|
|
|
verlch
SFN Regular
781 Posts |
 Posted - 06/24/2004 : 10:37:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
So, how 'bout a rebuttal to my refutation of #44?
Ok here is some ground rules, you can't go on for ten threads making fun of the sources...deal? |
What came first the chicken or the egg?
How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?
There are no atheists in foxholes
Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.
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; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4
II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!
Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?
Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.
We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.
"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
|
 |
|
|
verlch
SFN Regular
781 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 10:44:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Therefore you do not have free will, as your actions are the creation and intent of god.
I can drive over to your house and shoot you in the head right now! God won't stop me, that's free will. I can sit here on the computer, or I can invade Saudi Arabi and kill the whole country. I wouldn't do any of that, but I could. God is an uncreated being, the only one up there from all I can tell. If I am doing the will of an uncreated being than I fiqure I'm OK. He wants us, his created beings, to worship him and to do His will. We happend to rebel against Him, and now we are imperfect sinners that deserve nothing but damnation for our actions. Luckily God gave us a way out! If you use your free will to accept it!!!!! |
What came first the chicken or the egg?
How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?
There are no atheists in foxholes
Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.
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; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4
II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!
Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?
Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.
We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.
"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 10:47:30 [Permalink]
|
Certainly not for 10 threads. But if you hit me with Woodmorappe or his ilk, I'll certainly devote a few paragrapohs to tearing him a new one. A scorce has to be creditable.
So, do please proceed.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 11:21:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
quote:
Therefore you do not have free will, as your actions are the creation and intent of god.
I can drive over to your house and shoot you in the head right now! God won't stop me, that's free will. I can sit here on the computer, or I can invade Saudi Arabi and kill the whole country. I wouldn't do any of that, but I could. God is an uncreated being, the only one up there from all I can tell. If I am doing the will of an uncreated being than I fiqure I'm OK. He wants us, his created beings, to worship him and to do His will. We happend to rebel against Him, and now we are imperfect sinners that deserve nothing but damnation for our actions. Luckily God gave us a way out! If you use your free will to accept it!!!!!
Can you get a little more crazed in your response?
If I wanted this kind of prostelyzation, I'd go to a Charismatic church. You still have provided exactly zero sources for your assertations. Your opinion, while entertaining, still has no sources or proof to back it up. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 12:03:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
As opposed to inductive syllogism?
Deductive syllogism takes a general premise and reaches a specific conclusion.
Inductive is specific fact premises leading to a general conclusion.
(see, I do know the difference, atleast on a rudimentary level)
But yes, my little blurb from 3am is an inductive... that's what I get for posting at 3am after failing to achieve a state of sleep.
verlch, I'm not asking you to provide me with examples of free will. I agree that we all do have free will. What I want from you is an argument (deductive or inductive, take your pick) that can demonstrate free will is possible for beings created by an omnipotent and omnicient god. You can formulate and state it in 3 or 4 lines probably. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 16:03:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
As opposed to inductive syllogism?
Deductive syllogism takes a general premise and reaches a specific conclusion. ... (see, I do know the difference, atleast on a rudimentary level)
My only point was to suggest that "deductive syllogism" is more than a little redundant.
By the way, I find the free will argument less than satisfactory on two grounds: (1)it's only useful for irritating dim-witted fundamentalists, and (2) it's unclear what 'omniscience' means when applied to a Diety that is, presumable, outside of space and time, i.e., the concept of knowing the future only makes symantic sense when 'past' and 'future' are meaningful.
|
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 16:34:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
quote:
Therefore you do not have free will, as your actions are the creation and intent of god.
I can drive over to your house and shoot you in the head right now! God won't stop me, that's free will. I can sit here on the computer, or I can invade Saudi Arabi and kill the whole country. I wouldn't do any of that, but I could. God is an uncreated being, the only one up there from all I can tell. If I am doing the will of an uncreated being than I fiqure I'm OK. He wants us, his created beings, to worship him and to do His will. We happend to rebel against Him, and now we are imperfect sinners that deserve nothing but damnation for our actions. Luckily God gave us a way out! If you use your free will to accept it!!!!!
With the attributes that man has given the christian god, especially the all knowing business, the best you can have is the illusion of free will. If your god know everything about you, then you are just doing things according to god's script titled, "This is verlch's life." |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
ethan
New Member
USA
14 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 19:36:31 [Permalink]
|
| Verich, I would have to concur about the way you go about things. From the short time I've had to view your posts and ideas I get the idea that you're kind of a poor debater. Being someone who was involved in debate in the past, I can see a lot of your logical fallacies which really never answer the questions at hand but just attack. I would agree with you on a lot of points, but you really need to take the time to listen to other people when they present a valid argument. |
ethan |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 21:19:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
My only point was to suggest that "deductive syllogism" is more than a little redundant.
true.... but my head hurts with the terminology of argumentation. Syllogism is a deductive argument. Yes. "deductive syllogism" is like saying "ATM machine". Often I, mistakenly, substitute "syllogism" for "argument". Stupid I know... but I more or less understand the concepts involved... lol |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 21:30:01 [Permalink]
|
ConsequentAtheist wrote:quote:
By the way, I find the free will argument less than satisfactory on two grounds: (1)it's only useful for irritating dim-witted fundamentalists...
I think that's the point, at this stage in the game.quote:
...and (2) it's unclear what 'omniscience' means when applied to a Diety that is, presumable, outside of space and time, i.e., the concept of knowing the future only makes symantic sense when 'past' and 'future' are meaningful.
Not at all. That the attributes of God make the word 'future' meaningless for God (but not for us, who are discussing God) doesn't make the the concept any less clear. I don't believe that we can conceive of what knowledge would be like "outside of space and time," since we are trapped within them, and so from our point of view, for all intents and purposes, it is perfectly reasonable to say that God would know the future. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 21:44:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
and (2) it's unclear what 'omniscience' means when applied to a Diety that is, presumable, outside of space and time, i.e., the concept of knowing the future only makes symantic sense when 'past' and 'future' are meaningful.
When decribing god, as far as I know, we are talking about what his attributes are within our own frame of reference. Also, omniscience is implied within the meaning of omnipotent is it not? Afterall, if one is all powerfull, then one would by definition already be all knowing. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
verlch
SFN Regular
781 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 21:51:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Verich, I would have to concur about the way you go about things. From the short time I've had to view your posts and ideas I get the idea that you're kind of a poor debater. Being someone who was involved in debate in the past, I can see a lot of your logical fallacies which really never answer the questions at hand but just attack. I would agree with you on a lot of points, but you really need to take the time to listen to other people when they present a valid argument.
Your right, that's why they call me a dsylexic genuis!! I have great thoughts but destroy them before I can reley the thoughts!!! And it takes me many posts to describe it!!!! Your right, thanks for the info, later dude... |
What came first the chicken or the egg?
How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?
There are no atheists in foxholes
Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.
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; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4
II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!
Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?
Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.
We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.
"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 03:22:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
That the attributes of God make the word 'future' meaningless for God (but not for us, who are discussing God) doesn't make the the concept any less clear.
Rubbish. It makes the concept entirely 'unclear' to the point of being meaningless. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 05:51:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
So is this a Dr. M, or filthy, or who are you SM??? Could this be dude or Renea!!! Come on let the cat out of the bag Mr. IP address!!!
Are you implying that I'm not man enough to stand for what I say, so you accuse me attacking you in disguise?
You are a joke, Verlch. I have no reason to hide the fact that I think so.
By suggesting that I am a sneak, you are falsely judging me for an act you have no evidense for.
What did Jesus sau about judging others?
You're a sad case of Christian.
If you want to claim the moral high ground, you better get your ass there first. Otherwise people will only laugh at you. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
