|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
 Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:14:54 [Permalink]
|
Scene: Devil's conference room in Hell
Enter Beelzebub: Is it my imagination, or is there a cold wind blowing through Hell this morning?
Satan reading reports at his desk: Echthroi_man is going to apologize to someone on the Skeptic Friends forum.
Lilith reclining an the loveseat: That explains the frost on the windows.
quote:
Some of these are people that hold super-patriotism as some kind of a religion and call people trolls and morons who don't agree with them, so I wouldn't get too excited about anyone calling you a troll.
You should have seen the slobbering support they give irrational behavior such as that of Rubysue's.
Thanks, Gorgo, I appreciate that. It didn't boter me, but it's nice to know that such is a personal opinion and not an objective claim.
And let me say that I misjudged you. I therefore wish to apologize for the hostile replies I made to your earlier posts. I have no excuse, but I will say that the attitude of a few others had soured my opinion of the forum as a whole, so I lashed out where it was not deserved. I beg your pardon.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
 |
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:26:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
How do you put an animal you can't find or prove exist in a laboratory? How can you observe it at all?
Obviously you can't. But if it is real you will observe it, and if you capture it you can put it in a laboratory.
The point is you can do this because hidden animals are physical entities we can interact with; God is a spiritual entity with Whim we cannot interact, so we cannot observe Him or put Him in a laboratory.
quote:
Amazing! Maybe you should tell him to be more open minded. He demand[ed] evidence to accept the existence of mystical creatures. Wow! My unicorn is insulted.
Again, the point is that "mystical" (ie, spiritual) creatures fall outside the bounds of science, so their existence cannot be determined empirically. Only physical entities can be shown to exist empirically.
quote:
Fact: Despite a lot of effort, no evidence of any deity exist!
Conclusion : No deity capable of influencing our universe exists.
That is a logical fallacy called the appeal to ignorance: "No one has proven that God exists, so God cannot exist." There are no facts that can tell us whether He exists or not; we have a complete lack of empirical evidence on this subject. Therefore, empirically, all we can say is that the existence of God is an open question.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:26:54 [Permalink]
|
I haven't said a hostile word to anyone since I've entered these forums and most of the people here ignore me like I was Beelzebub.
My needling of you is to stimulate thought in both of us, not to show you hostility. If you see hostility in me, it's because I don't understand something or you don't.
Please accept my apologies if I seem hostile. It's my way of trying to push toward the truth and sometimes it's taken as combative.
Something I've discovered too, just because someone has a degree and is extremely informed in their field doesn't mean that they have a lick of sense.
You should have seen some of the discussions I've had with prominent M.D.'s on another forum. Very sad display. I'm not saying that I'm bright, but geesh.
quote:
Scene: Devil's conference room in Hell
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited by - gorgo on 08/03/2002 08:27:47 |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:29:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
"God-as revealed in his book of edicts and narratives is practically an idiot. He has nothing to say that any sensible person should want to listen to."
-- Johann Most
Except love your neighbor as you love yourself.
Except do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Imagine how much better the world would be if everyone followed God's words in just these two instances, instead of heeding the words of Mr. Most.
The Irish Headhunter
[/quote]
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:34:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
since God is not a physical entitiy and does not operate within the physical realm, there are no facts to base a conclusion on. So the best you can say is you do not know if He exists.
Gosh, you are well educated on this God fellow. Could you post a reference to this immense discovery regarding God's nature. Shoot, that would be a Nobel prize winner for sure.
This has been common knowledge to Christians for two thousand years, and to the Jews before them for three thousand years. It is the one trait shared by all deities. They may be able to take physical form, but their normal nature is spiritual.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:43:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
First if there is some new startlingly convincing evidence YOU HAVEN'T PRESENTED IT!!!
I don't need to present new evidence, because there is old evidence that you have dismissed that in fact has not been refuted.
{quote]
Secondly a great deal of actual research been done on these legendary critters and it is you who are ignoring the evidence. The evidence shows no signs of any of these beasts existing.
And this evidence is? Please describe it.
quote:
Thirdly in the cases of Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster these sites have become tourist attractions. (On my shelf here in my office I have a little china Loch Ness Monster I picked up at the Loch Ness gift shoppe.)
I wasn't aware that there were bus tours through Sasquatch country; where can I sign up for one? How do they penetrate the deep forest or swamps with no roads?
quote:
There are people looking constantly-but there are no monsters. Stop ignoring the evidence.
[/quote]
Sounds like the only "evidence" against these creatures is your claim that they have never been seen. Even if this were true, that is not evidence, it is simply the lack of evidence. Perhaps you are not aware that in science absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
What concrete evidence do you have that I am ignoring that demonstrates there are no monsters?
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:48:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Perhaps you are working on a misconception of Atheist thought. Atheists do not have a belief that god doesn't exist. Atheists lack a belief in god.
Semantics. In the end, however you chose to say, you are saying that God does not exist. In the complete absence of empirical evidence one way or the other, that claim can only be made by faith, which in turn makes it a belief.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:52:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
As an Atheist I am not rejecting god. There have been not gods presented to accept or reject.
Then you are being inconsistent. If you do not reject god, then you cannot claim that there have been no gods. The latter is a rejection of the existence of god, despite your prologue.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 08:55:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
So Mr. Enemies, if I feel "spiritual evidence" of Isis, does that mean that I have good evidence that she exists?
I would say that what you felt was God, but that the cultural context in which you were raised called God "Isis".
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 09:06:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I would say that what you felt was God, but that the cultural context in which you were raised called God "Isis".
It will be funny in 2000 years when followers of a new religion say that when you said "God" you actually meant the God Du Jour.
 @tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 09:10:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If god does not operate in the physical realm, and we operate exclusively in the physical realm, how does this god have any effect on us?
Through the spiritual realm. The spiritual realm permiates the physical realm and influences it, but on a level that we, as physical beings locked within a physical realm, cannot see. The only way we know anything about the spiritual realm is because we have souls that connent to that realm, but the connection is so subtl that we cannot experience with our physical minds. We can only feel it.
quote:
Contrarily, if god does affect us physically (and I include brain and emotional processes as part of the physical realm), then how can he not be amenable to scientific study?
Because the spiritual realm through which He operates is not detectable by physical means. I grant this is a hard concept to get one's mind around, but it's like being fish inside a tank made of one-way mirrors. Our owner can see us inside the tank, but we cannot see him because on our side we see a mirror. All we know of him is the occasional anomalous event, such as food apearing from nowhere.
quote:
The only way you can claim that god is non-physical and yet affects us physically is to claim that there is some non-physical component of humans that god can operate on. Is this your position? Do you maintain that god can only affect the human soul, but not the physical bodies that house it?
Yes and no. He affects the soul, but the soul can affect the body.
quote:
If god operates exclusively in the non-physical realm, how did he create the physical universe?
By manipulation of spiritual forces to create physical reality.
quote:
Either this god can and does affect the material world (in which case we should be able to detect him, but we haven't). . . .
How would you detect Him? What method would you use? What criteria would you use to distinguish an event caused by God from an event caused by ordinary forces?
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 09:15:51 [Permalink]
|
No, I'm saying the belief in god doesn't exist, not god. Certainly Jehovah doesn't exist, but you knew that.
quote:
Semantics.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 09:24:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Because the spiritual realm through which He operates is not detectable by physical means. I grant this is a hard concept to get one's mind around, but it's like being fish inside a tank made of one-way mirrors. Our owner can see us inside the tank, but we cannot see him because on our side we see a mirror. All we know of him is the occasional anomalous event, such as food apearing from nowhere.
You said that this spiritual stuff is not detectable by physical means then you go and say it can be felt which is quite physical. You can't have it both ways.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 10:04:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You and I both know what science is. The basic methodology is to examine the facts and draw conclusions from them. This is sometimes difficult because, being primates, we often decide ahead of time what results we would prefer to find. Facts, however, exist independently of our desires. Sometimes the truth is not what we would wish it to be. Primates learn this at a very early age. It is a difficult lesson. But, if you honor TRUTH, you must learn it.
In his book "Science and Earth History", Arthur N. Strahler (hardly a Christian apologist) wrote (pg. 7, first edition): "Let us vow never again to say 'Scientists discover the truth.' Observation statements that are the building blocks of science and of all knowledge within the research fields are designed only to minimize the probability of failing to make a true statement. Let us admit that the human mind or brain will never be privy to the truth, but rather agree that the specific kind of observation statement that is a scientifi statement, despite being put forward as being true, actually contains a certain probability of being in error."
Later he writes: "I can anticipate several of my readers coming up with a challenge to my flat assertion that there is no place in science for such concepts as a fact, an actuality, or a truth."
This is not to argue taht he claims that scince cannot find the truth, when he very clearly states otherwise. He is simply arguing that the truth that science finds is provisional and is based on observation of the physical world.
This then begs the question as to whether scientific truth is the only truth there is. According to scientism, it is. But scientism is a world view that one accepts a priori, it is not a theoretical concept that can be empirically proven. You seem to accept scientism as true, considering your insistence upon "liberal science" as the sole way of determining the truth. But you cannot prove that your world view is any more true than I can prove that my worldview (Christian theism) is.
As a scientist, I am dedicated to Strahler's idea of scientific truth, or rather scientific knowledge, which he defines as (pg. 9, first edition): "the best picture of thr real world that humans can devise, given the present state of our collective investigative capability." Only I would substitute "physical world" for "real world". As a scientist, as long as what I am investigating is a part of the physical world, I maintain a strict adherence to the scientific method. That is why I state that my acceptance of the probability that psychic abilities and certain hidden animals are real and the near certainty that the phenomenon called cold fusion is real is based only on evidence, not belief. I realize that the evidence I find compelling, even convincing, does not impress you, and I have no problem with that, but to say that no evidence for these subjects exists at all is making an irrational, unscientific claim.
As a Christian, however, I also recognize that in addition to the physical realm, there is also a spiritual realm. Since in my worldview science can only tell us the truth about the physical realm, I believe that other investigatory methods are needed to investigate the spiritual realm. Contrary to your evaluation of me, I would never use one of these other methodologies for investigating any aspect of the physical realm; they are inappropriate for that purpose. But neither would I use the scientific method for investigating the spiritual realm; it is inappropriate for that purpose. I believe that far from being dishonest, this is the most honest appraisal one can make. What I find dishonest is the complete rejection of any investigatory method except liberal science.
With a few exceptions -- logic, philosophy, and scholarship being some of them -- the mehodologies used to investigate the spiritual realm are subjective; as such, the evidence they produce is subjective. Because subjective evidence is personal evidence, it is conclusive only to the person who experiences it. Other people, even other Christian theists, see it as personal opinion; they will not accept it until they can feel it for themselves. The problem is, if your worldviw rejects the possibility of their being a spiritual realm, then it will be nearly impossible to experience spiritual evidence.
Ultimately the point is that the spiritual realm and the physical realm can only be investigated by methodologies that are appropriate for that realm. To try to investigate, or even just make claims, about either realm using an inappropriate methodology is to abandon the search for truth in any form and advance an ideology.
One more point: Based on your opinion of me, I would imagine that you must think Sir Isaac Newton was a charlatan as well. After all, he wrote extensive religious treatesies on revelations and he was a believer in alchemy; he spent many years in his later life trying to develop the philosopher's stone and other alchemical Holy Grails. I suppose that because of all that you question the validity of his dicoveries concerning the structure of light and the laws of motion and gravitation.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
|
echthroi_man
Skeptic Friend
104 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2002 : 10:14:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
I would say that what you felt was God, but that the cultural context in which you were raised called God "Isis".
It will be funny in 2000 years when followers of a new religion say that when you said "God" you actually meant the God Du Jour.
That's a remarkably cogent statement. It touches on a subject I've been wanting ro raise.
I do not believe in the Christian god. I do believe in God, but I do not believe that God sectarian. What I believe is that God has been the inspiration for many of man's religions. As such, when a Christian worships Jehovah and a Jew worships Yahweh and a Muslim worships Allah, they are all worshipping the same deity. Since I see no reason for supposing that God has stopped trying to influence mankind, I do not doubt that he will inspire new religions in the future. So, yes, I am sure that some future person will say that "my" God is really their god. In the end we are all saying the same thing: God exists and He has power in the lives of men.
The Irish Headhunter
Oblivion -- When you REALLY want to get away from it all! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
