tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7251693339364322895.post8969141932695769467..comments2024-02-16T07:42:10.015-06:00Comments on SKEPTIC REFLECTIONS: POINTS OF BELIEFJOHN PHILLIPShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06357524637192990158noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7251693339364322895.post-63579569768822176052013-10-13T19:23:21.083-05:002013-10-13T19:23:21.083-05:00Lisa,
a. So you think the laws of nature were cha...Lisa,<br /><br />a. So you think the laws of nature were changed at man's fall, but they have been consistent since. But all of science is premised on the idea that the laws of nature apply for all times and all locations, at least in this universe. Thus we differ on this point. And I have to say I believe your argument is tautological. I do not know how you would be able to demonstrate your point of view without begging the question.<br /><br />b. My question was whether you thought the scriptures were inerrant. I'm not sure you answered that question. You said that the scriptures were not a direct word-for-word expression from God. If you are saying that there are discrepancies in the Bible, say, between the descriptions of God in the OT and those in the NT, then how are you deciding which is correct? Just by what feels preferable? Seems like cherry-picking to me.<br /><br />c. So is this confirmation that a lot of the OT, to the extent it differs from the NT, should be treated as incorrect? How do we know this? Maybe it's just because the NT view is more compatible with our overall moral point of view at this point in history.<br /><br />d. Accepted science--at least that of the last 125 years--has not had "many voices" on the question of the age of the earth and life on earth, on evolution, or on the flood. The views espoused by supporters of "intelligent design" or "creation science" or whatever you want to call it have virtually no support in the scientific community. It is true that the finer points of, say, evolutionary science have changed over the years, but only in the details not in the basic principles. There is not a shred of credible evidence in favor of a fundamentalist point of view in these areas. Moreover, evolution makes great sense. Within a short time after Darwin published "The Origin of Species" the scientific community was saying, "That's so obvious, why didn't we think of it before."<br /><br />e. The discussion was on consciousness, not conscience. I'm not sure we differ on the issue of conscience. Please reread my comment on this point.JOHN PHILLIPShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06357524637192990158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7251693339364322895.post-42744717366603522652013-10-13T01:22:17.480-05:002013-10-13T01:22:17.480-05:00a...I think that is basically true, after sin. I d...a...I think that is basically true, after sin. I doubt the nature was the same before sin...because I think satan governed the world. God gave man the earth to rule and we let satan take it away....<br />b. Yes, I do believe culture influenced things written in the Bible and how can man fully understand and explain God? I think though the guidance of the HS that men were moved to write...but it wasn't a direct word by word recording of God. It was their understanding of God. So, I might not agree with other christians on this...but this is how is see it. I think that is why Jesus came...to reveal God because we had gotten it so wrong.<br />c. I am saying that the life of Jesus and His teachings are the truth about God. Jesus said, "if you have seen me you have seen the Father." Jesus came to reveal the truth about Himself, God, to us. <br />d. I just don't think that matter didn't exist before creation...the bible says the the universe was a witness to creation. So it could have come with a "bang" long before earth came into existence. I do believe in creation, and Adam and Eve and I think there truly was a flood, science has many voices on this topic. I also think science is evolving...new discoveries prove old theories wrong all the time.<br />e. Yes, but without conscience where does doing right and wrong fit...why do you live by certain principles...to show your love for those you care about. It is that inner voice that questions your actions, that stops you from hurting...that makes you want to share and care. Consciousness is awareness, but a mentally ill patient may not know the difference between shooting someone or just hating them. Conscience impacts behavior.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17878921756248563809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7251693339364322895.post-16943097777438072912013-08-26T13:03:45.189-05:002013-08-26T13:03:45.189-05:00Hi, Lisa,
Thanks for your comments on my post, wh...Hi, Lisa,<br /><br />Thanks for your comments on my post, which is probably the most fundamental of those I have written. Because of the way I think, I am responding to a number of points you have made.<br /><br />a. As far as we know, the laws of nature are unchanging. It's our understanding of them over the years that has changed.<br /><br />b. Are you saying that because the scriptures were written by men that they are not inerrant? That would be a major difference with most fundamental Christians, who believe that the scriptures are inerrant.<br /><br />c. You stated, that Christ "demonstrated what God is, because He is God. Anything that is called truth other than that is a false truth." I confess that I am having a hard time understanding what you meant by that. Are you saying that the only truth is that Christ is God and that all else is false? Obviously that would be a fundamental difference between our points of view. I am saying that there are truths about the world. We don't know what they are precisely, but it is science that has brought us closer to that truth.<br /><br />d. I guess I'm not sure where you stand on creation. Are you saying that the big bang happened when science says it did, some 13.7 billion years ago? How do you feel about the rest of the creation story? The evolution of life through natural means? Adam and Eve? The Flood? The age of dinosaurs? Geologic periods?<br /><br />e. Conscience is a component or type of consciousness. Humans are animals and function like other animals in terms of their biology. I've been around dogs enough to feel confident that they have a consciousness. Humans of course have consciousness and that is where we get our sense of freedom of choice and of the soul, but, in the end, consciousness does not have any impact on our behavior.JOHN PHILLIPShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06357524637192990158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7251693339364322895.post-37159748513640213212013-08-25T23:22:57.824-05:002013-08-25T23:22:57.824-05:00Interesting...You know you are way beyond me in un...Interesting...You know you are way beyond me in understand the "physical world (and it's), operating according to a set of rules--essentially matter, energy, space, time and the laws of physics that govern them. And yet there are rules that seem unchanging like the "I Am." The same yesterday today and tomorrow. <br />Impeding the progress of this world is the interpretation by man of the Bible and other sources of reference to what is truth. I agree that the Bible is a book that was written by man for man to help us see God. But I also believe that man's view of God is flawed and therefore faulty. Even the Bible says we see through a glass darkly. I think the only truth to focus on is Jesus who came to reveal God. He demonstrated what God is, because He is God. anything that is called truth other than that is a false truth, so I would say that most religion is false...yes, even much in the SDA church. Jesus was always restoring, healing, blessing, forgiving. He was trying to bring order back. The little He did do got Him killed. No one wanted to believe what was beyond their finite minds. And yet He calls us to believe.<br /><br />As for the big bang...matter might have made an appearance with a bang. the world created out of that matter, which was without form and void many billions of years later accounts for the age difference people give to the world, hence the misunderstandings among creationists. I have no problem with that idea. All that sustains life existed before life began...we needed light water, vegetation etc for life be sustainable...for it all to be there ready to support life is pretty amazing to think of without creation.<br />Consciousness is a by-product of the electro-chemical activity of the nervous system. Animals and humans function differently, why. There is certainly a difference between consciousness and conscience. Why is there feelings of guilt, remorse, sadness, longing, hope, courage...desire to learn?<br /><br />And then laws of nature...we see life in nature...the oceans provide water for the clouds, which refresh the earth and the rivers run back to the ocean...take the circle of life out of this picture and you get the dead sea. Or take respiration...we give out Co2 and the plants use it to give us O2. Refuse to give Co2, tie a plastic bag over your head and you die. Life is based on the circle of life...the kreb cycle in the body...the seed the in ground, buried and springs forth in newness of life only to produce more seed...Yes, nature it the perfect example of life...as love is the perfect example of God, He gave all to give life...the circle of life. As the good book says, dying to self we live. Personal responsibility in a nutshell...love others as you would have them love you.<br /><br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17878921756248563809noreply@blogger.com