Author Topic: I don't get YEC.  (Read 26617 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #203 on: July 08, 2013, 03:53:44 PM »
Science is very poor at discerning the past.  Very poor. 
It's not designed for that.
But let's say that it is for a moment.
Is light before the sun possible?
Of course light was possible before the sun existed.  The question wheels was actually asking was whether having a day-night cycle was possible before the sun existed.  I think you should answer that question.

The time you speak of is when Adam walked in the Garden with God.  At that time
one only had to think of something and it was.  We don't live in that era.  This is not paradise.
I'll take that as a yes, that you do think a day-night cycle was possible before the sun existed because someone just had to think of something happening and it would happen.

You have the temerity to claim that things that scientists have deduced about the early universe are science-fiction, and then you pull out something that would fit right into pure fantasy.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2013, 04:00:25 PM by jaimehlers »

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #204 on: July 08, 2013, 03:56:28 PM »
Science is very poor at discerning the past.  Very poor. 
It's not designed for that.
But let's say that it is for a moment.
Is light before the sun possible?
Of course light was possible before the sun existed.  The question wheels was actually asking was whether having a day-night cycle was possible before the sun existed.  I think you should answer that question.  Light could go on and off without even clapping.

Yes.  At that time, one only had to think and it was so.  Spirit ruled the material.
There was no death at that time.

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2443
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #205 on: July 08, 2013, 03:59:56 PM »
I don't feel that we are getting anywhere but let's keep trying.

Now, for green plants to grown they need quite a lot of light - the sort of light that comes from our sun. The light that existed in the are of the galaxy that is now occupied by earth and the solar system is something like you can see on a night when there is no moon and only starlight is about. Tell, me, Skwriting, do you think that is enough for plants to grow?

Secondly, suince we are on creation, did you look carefully at the picture I posted illustrating the world which was created according to Genesis and Job 39? Did you notice anything odd about it compared with what we know to be the case today - vast universe with galaxies, stars etc. and the sun the centre of our solar system. How can you think that the biblical accounts which point to a wrong view of the universe has any validity - it is just what men thought at the time it was written.

Thirdly, let's sort out this history thing shall we? Precisely what do you content that science is not good at? I imagine you think it fine enough when forensic evidence from DNA, fibres, finger prints and the like convict a murdered who claims to be innocent? If you do, you have to accept that science can tell us about the past. Of course, it takes some reading and understanding to see how we derive this sort of stuff - criminal stuff of the origin of the universe - and we haven't all the answers... yet, but things are moving along. So, precisely what do you thing science can't manage in connection with history?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #206 on: July 08, 2013, 04:00:41 PM »
Science is very poor at discerning the past.  Very poor. 
It's not designed for that.

Damn. Will you stop repeating that lie? Most of science is about figuring out the past. That is what science does quite well. Geologists, paleontologists, archeologists, crime scene experts, even the arson investigators hired by insurance agencies recreate the past with science.

Or do you think these people get paid by petroleum companies, police departments and insurance firms to just make up random sh!t?
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2443
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #207 on: July 08, 2013, 04:00:46 PM »
Science is very poor at discerning the past.  Very poor. 
It's not designed for that.
But let's say that it is for a moment.
Is light before the sun possible?
Of course light was possible before the sun existed.  The question wheels was actually asking was whether having a day-night cycle was possible before the sun existed.  I think you should answer that question.  Light could go on and off without even clapping.

Yes.  At that time, one only had to think and it was so.  Spirit ruled the material.
There was no death at that time.

Nice try but evading the point. Oh, and can you quote chapter and verse for this view?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #208 on: July 08, 2013, 04:08:34 PM »
Yes.  At that time, one only had to think and it was so.  Spirit ruled the material.
There was no death at that time.
Let me reiterate something I said before.  Just because you believe something doesn't make it true.  You need to support it with evidence, or else nobody else has any obligation to consider it anything but your opinion (or, depending on the circumstances, your fantasy).  The scientists you played at decrying in your previous post actually had observational evidence to back up what they were saying.  You don't even have that.  You just have interpretations of an ancient story, where most of the events happened before anyone was alive to witness them.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #209 on: July 08, 2013, 04:10:20 PM »
Science is very poor at discerning the past.  Very poor. 
It's not designed for that.
But let's say that it is for a moment.
Is light before the sun possible?
Of course light was possible before the sun existed.  The question wheels was actually asking was whether having a day-night cycle was possible before the sun existed.  I think you should answer that question.  Light could go on and off without even clapping.

Yes.  At that time, one only had to think and it was so.  Spirit ruled the material.
There was no death at that time.

Do you actually think that god poked holes in heaven to create the stars, and then magically hung a giant ball of gas in the sky after he put plants in the ground? And that all the plants are the same age? That is what the bible says. People back then did not know that the sun was a star, or that there were stars even bigger than the sun, or that plants with spores evolved way before plants with seeds.

And then god jiggered the solar system to look like it took billions of years instead of a week to form? :-\
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #210 on: July 08, 2013, 04:17:53 PM »
Science is very poor at discerning the past.  Very poor. 
It's not designed for that.
But let's say that it is for a moment.
Is light before the sun possible?
Of course light was possible before the sun existed.  The question wheels was actually asking was whether having a day-night cycle was possible before the sun existed.  I think you should answer that question.  Light could go on and off without even clapping.

Yes.  At that time, one only had to think and it was so.  Spirit ruled the material.
There was no death at that time.

Do you actually think that god poked holes in heaven to create the stars, and then magically hung a giant ball of gas in the sky after he put plants in the ground? And that all the plants are the same age? That is what the bible says. People back then did not know that the sun was a star, or that there were stars even bigger than the sun, or that plants with spores evolved way before plants with seeds.

And then god jiggered the solar system to look like it took billions of years instead of a week to form? :-\

I believe He jiggered the water to taste like aged wine. That is only a belief.
I can't figure out the point of the story if it's fiction.

So

given the assumption that the wine story is correct, then the Creation story fits the same pattern.  In those days, the story goes, God just thinks stuff up and it is.  There don't seem to be any Physical restraints on what happens.  My point is that the story is internally consistent.    What God wanted, became so.  Like Jean-Luc Picard but even more authority.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #211 on: July 08, 2013, 04:25:16 PM »
So you do believe that god hung a big gas ball in the sky after he stuck the plants in the ground. Are you 6 years old? You type quite well.  &)

I'm done for now. Whew. This is like doing social work again. :P
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #212 on: July 08, 2013, 04:27:37 PM »
So you do believe that god hung a big gas ball in the sky after he stuck the plants in the ground. Are you 6 years old? You type quite well.  &)

I'm done for now. Whew. This is like doing social work again. :P

There were no physical restrictions.  God could have grown the plants in darkness if He choose to.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #213 on: July 08, 2013, 08:20:40 PM »
I believe He jiggered the water to taste like aged wine. That is only a belief.
I can't figure out the point of the story if it's fiction.
Are you serious?  You can't figure out the point of the story if it's fictional, so you're assuming it's true?  Tell me, have you ever heard these words at the end of a story?  "And the moral of the story is..."?  There are usually several reasons to tell a story like that; it doesn't have to be true or factual to fulfill its purpose.  Water into wine was almost certainly intended to show off the miraculous powers that were attributed to Jesus.

Quote from: SkyWriting
given the assumption that the wine story is correct, then the Creation story fits the same pattern.  In those days, the story goes, God just thinks stuff up and it is.  There don't seem to be any Physical restraints on what happens.  My point is that the story is internally consistent.    What God wanted, became so.  Like Jean-Luc Picard but even more authority.
You do realize Picard is a fictional character, right?  Not exactly the best example to choose.  In addition, there is nothing stopping fictional stories from being internally consistent.  Indeed, the best fiction is internally consistent - sometimes even more consistent than reality.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #214 on: July 09, 2013, 12:54:02 AM »
So you do believe that god hung a big gas ball in the sky after he stuck the plants in the ground. Are you 6 years old? You type quite well.  &)

I'm done for now. Whew. This is like doing social work again. :P

There were no physical restrictions.  God could have grown the plants in darkness if He choose to.

What is your evidence that plants in some past era could grow magically, without light?

Just saying something does not make it true, no matter how many times you say it, or where you read it, or who you heard it from. I believe Adam, Eve, the serpent, god and Michael Jackson all smoked dope and then had nightly sex orgies with blue star fairies in the garden of Eden. I obviously just made that up. Just like you are making up stuff about plants growing without light. Neither of us has any evidence for those statements, so they are both fictional-- interesting stories, maybe, but worthless as facts.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2443
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #215 on: July 09, 2013, 02:38:52 AM »
So you do believe that god hung a big gas ball in the sky after he stuck the plants in the ground. Are you 6 years old? You type quite well.  &)

I'm done for now. Whew. This is like doing social work again. :P

There were no physical restrictions.  God could have grown the plants in darkness if He choose to.

Plants growing in the dark eh? That sounds a good workable idea and gets round the problem of no sun. Oh, juts one thought though - if your god made the plants and they are more or less now as they were then, why did it make them with a photosynthesis based energy system that only works in the light?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #216 on: July 09, 2013, 03:08:09 AM »
I was searching for an answer and visitation from alien life forms seemed a possibility better than natural evolution.  Some do follow that theory.  I gave it up as a scientific solution due to lack of hard data to work with.

Okay.  So what you are saying is that in the past you believed something, but gave up that belief because there was no hard evidence to support it.

God, being Spirit, offers no hard data at all.  Everything I read fit perfectly with what I see around me.

Now, of course, you have chosen a different theory with no hard data.

What is different between your position then, and your position now?  What makes your position now more reasonable than your position then?
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #217 on: July 09, 2013, 08:05:55 AM »
I was searching for an answer and visitation from alien life forms seemed a possibility better than natural evolution.  Some do follow that theory.  I gave it up as a scientific solution due to lack of hard data to work with.

Okay.  So what you are saying is that in the past you believed something, but gave up that belief because there was no hard evidence to support it.

God, being Spirit, offers no hard data at all.  Everything I read fit perfectly with what I see around me.

Now, of course, you have chosen a different theory with no hard data.

What is different between your position then, and your position now?  What makes your position now more reasonable than your position then?

Thanks for the analysis.  I think you've gotten the meat now.  The former was a scientific analysis of data and facts.  There can never be any proof, and the basis for all decisions can change by way of majority opinion, or general consensus of the week.

The Christian hypothesis, on the other hand, is based on Spiritual principals that have never changed from the first day I began exploring it.  My exploration can go 100's of directions, but it is always based on the same "WHY". 

And "WHY" is the basis of all reality.  All rational thought. So when you find the correct 'WHY" in your life then everything else falls into place.

Lets's say your "Why" is Meth.  All your decisions in life revolve around your WHY.  Sadly, the drug can be mixed wrong and your life ends.  Or other things happen because your WHY is not a healthy one. Science is interesting, but it's not a healthy 'WHY".   Just when you think you have a handle on it, the levels just go deeper down the rabbit hole.

I've learned to have Faith in the Scriptures became they are based on the correct WHY for humans to thrive.

 

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #218 on: July 09, 2013, 09:30:40 AM »
I was searching for an answer and visitation from alien life forms seemed a possibility better than natural evolution.  Some do follow that theory.  I gave it up as a scientific solution due to lack of hard data to work with.

Okay.  So what you are saying is that in the past you believed something, but gave up that belief because there was no hard evidence to support it.

God, being Spirit, offers no hard data at all.  Everything I read fit perfectly with what I see around me.

Now, of course, you have chosen a different theory with no hard data.

What is different between your position then, and your position now?  What makes your position now more reasonable than your position then?

Thanks for the analysis.  I think you've gotten the meat now.  The former was a scientific analysis of data and facts.  There can never be any proof, and the basis for all decisions can change by way of majority opinion, or general consensus of the week.

The Christian hypothesis, on the other hand, is based on Spiritual principals that have never changed from the first day I began exploring it.  My exploration can go 100's of directions, but it is always based on the same "WHY".  .....I've learned to have Faith in the Scriptures became they are based on the correct WHY for humans to thrive.

And?  So what?  Doesn't mean any of the myth behind the teachings are true.

More to the point though, WHY did you do a scientific analysis of CotG?  Why didn't you just accept THEM as true? 
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2443
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #219 on: July 09, 2013, 10:38:33 AM »
Thanks for the analysis.  I think you've gotten the meat now.  The former was a scientific analysis of data and facts.  There can never be any proof, and the basis for all decisions can change by way of majority opinion, or general consensus of the week.

The Christian hypothesis, on the other hand, is based on Spiritual principals that have never changed from the first day I began exploring it.  My exploration can go 100's of directions, but it is always based on the same "WHY". 

And "WHY" is the basis of all reality.  All rational thought. So when you find the correct 'WHY" in your life then everything else falls into place.

Let's say your "Why" is Meth.  All your decisions in life revolve around your WHY.  Sadly, the drug can be mixed wrong and your life ends.  Or other things happen because your WHY is not a healthy one. Science is interesting, but it's not a healthy 'WHY".   Just when you think you have a handle on it, the levels just go deeper down the rabbit hole.

I've learned to have Faith in the Scriptures became they are based on the correct WHY for humans to thrive.

Mmm... so you are more interested in answering 'why' than 'what'? You are keen for explanations about purpose so as to direct your life? Well, I suppose holy books are as good as anything for that. I'd love to know why you chose the pone you did though - there's lots to choose from, including the Qur'an, so why the one you picked. 

Of course knowledge changes as time goes by and we find out more. For example, if you could interview some of the disciples just after Jesus died and ask them about the Trinity them would be dumbfounded and have no idea what you were talking about because the doctrine of the Trinity was the result of a couple of centuries or more of theological reflection. Theology changes as people look for new things. The idea that the bible is the literal, word for word, text god wanted would have no meaning or sense for people of the 18th century as the idea hadn't been born yet.

Yet theology had its won ideas that were shown to be plain wrong by those looking at the world and the universe. Never forget that the pope had to accept that the earth was not the centre of the universe when this was demonstrated to be the case though the careful use of telescopes. In fact, science has been a process of discovery in which more and more about our world and the universe are revealed as time goes by. People thought the moon was made of cheese but we went there are brought some rock back to prove it right. We learned what caused disease and how to cure it - praying has never managed that! That science has changed its views is a good not a bad thing whilst the fact that creation still only amounts to that drawing I posted earlier - a drawing that is contrary to what we have found out - shows how holy books really lose their value.

If you want to know 'why' then for many processes of nature you are probably going to have to invent the answer as their is no purpose in nature and if you want a purpose in life you are going to have to create one too.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #220 on: July 09, 2013, 11:38:09 AM »
I think I get it.  What you want is for things not to change.  And when you discovered that science couldn't give that to you, you turned to religion instead.  Well, I can't blame you for wanting things not to change.

The thing you don't get is that change is not only inevitable, it's unavoidable.  We live in a world that is constantly changing, and we can't make it otherwise no matter how much we wish, or imagine, or pretend otherwise.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #221 on: July 09, 2013, 02:52:22 PM »
I think I get it.  What you want is for things not to change.  And when you discovered that science couldn't give that to you, you turned to religion instead.  Well, I can't blame you for wanting things not to change.

The thing you don't get is that change is not only inevitable, it's unavoidable.  We live in a world that is constantly changing, and we can't make it otherwise no matter how much we wish, or imagine, or pretend otherwise.

Here is what I think, from reading through SW's posts.  He is an intelligent guy, but sometimes the unfairness and uncertainty of life is just too much. He has to know that he has some way to make things work out. Prayer clearly has no effect on who suffers, since the most religious, prayerful people in the world suffer the most. Who prays more sincerely and fervently than a family with starving children? And food never magically appears to save them.

Some families in Darfur starved to death during the civil war and other families got rich from it. Some workers in Bangladesh got crushed when a factory collapsed on them and others did not go to work that day. Some families in the US go bankrupt trying to pay for health care while folks a few miles away across the border in Canada don't have to worry about medical bills at all.

The godless people in the wealthy countries of Europe have the best lives overall. People who never pray even once, but have long, healthy, stable, happy lives.
 
So, he realizes at some level that he does not have control over everything, and that realization sucks. He has been through a lot of trials--a severely disabled wife, problems with kids, etc. He could either decide that, for no particular reason, his life is just harder than average and deal with that. Or he can try to find an explanation for it.

Well, rationally, there is no explanation. There really is no evil Satan or loving creator god. There is no ultimate answer to "why". But his brain can't tolerate that uncertainty. So he has created a fantasy world where, as long as he does what he thinks god wants, things will work out. Or at least not be a bad as they could be.  So, he has invented a god who puts a bubble of protection around him and his family, as long as he prays right, "gives up his will" or whatever.

If that is how he keeps getting up every morning and puts one foot in front of the other, more power to him. But he is still living in a fantasy world....That is why his arguments are full of contradictions, why he rejects science while depending on it every day, etc.

Still, he has really livened up this board! I give him a +1 for that.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #222 on: July 09, 2013, 04:17:42 PM »
You know, it isn't the sense of powerlessness that many religious people have that bothers me.  Or even the fact that they use religion to cope with that powerlessness.  I could live with it if that were all it was.  No, the problem is that so many of them then act like the whole thing is reality-proof, as if what they believe overrides what actually is.

I went through something like that myself when I was younger, except that it involved fantasy and sci-fi.  I wanted so badly for those created worlds to be real, so I could go there and meet the characters I'd brought to life in my own mind.  I even imagined some worlds of my own that I wanted to exist.  But I slowly realized that wanting them to be real, of believing that they were real somewhere, wouldn't make them real.  Their existence was only in my own mind - other people who imagined the characters had their own versions of those characters that only existed in their minds - and no amount of belief, of desire, would make them real people.  Even though they felt real to me, they didn't have an existence independent of me.

But you know something?  Knowing that they'll never be real doesn't bother me the way I was afraid that it would.  Because for one thing, they're actually expressions of myself.  By creating them, I learn things about myself, good or bad.  For another, even knowing that they're not real doesn't make them meaningless, anymore than reading fiction is meaningless.  And for a third, everything artificial that humans have ever made once existed only as an imaginary idea inside someone's head.  Every idea that ever came to fruition only happened because someone imagined it first.  That's an awesome power and an even more awesome responsibility, not the least of which is that some of those ideas are far better than others.

You know, it's kind of funny.  SkyWriting said that God imagined things during the Creation week, and they came to be.  But in actual fact, everything that humans have ever made came about because we imagined them, and worked to make them.  To me, that's so much better than just having stuff pop into existence simply because we think of it, because having worked for it, we value it so much more.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #223 on: July 09, 2013, 05:23:00 PM »
Good points. We humans are struggling to make gourmet meals from scratch, while god just has to nuke a hot pocket in the microwave. Maybe that is why god plays so fast and loose with his creation. He did not have to work very hard to make anything, so he does not appreciate it.

The sun will go supernova and we will be all "Ahhhhhh!" God will say, "So sorry, you weren't really using that solar system, were you? Most of it was just going to waste." And blows out the match.

Easy come, easy go. :P
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline alexreflex

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • ukelele player
    • my songs
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #224 on: July 09, 2013, 06:55:20 PM »
Lets's say your "Why" is Meth.  All your decisions in life revolve around your WHY.  Sadly, the drug can be mixed wrong and your life ends. 
if meth is my "Why" and it's fucking up my life, i would readily accept criticism, look inward at my folly and i may still continue doing it.  that would be different than your ridiculous insistence that your god is the truth and all the bullshit that comes with it must be defended and rationalized at all costs.

I've learned to have Faith in the Scriptures became they are based on the correct WHY for humans to thrive.

bullshit.  you can have your faith, but don't try that "correct WHY" throat job.
don't take the last 2 donuts.  leave 1 for the next.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #225 on: July 11, 2013, 04:04:59 PM »
Lets's say your "Why" is Meth.  All your decisions in life revolve around your WHY.  Sadly, the drug can be mixed wrong and your life ends. 
if meth is my "Why" and it's fucking up my life, i would readily accept criticism, look inward at my folly and i may still continue doing it.

You can either test your theory on what you would do or find additional support
for your theory in the form of published data or create your own.
If you have a good "Why" for your actions, you'll be more likely to
succeed in your goal of finding the answer.   

No person lifts their pinky finger from the ground
without a good reason why, first.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #226 on: July 11, 2013, 04:12:26 PM »
You know, it isn't the sense of powerlessness that many religious people have that bothers me.  Or even the fact that they use religion to cope with that powerlessness.  I could live with it if that were all it was.  No, the problem is that so many of them then act like the whole thing is reality-proof, as if what they believe overrides what actually is.

I went through something like that myself when I was younger, except that it involved fantasy and sci-fi.  I wanted so badly for those created worlds to be real, so I could go there and meet the characters I'd brought to life in my own mind.  I even imagined some worlds of my own that I wanted to exist.  But I slowly realized that wanting them to be real, of believing that they were real somewhere, wouldn't make them real.  Their existence was only in my own mind - other people who imagined the characters had their own versions of those characters that only existed in their minds - and no amount of belief, of desire, would make them real people.  Even though they felt real to me, they didn't have an existence independent of me.

But you know something?  Knowing that they'll never be real doesn't bother me the way I was afraid that it would.  Because for one thing, they're actually expressions of myself.  By creating them, I learn things about myself, good or bad.  For another, even knowing that they're not real doesn't make them meaningless, anymore than reading fiction is meaningless.  And for a third, everything artificial that humans have ever made once existed only as an imaginary idea inside someone's head.  Every idea that ever came to fruition only happened because someone imagined it first.  That's an awesome power and an even more awesome responsibility, not the least of which is that some of those ideas are far better than others.

You know, it's kind of funny.  SkyWriting said that God imagined things during the Creation week, and they came to be.  But in actual fact, everything that humans have ever made came about because we imagined them, and worked to make them.  To me, that's so much better than just having stuff pop into existence simply because we think of it, because having worked for it, we value it so much more.

We are made in God's image.  It's great to see how you appreciate the connection between how God made Creation and how man creates.  Your quite a thinker.  You even came up with a great explanation of why God has us laboring under the effects of Sin in the first place:

"To me, that's so much better than just having stuff pop into existence simply because we think of it, because having worked for it, we value it so much more."


Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #227 on: July 11, 2013, 04:18:45 PM »
Thanks for the analysis.  I think you've gotten the meat now.  The former was a scientific analysis of data and facts.  There can never be any proof, and the basis for all decisions can change by way of majority opinion, or general consensus of the week.

The Christian hypothesis, on the other hand, is based on Spiritual principals that have never changed from the first day I began exploring it.  My exploration can go 100's of directions, but it is always based on the same "WHY". 

And "WHY" is the basis of all reality.  All rational thought. So when you find the correct 'WHY" in your life then everything else falls into place.

Let's say your "Why" is Meth.  All your decisions in life revolve around your WHY.  Sadly, the drug can be mixed wrong and your life ends.  Or other things happen because your WHY is not a healthy one. Science is interesting, but it's not a healthy 'WHY".   Just when you think you have a handle on it, the levels just go deeper down the rabbit hole.

I've learned to have Faith in the Scriptures became they are based on the correct WHY for humans to thrive.

Mmm... so you are more interested in answering 'why' than 'what'? You are keen for explanations about purpose so as to direct your life? Well, I suppose holy books are as good as anything for that. I'd love to know why you chose the pone you did though - there's lots to choose from, including the Qur'an, so why the one you picked. 

Of course knowledge changes as time goes by and we find out more. For example, if you could interview some of the disciples just after Jesus died and ask them about the Trinity them would be dumbfounded and have no idea what you were talking about because the doctrine of the Trinity was the result of a couple of centuries or more of theological reflection. Theology changes as people look for new things. The idea that the bible is the literal, word for word, text god wanted would have no meaning or sense for people of the 18th century as the idea hadn't been born yet.

Yet theology had its won ideas that were shown to be plain wrong by those looking at the world and the universe. Never forget that the pope had to accept that the earth was not the centre of the universe when this was demonstrated to be the case though the careful use of telescopes. In fact, science has been a process of discovery in which more and more about our world and the universe are revealed as time goes by. People thought the moon was made of cheese but we went there are brought some rock back to prove it right. We learned what caused disease and how to cure it - praying has never managed that! That science has changed its views is a good not a bad thing whilst the fact that creation still only amounts to that drawing I posted earlier - a drawing that is contrary to what we have found out - shows how holy books really lose their value.

If you want to know 'why' then for many processes of nature you are probably going to have to invent the answer as their is no purpose in nature and if you want a purpose in life you are going to have to create one too.

Nothing happens unless your "Why" is bigger than inertia.   I've noticed people with a lot of mass to them will not move much until their why gets big enough.   Why runs everything.  "How" come next.  Then "What".

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #228 on: July 11, 2013, 04:33:03 PM »
We are made in God's image.  It's great to see how you appreciate the connection between how God made Creation and how man creates.  Your quite a thinker.  You even came up with a great explanation of why God has us laboring under the effects of Sin in the first place:
While I appreciate the compliment, I have to disagree.  I don't think humans ever possessed the magical ability to create things out of nothing in the Genesis story, and that means that there was never any need for this "sin" or its effects to begin with.  There was no reason to make a paradisaical garden for humans to live in, only to kick them out later on, and there was no reason to have "work for what you want" be a punishment to begin with.  There was no reason to threaten Adam and Eve with death if they ate that fruit, either (especially since they didn't actually die).

The second Genesis story is the kind made by people who are trying to explain the harsh life that they had to deal with, along with the yearning for an easier life (which has been something that humans have desired pretty much forever).  But that doesn't make it true, simply because it was passed down as true.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6502
  • Darwins +846/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #229 on: July 11, 2013, 04:50:18 PM »
What is the "why" for god?
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #230 on: July 11, 2013, 04:52:25 PM »
We are made in God's image.  It's great to see how you appreciate the connection between how God made Creation and how man creates.  Your quite a thinker.  You even came up with a great explanation of why God has us laboring under the effects of Sin in the first place:
While I appreciate the compliment, I have to disagree.  I don't think humans ever possessed the magical ability to create things out of nothing in the Genesis story, and that means that there was never any need for this "sin" or its effects to begin with.  There was no reason to make a paradisaical garden for humans to live in, only to kick them out later on, and there was no reason to have "work for what you want" be a punishment to begin with.  There was no reason to threaten Adam and Eve with death if they ate that fruit, either (especially since they didn't actually die).

If one is walking side by side with God, then humans would have no need to do any creating themselves.  There would be no "themselves".   So you make a good point.  Man did not "create things" from his imagination.  I stand corrected.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 04:55:56 PM by SkyWriting »

Offline Traveler

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2056
  • Darwins +142/-2
  • Gender: Female
  • no god required
    • I am a Forum Guide
    • Gryffin Designs
Re: I don't get YEC.
« Reply #231 on: July 11, 2013, 04:56:37 PM »
If we ever travel thousands of light years to a planet inhabited by intelligent life, let's just make patterns in their crops and leave.