correct value of pi to 3 trillion places, is not essential to attaining eternal salvation and therefore it is understandable that the Bible would give an integral approximation to pi. The Bible teaches us many important things such as there is one God and that humans are made in the divine image. The categories, methods and mathematics of today's scientific enterprise would not have been understood by the people at the time the Bible was written.

1. The Bible teaches us that the Earth was Created in six days, the Sun later than the Earth and birds before land mammals. Science says it it not so. You accept this?
2. If the Bible was wrong about the value of Pi, can you be certain that it is correct about the One God and us being made in His image? How would the people being around at that time know these things if they were so ignorant in other issues?
3. The Gospels say that Jesus was God, that He suffered and Arose from the Dead. The combined forces of natural sciences, history, textual criticism, etc. say that this cannot be proven and that most of the stories in the Gospels are unlikely. If there was a historical Jesus, the Divinity can still not be proven. Do you accept this also, as it derives from the same scientific enterprise that would not have been understood by the people at the time the Bible was written?

Was there a Jesus? Did He say the things written in the Gospel? If He did, was He wrong when He referred to Adam, Noah, Jonah, etc.? If there was a Jesus, how can the atheist know that He was God if other parts of the Bible are unreliable?

1 Timothy 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Let's ask this one more time:

• If natural science is right when it dismisses the literal Genesis, how can it be wrong when it combines forces with historical sciences, archaeology and textual analysis and says that the Gospels are not literal, either?

Yours in Christ,

Elmer

Scientific accuracy, such as the correct value of pi to 3 trillion places, is not essential to attaining eternal salvation and therefore it is understandable that the Bible would give an integral approximation to pi. The Bible teaches us many important things such as there is one God and that humans are made in the divine image. The categories, methods and mathematics of today's scientific enterprise would not have been understood by the people at the time the Bible was written.

[Dolores de Barriga]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

1. "This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened" quote from Einstein about the Big Bang theory developed by Father LeMaitre.
p. 55 of Cosmology and Controversy
by Helge Kragh
OR
How Einstein Created Relativity out of Physics and Astronomy by David Topper.

As we have already established many posts ago, nobody cares about quotes that Someone Important said over coffee.

Let me repeat that: in science, nobody cares about quotes of famous people.
Nobody.

Here is the surprising fact about science: it is all about interpretations derived directly from data, presented in peer reviewed publications which also contain - wait for it, wait for it - supporting rigorous data.

Therefore, please refrain from posting anecdotes about people with high index of name recognition. Because nobody cares. Really. NOBODY CARES.

2. The cosmic microwave background (CM spectrum is that of a nearly perfect blackbody with a temperature of 2.725 +/- 0.002 K. This observation matches the predictions of the Big Bang theory:
NASA Report on Findings of the COBE Satellite. http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/

Please cite a specific article, not the entire damned database! Have you ever written a source-based paper in college? I guess the more important question is, have you ever made it to college? Seriously, backing your claims up with data is not that hard, assuming that such data actually exists!

[Elmer G. White]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

The world of methodological naturalism does not care who said something... the names are irrelevant... the theory would be judged based on its merits and predictive power, not by any fancy names that support or dismiss it... not opinions about these sources.

1. "This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened" quote from Einstein

Matthew 22:29
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

The Truth™ value of Christianity cannot be judged based on the popularity of different denominations.

That is an argument which I haven't used yet.

[tomdstone]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

And off to another irrelevant tangent, quite predictably lacking any citation or reference.

1. "This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened" quote from Einstein about the Big Bang theory developed by Father LeMaitre.
p. 55 of Cosmology and Controversy
by Helge Kragh
OR
How Einstein Created Relativity out of Physics and Astronomy by David Topper.
2. The cosmic microwave background (CM spectrum is that of a nearly perfect blackbody with a temperature of 2.725 +/- 0.002 K. This observation matches the predictions of the Big Bang theory:
NASA Report on Findings of the COBE Satellite. http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/