[IWantToUnderstand]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

If there's one point on which I can agree with you, it's that. One must choose between Science and Religion - you can't have both.

[James Hutchins]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

As I said, my intention was never to offend you. That statement was really aimed at the large misunderstanding I had with Mr Hutchins. I do not expect gratitude, I instead feel gratitude towards you.

I never misunderstood you. You completely failed at expressing yourself. The same reason why as a child, I was wondering why the large mouth bass I just caught failed to communicate clearly. It mouthed words yet failed to articulate. How could I possibly know what it was trying to say. It would be inappropriate for me to assume I had the answer. In life, we have the Holy Bible to speak for the silent.


Patience is a virtue (so I have been told).

[James Hutchins]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

If there's one point on which I can agree with you, it's that. One must choose between Science and Religion - you can't have both.

Not true. Science only exists because of God. He wants us to question everything and give faith unconditionally. Free Will.

[IWantToUnderstand]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

Again, I apologise for my phrasing. I am still young and learning how to express myself clearly.
By "you can't have both" I meant you have to choose to either believe all of Science or all of the Holy Bible, as Basilissa has said.

[James Hutchins]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

I want to know when you are going to abide by forum rules. We have all been more than reasonable listening to your near incoherent rants and tolerating your belittling.

[IWantToUnderstand]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

The purpose of this account was to ask some questions, which I have done. I might create a proper account in the near future. I agree that this post was against forum rules, and I am grateful to you for letting it slide long enough for me to gain knowledge and understanding - I can help you understand the Atheist mindset in return if you like; though I think you already understand it quite well.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

If you read the Bible, you will realize that it is impossible to reconcile these two paradigms. The Bible makes statements about the world which under modern science paradigm are false

.... though possibly not, Sister, under the "simplified" (for which read "misunderstood") rules of logic which we have had explained to us here. I would be asking for any tuition fees to be refunded and for that teacher to be fired.

I am curious, though, about this:

Yours is also a thought process I did not think I would see here, largely because of this (http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showt...t=44533&page=1) thread.

Tell us, did you just look at the thread title/first post and start out on the basis of a false assumption? Or did you actually take the time to read the entire thread, which (at only 30 pages over a period of eight-and-a-half years) is probably not too challenging for most people. Just to say that it is sometimes unwise to weigh in while so sadly uninformed.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

4. I have read that you reject rational thinking, but do you reject logic? By that, I mean the three laws of logic:
i) Argument 'x' cannot both be true and (apparently “untrue” goes here)
ii)Argument 'x' must be either true or untrue
iii)If argument 'x' is true, it is indeed true
(I'm sorry if these confuse you, I've put them as simply as I could. If they do, just ignore this bit)

Is that supposed to be a syllogism? Because if it is, it doesn't work.

An "argument" can be valid and can be sound but the idea of an "argument" being "true" is new to me. Perhaps its conclusion may be true and the premises need to be true for the argument to be sound, of course.

Scientists (as they call themselves) do not consider the rules of logic to apply universally. Someone like Aristotle would think they did, but work from Democritus or Epicurus.—.relating to the properties of minima.—.refuted claims of that type 2½ millennia ago.

2 + 2 = 4 may or may not be a tautology depending on what the numerals (2) and (4) signify. The superficial meaning could be

: + : = ::

where the counting system is

1 .
2 :
3 :.
4 ::

and so on. But other counting systems may exist, after all the laws of logic and numbers are just human inventions for the purpose of describing observations, the scientists tell us. Another counting system may have values we'd otherwise describe as follows

1 one
2 the square root of two
3 the cube root of three
4 the fourth root of four

et cetera. This would be absolutely internally consistent, new rules and relationships between numbers could be worked out but obviously 1 + 1 would not equal 2.

The Bible is not like that. God is always consistent and there are no mistakes in what He has given us. Because as humans we're limited, living within horizons of perception and experience, it's not always the reality we think we see that actually exists. And let's face it, if we already knew (or could discover) what God knows there wouldn't be much point giving us The Bible. Measured with the rubber ruler of human imperfection serves merely to demonstrate the inadequacies of "science" and "logic" even when it's applied correctly.

Psalm 18:30-32 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him. For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God? It is God that girdeth me with strength, and maketh my way perfect.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

Again, I apologise for my phrasing. I am still young and learning how to express myself clearly.
By "you can't have both" I meant you have to choose to either believe all of Science or all of the Holy Bible, as Basilissa has said.

It sounds as if you expect there to be a zero-sum game here: Either the Bible is correct and science is wrong, or science is correct and the Bible is wrong. Consider that true science reflects Jesus' early handiwork, the natural world. Those who are honest recognize the Holy Bible was the very first scientific research paper in existence! Consider the following:

• Both man and woman possess the seed of life (Genesis 3:15); discovered by man in 17th century
• Earth is held in place by invisible forces (Job 26:7); discovered by man in 1650
• Blood is necessary for life (Leviticus 17:11); discovered by man in 19th century
• Oceans have natural paths in them (Psalms 8:8); discovered by man in 1854
• Light is a particle and has mass (a photon) (Job 38:19); discovered by man in 1932
• Stars give off signals (Job 38:7); discovered by man in 1945
• Oceans contain fresh water springs (Job 38:16); discovered by man in 1920
• Dust is important to survival (Isaiah 40:12); discovered by man in 1935
• Hubert Spencer's scientific principles (Genesis 1); discovered by man in 1820
• Air has weight (Job 28:25); discovered by man in the 17th century
• Light can be split up into component colors (Job 38:24); discovered by man in 1650
• Matter is made up of invisible particles (Romans 1:20); discovered by man in 20th century
• Water cycle (Ecclesiastes 1:7); discovered by man in 17th century
• Lightning and thunder are related (Job 38:25); discovered by man in 19th century

[James Hutchins]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

The purpose of this account was to ask some questions, which I have done. I might create a proper account in the near future. I agree that this post was against forum rules, and I am grateful to you for letting it slide long enough for me to gain knowledge and understanding - I can help you understand the Atheist mindset in return if you like; though I think you already understand it quite well.

Oh we understand you. We see people lioke you every day. Ignorant , popous and self righteous, thinking "I can fool the dumb old Christians."
Atheists are simply people who are destined to burn in Hell for all of eternity. Now, if one of you people had an open mind, we could help you. That is what we do. Help people understand. We cannot do that if you are close minded. Open your eyes.


Also understand, the DoF keeps a very close eye in the interwebs and thanks to proprietary tools provided by Al Gore and utilized in the JesOS Ver. 10.7, it is near impossible to have a second account. Just like you get one life. There is no such thing as Second Life.

[Basilissa]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

If there's one point on which I can agree with you, it's that. One must choose between Science and Religion - you can't have both.

In your reply, you have omitted a very important word here - paradigm.

Paradigm
3 : a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated

the Freudian paradigm of psychoanalysis

broadly : a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind

It is the scientific paradigm that we reject. We do approve of science - as already pointed out by Sister Mary E., we have an entire forum dedicated to Creation Science - as long as that science confirms what we already know is true because the Bible tells us so. In other words, we are OK with science as long as it is done within the framework of the Biblical paradigm. Here is an example of a scientific report written within the Biblical paradigm.

The purpose of this account was to ask some questions, which I have done. I might create a proper account in the near future.

No need to do so. You already have one account, why in the world would you want to have two?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

God describes two distinct categories of science.

Daniel 1:3-6 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes; Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king. Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.

The wonderful events following on may be read by clicking the reference header. Similarly when Paul wrote to encourage Timothy he knew about the nonsense coming from naturalistic belief systems around that time and before resulting in fools such as Archimedes, Euclid and Heron of Alexandria. Soon their falsehoods were to be crushed but in the meantime danger was abroad.

I Timothy 6:20-21a O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science.falsely.so.called which some professing have erred concerning the faith.

The distinction is made quite plain and the ideas circulating then are easy enough to discover although Paul does not specify which "scientists" particularly, no doubt wishing to avoid unnecessary publicity.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

Ezekiel Bathfire, thank you for your clear reply. Yes, Logic is a syllogism, and I have defined it using the three official laws of logic. Do you agree with them?
i) Argument 'x' cannot both be true and untrue
ii)Argument 'x' must be either true or untrue
iii)If argument 'x' is true, it is indeed true

You missed out a word...

If you read the Bible and miss out words, it is small wonder that you think that there are discrepancies within its Holy Pages.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

What would it take to convince you to change your faith? Be honest. If the Muslim god came down from the heavens and spoke to you, would you change your mind?

I could not change my mind even if I witnessed a wonder or miracle.

Deut 13:1-3
1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

The written record of the miracles performed by Jesus 2,000 years ago is more than enough to convince me I'm right.

Jn 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

I trust the Bible more than I trust my own eyes and ears.

I could not change my mind by hearing a false teacher.

Gal 1:8-9
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

I could not change my mind through reasoning.

For I did not reach my position through reason.

1 Cor 2:13-14
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I could not change my mind if secular science proved the Bible wrong.

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

For example, I know science has proved prayer doesn't work (and in fact may be harmful), but I still pray.

I could not change my mind. PERIOD.

I do not have the power to change my mind about God; He has made up His mind about me. He has chosen me. He has saved me and made me one of His people. And there is nothing that can change that.

Jn 10:27-29
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Phil 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Rom 11:28-29
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

There would be no point in you trying to change my mind or in me trying to re-examine my beliefs. The only way I could change my mind is if I somehow lost my faith first. Then I would know the above passages were wrong. But that can't happen because the Bible says so.

As I think Sister Mitza mentioned, you seem misunderstand what an argument is. I have written a short guide which you may find enlightening.


In His grip,

P. P.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: I want to understand this forum, and you, dear reader.

You know I never understood before that we're not the ones who choose to believe in God. Even though we're unworthy of Redemption it is by Christ that we believe. If this applied to everyone there'd be no point choosing us (over everyone else) because there'd be nothing to distinguish us from them. The topic would simply not arise.

I Peter 1:18-21 Ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

We have been rescued from the everlasting torment described in The Bible and have no choice what we believe because it's in The Spirit sustaining us by which that belief comes. A bit like if you breathe air with fumes in it whatever's in the fumes gets in your blood. That eucalyptus stuff with a towel over your head when you've got a cough, for example.