1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Science ... NOT God ...

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by NewGuyOnTheBlock, Jul 31, 2019.

  1. Prestor John

    Prestor John Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2016
    Messages:
    2,182
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Latter-Day Saint
    Are you this aggressive to everyone or only those you disagree with?
    Let's try to stay on topic.
    It appears that I may understand it better than you.

    The onus for proof was upon you the moment you made the claim in post #71,

    "...it doesn't exactly help [it's] case either when it is filled with magical stories that science keeps knocking out of the part one after the other...what with the magical gardens and the talking snakes and impossible floods that never happened and all that jazz."

    You made the vague claim that these events recorded in the Book of Genesis (and other records) were refuted by "science".

    You also claimed that these events were "magical", "impossible" and that they "never happened".
    I find this hard to believe considering that not all Biblical religions agree on what exactly the Deluge was.
    [QUOTE="TagliatelliMonster, post: 6237288, member: 65929Do your own homework. It's your claim.[/QUOTE]
    No, it is your claim.


    All I did was dispute your claim.
     
  2. Prestor John

    Prestor John Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2016
    Messages:
    2,182
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Latter-Day Saint
    How is that?

    Did I ever make the claim that those things really happened?

    All I did was dispute the other member's claim that those things had been disproved by "science".

    I said, "No one has disproved the existence of the Garden of Eden, the pro-mortal intelligence of animals and the Deluge."

    That is the truth. It is not a claim to the reality of any of these things.
    People can believe whatever they want without proof.

    Considering that you were the one who opened this thread it is you that bears the burden of proof.
     
  3. Wild Fox

    Wild Fox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,414
    Ratings:
    +936
    Religion:
    nature
    What do you mean by the pro-mortal intelligence of animals?
     
  4. Prestor John

    Prestor John Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2016
    Messages:
    2,182
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Latter-Day Saint
    Oops. That is supposed to read "pre-mortal" intelligence of animals.

    Before Adam and Eve partook of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, they and all the other creations upon the Earth had not yet entered into mortality.

    It was the effects of the fruit that brought about the knowledge of good and evil and the conditions of mortality, such as; pain, sickness, weakness and death.

    These effects are referred to as the Fall in the scriptures and before the Fall all animals could speak as men do.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. Wild Fox

    Wild Fox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,414
    Ratings:
    +936
    Religion:
    nature
    So man eats fruit and god blames not just man but the animals too? Not a very intelligent god. Surely god could have figured out that the animals did not eat the wrong fruit. Very strange belief. Some animal do not eat fruit, just doesn't seem fair.
    Also how did sponges, earthworms and jellyfish actually talk?
     
  6. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,023
    Ratings:
    +11,659
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Well, I guess nobody has proven the non-existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn either.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    13,348
    Ratings:
    +6,426
    Religion:
    None
    Uh, Poe's Law?
     
  8. Shad

    Shad Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2014
    Messages:
    14,277
    Ratings:
    +3,214
    Religion:
    Theological noncognitivist
    The results.

    Still waiting for Jesus to get back?
     
  9. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,357
    Ratings:
    +15,193
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Actually that was done over one hundred years ago. A person's inability to understand does not mean that has not happened.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    932
    Ratings:
    +165
    Religion:
    Properly some form of non-revealed deism
    So gravity is not a part of reality, reality just is. Water is not a part of reality, reality, reality just is. So what is reality?
     
  11. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,234
    Ratings:
    +301
    Religion:
    None
     
  12. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,105
    Ratings:
    +2,191
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Aggressive? What was aggressive about my post?

    I did. I replied directly to the points in your post...

    Evolution disproves the idea of Adam and Eve as "first humans".
    Geology, biology and physics disprove the flood (no universal genetic bottleneck, no global flood layer in the geological column).

    They are. The flood is directly refuted, as it makes testable predictions (among other things: a universal genetic bottleneck in all species and a global flood layer in the geological column and neither exists in the real world... therefor, the claim of the flood is false)

    Well, yes... they require the suspension and/or violation of natural law to one extent or another. That makes them magical.

    The anatomy of snakes makes it impossible for them to be able to talk.

    The details of the flood (dimensions of the boat, amount of water, etc) make the flood physically impossible.

    These stories of the bible are completely and utterly incompatible with the findings of science in every sense.

    Fortunatly, reality doesn't depend on your beliefs.

    The story as written in the book, is demonstrably false.
    Also, if "biblical religions" can't even agree on what it was, then claiming it happened is pretty meaningless - as at that point, what is even being claimed? Something that isn't agreed upon / known / understood?

    Might as well claim "gooblydockydoo". I don't know what it is, but it exists, trust me! :rolleyes:

    No, it is your claim.

    All I did was dispute your claim.[/QUOTE]
    What you are calling my claim, is just a response to the claims of the bible.

    I am aware that plenty of them are demonstrably false, as explained above.
    The larger point here however, is that such disproval isn't actually necessary.

    Even if none of it could be disproven, that still doesn't make any of these stories credible by any stretch of the imagination. Not being able to disprove a thing, does not mean the thing can be regarded as correct.
     
  13. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,105
    Ratings:
    +2,191
    Religion:
    Atheist
    It's not the truth.

    The flood has been disproven. It makes testable predictions and the predictions don't check out when tested. That makes the story false.

    As for the other magical claims... the findings of science are incompatible with them. That makes them false as well.

    Especially if they don't care about being rationally justified in their beliefs....
     
  14. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,105
    Ratings:
    +2,191
    Religion:
    Atheist

    :rolleyes:

    So what did they eat?

    Through magic?
    Certainly not through their anatomy, because their anatomy doesn't allow for speaking.
    Or did the magical fruit also magically change their anatomy?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    15,550
    Ratings:
    +10,981
    Religion:
    None
    What? Where does that nonsense come from?

    Gravity can be measured

    So can water

    I have already given the definition of reality that you considered invalid, that is not my problem and i do not go around in circles
     
  16. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,105
    Ratings:
    +2,191
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The guy has much trouble with the word "reality", for some strange reason. He seems to be compulsive in confusing everything, including himself.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    15,550
    Ratings:
    +10,981
    Religion:
    None
    Thanks for that,
     
  18. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    932
    Ratings:
    +165
    Religion:
    Properly some form of non-revealed deism
    I like words about reality. Here are some:
    Subjective: characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind
    Objective: having reality independent of the mind
    There are 3 versions of reality:
    • Reality in total
    • Reality as objective
    • Reality as subjective
    I can hold all 3.
    And I know you do it differently. So you pick your definition and I pick mine. Words are so funny. So what is really real?

    And BTW imagination and its connects are real, otherwise we couldn't talk about them. Now how that matches the rest of reality is another fun round of words.

    And again: There are at least 5 versions of truth:
    https://www.iep.utm.edu/truth/

    So you keep your truth and I keep mine.
     
  19. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,105
    Ratings:
    +2,191
    Religion:
    Atheist
    See what I mean?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    9,859
    Ratings:
    +8,480
    Religion:
    none
    IIRC (going from memory here and not watched them for a while so could be misremembering) that's not really what he is getting at though. He's not talking about when certain aspects of experimental natural philosophy, with hindsight and if taken in isolation, could have potentially been called science, but that in its time science didn't exist conceptually in the manner it does today (and neither did religion).

    So he's not saying Newton didn't do anything that could count as science (he is aware that Newton used scientific methods), but that the idea of science as a specific field of enquiry distinct from philosophy (and theology) was not really in existence.

    You are making the point that we can say science existed when the scientific method existed (which is fair enough), and he's making a point about how science emerged as a distinct and reified concept concerned with the cumulative and progressive acquisition of knowledge.

    It's not just semantics though but how these concepts fitted in to an overall worldview, and how this evolved in the Western intellectual tradition.
     
Loading...