Senate Christianity Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Community' started by Jabba-wocky, Aug 1, 2013.

  1. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    Wocky what are you even going on about?

    >The complaints about how unconvincing these responses have been thus overlook the fact that they were never trying to be very convincing.

    Except for the 10+ times SkywalkerNumbers has complained about us not being convinced by her.
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  2. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    No, magic is reserved for things like talking snakes, a burning talking bush, an old dude somehow fitting all of the world's animals onto a tiny boat, another old dude separating the waters of a sea, virgins getting impregnated, and young dudes dying and getting resurrected.
  3. Jabba-wocky Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 4, 2003
    star 8
    "Why aren't you satisfied with my Biblical interpretation in a thread where people interpret the Bible?" makes a modicum of sense, whereas "Why aren't you satisfied with my science discussions in a thread where people interpret the Bible?" is at least a bit more odd.

    As always, scientific information is interesting, and makes for an interesting perspective in any broader discussion. But I just fail to see why failure to rigorously debate science in a thread that never claims to be about scientific inquiry or provable data means anything. The most basic premise of all this is an invisible being with limitless power. That already doesn't really fit very well with modern science. Why would you bother to bring up anything else beyond that? What does it even matter?
    Sarge likes this.
  4. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    It doesn't particularly matter to me what a thread is called or why the conversation steered into the direction it did. I deal with where the conversation was when I entered, and when I entered this thread, we had two people claiming young earth creationism.

    So, if you're done with this meta-thread nonsense, we can get back to me destroying anyone who thinks science is "flawed."
  5. Jabba-wocky Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 4, 2003
    star 8
    But in what way are you "crushing" them? You responded to people who acknowledge the disagreement between science and the Genesis creation story about the origins of the universe and pointed out to them at great length that. . .modern science disagrees with the Genesis creation story. They know. They don't care. More posts isn't going to change that, nor really should it.
    Sarge likes this.
  6. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    Well why discuss anything? "No one cares," right? When has "they don't care" ever been a valid point?
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  7. Jabba-wocky Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 4, 2003
    star 8
    Erm.

    Usually you don't have a discussion if the other party you are trying to discuss with isn't interested.
  8. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    Based on the replies the other person seems interested.
  9. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    ...in converting the rest of us.
    timmoishere likes this.
  10. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    When confronted with credible new information that contradicts one's previously held beliefs, an intellectually honest person will change his or her beliefs to adapt to the new information. An intellectually dishonest person will seek a way to discredit the new information or jump through a thousand hoops to make both of them fit together.

    Clinging to a literal interpretation of creation despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary is intellectual dishonesty.
  11. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    Or, you can take the third option and acknowledge the other arty has a point even if you don't agree with it.
    Sarge likes this.
  12. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    Thank you, Katana_Geldar. I was about to give up on this thread, but you spoke up as a voice of reason.

    I'm not trying to "prove" anything here except that reasonable, intelligent people can look at evidence and see different ways to interpret that evidence. If you choose to disagree with that evidence, that's your choice. Just try to see another's point of view before dismissing it out of hand.
    Katana_Geldar likes this.
  13. Ghost Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2003
    star 6
    I wasn't debating the exact amount of years with you, I was trying to explain evolution. Couldn't what I said be true, about evolution and God co-existing? Pasted my earlier response below for you:





    Catholic brothers at my old high school used to say that Adam and Eve were just a metaphor for the cause of humanity's sinful nature. I think the Catholic Catechism says that the Adam & Eve story is probably not literal, but still offers insight into the distant time period when humans became morally-aware.
  14. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    It's perfectly acceptable to dismiss an unscientific view on the nature of the universe out of hand. :)
  15. Zapdos Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 7, 2013
    star 5
  16. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    It won't win you any friends though.
  17. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    There's nothing wrong with seeing things scientifically, but the older I get the more I understand that some things transcend science. I've seen many people realize that as they grow older. Maybe we should revisit this conversation in 10 or 20 years.
    Katana_Geldar likes this.
  18. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7

    Science isn't some ephemeral understanding of the universe that goes away with age. There's no special knowledge that being old gives you that some how transcends science.

    Also, all those old scientists with the crazy hair. Yeah, try again.
    Last edited by Lord Vivec, Aug 5, 2013
  19. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    What things have you seen that transcend science, Sarge? If you mean there are things that science hasn't explained yet, well yeah, that's obvious. Humanity knows more today than it did yesterday, and it will know more tomorrow. That's how learning works.

    Take the Big Bang for example. No one knows what caused it, but the effects of it are observable and measurable. My personal hypothesis is that the universe is like a balloon that keeps on expanding and contracting over trillions of years. It is currently expanding, but when the universe reaches a critical mass, assisted by the numerous black holes, it will start shrinking again. It will collapse into a massive black hole, which will eventually explode again with a new Big Bang and so on. I don't have any evidence to support such an idea, nor have I presented it to the scientific community, but it's a neat and tidy explanation that I'm satisfied with.
  20. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    I'll be 61 in 20 years, and I've actually become less religious with age. What should we revisit?
  21. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    I've heard the theory that the universe will keep expanding forever, and I could never wrap my head around that. With all the mass in the universe, shouldn't we expect everything to eventually gravitate back to a center? Gravity obeys the inverse square law, so it never completely vanishes at any distance, and with all the time in the universe, shouldn't gravity suck everything back into the big crunch at the end of time? As I understand it, the expanding forever theorists are pointing to mysterious properties of dark matter and dark energy to explain their theory. I haven't looked into those much.
    The question that intrigued me was, how did the cycle begin? If our big bang was caused by the most recent big crunch, what caused the previous big bang? Where did it all begin? Nothing comes from nothing, so how did the first big bang happen? I'm sure you won't be shocked when I tell you I believe that was God's doing.

    There are things science hasn't explained, absolutely. I believe there are some things that science will never explain. Those are miracles. Again, I'm sure you're not shocked that I believe in miracles! I've had dreams about people and learned things about them I never could have known. And I've seen too many "coincidences" to believe there's no all powerful force field controlling everything. One example: A friend had a baby girl born with a heart defect. The surgery worked and she is happy and healthy now, but my friend had no way of paying the bills. He was out of money and out of food and still owed $750. That was when someone showed up with an envelope full of cash collected from friends. The envelope held $760. And he had just ordered a $10 pizza without knowing how he was going to pay for it.
    I'm sure most people will dismiss that as an amazing coincidence. I find it easier to believe that is God at work.
  22. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    Do you understand the difference between knowledge and wisdom?
    [IMG]

    @AnakinsFan, we should revisit what we've learned in 20 years, how we've grown, how we've changed, how we see things differently. If we knew any of that now, we wouldn't have to wait 20 years!
    Katana_Geldar likes this.
  23. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    Gravity is actually a very weak force compared to the three others. As far as I know, the current understanding is that dark energy will eventually overwhelm even the forces that hold atoms together.
  24. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    As far as I am aware, nobody really knows how the universe got started. The problem with the God theory is that it doesn't explain where God came from. If nothing comes from nothing, then how did God first appear to cause the big bang. It seems like many religious people are very willing to accept the notion that something as big and complex as the universe must have come from somewhere, it just couldn't have appeared without a creator, but they are very unwilling to accept the notion that the same problem applies to the creator itself. If god created the universe, who created god? If it's OK to say that God is just some eternal force which has always been there, then why can't the same explanation be applied to the universe? It just seems inconsistent to me.

    Wherever I come across inexplicable stuff that 'transcends' scientific or rational explanation, I just file that away under "inexplicable" and hope someday that a plausible answer is found. Until then it is simply unexplained. You appear to file the same phenomena away under 'God's work" and that is fine and dandy as everyone has different ways of dealing with reality and processing the events which constitute our short lives.
    Last edited by LostOnHoth, Aug 5, 2013
    darthcaedus1138 and Sarge like this.
  25. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    I know the difference between knowledge vs wisdom. Knowledge is what I want to share with others regarding the universe. Wisdom is knowing there are some here who don't want that knowledge.

    Well, I'm not very wise. So this will continue. However Wocky will complain again. Do you want to continue into the evolution thread, @Sarge ?

    Never? Really? Look at the word you're using. Never.

    Science will NEVER explain.

    Look at all that the science had explained, and you're perfectly okay with saying there are things it will NEVER explain?

    Sounds like a Joel Osteen anecdote that probably isn't true.
    1) A pizza that's exactly $10? Okay...
    2) Ordering food without knowing how to pay for it? Okay...

    But let's say it is.

    Is it really that miraculous that the people who did the collection would have collected a little extra? I mean of all the stories you go to show a miracle, a little extra money in an envelope? I mean all I've learned from that story is that modern medicine saved that girl.

    I'm not a cosmologist but I'll try to explain here.

    You're talking about two different things here. The first is the flat universe model; the second is the spherical universe. Dark Energy here doesn't affect the overall end of the universe regarding the flat universe. Whether Dark Energy exists or doesn't, the ultimate fate of the flat universe is the same. All Dark Energy does is determine the intermediate behavior of the universe, not the fate.

    The Big Crunch is the Spherical universe, and it's not the favored model currently.

    As for nothing coming from nothing? A flat universe has a total sum of zero energy. So it could come from nothing.