Ignorant from the start

Tart · Post by **Tart** » Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:30 pm

As quoted in another thread
"So this tendency that believers have to look towards the past as a time of knowledge and informed wisdom, is actually an ignorant position."

This is talking about looking at our past for knowledge... Like looking at a source from 2000+ years ago... Saying we would be ignorant to do such things...

Actually this conversation was specifically about Aristotle... For Aristotle was perhaps the first of the scientists, and Aristotle put forth scientific arguments for the existence of God... In his Book "Physics" (where the word comes from), Aristotle tells us that "that there must be an immortal, unchanging being, ultimately responsible for all wholeness and orderliness in the sensible world"

Just the same as Newton... "Don't doubt the creator, because it is inconceivable that accidents alone could be the controller of this universe."~Newton

These are scientifically based arguments, and reasoning, that God exists. And they are saying that the orderliness of nature is dependent on a God... That without God there is no reason that science, and the order in nature, should exist...

Its just ironic that atheists have these kind of quotes (like the one above)... They say, why would anyone look at our past for knowledge? That they were just ignorant back then, and conclude that they have no merit...

But the scientific method itself is based upon past experiments, and inductive reasoning. The only way the scientific method can make sense out of the order in nature, is if the past will be like the future. If the experiments we did yesterday can be done today and tomorrow, yielding the same results...

This is what philosophers call "inductive reasoning"... Its funny, because science is based off this stuff... And in order for us to make sense of anything, we need to have a past that is logically coherent...

Its also quite astonishing as well, that atheists have taken this one step further... While many scientist, theologians, philosophers, have made the argument that the order in nature is evidence for a God, a God who keeps things orderly...

Atheist on the other hand have brought to question inductive reasoning itself.. It is called the "problem of induction", as Hume said it. He couldn't make sense of why things make sense.. He said there needs to be a proof for induction that is not dependent on its past (kind of like how atheist dont want to depend on our past)... And this goes on today as something philosophically unproven (without a God)... That inductive reasoning (which the scientific method is based off of, also logic and language itself) needs to have some kind of justification for it....

So, all these believing scientists/philosophers point to induction as proof of God. While all the atheists scientist/philosophers point to induction as not making any sense... Kind of funny..

Isnt it just clear... The evidence is all on one side... The claim is that truth has a start, knowledge has a foundation, that we can learn truths from our past.. And this isnt even limited to our human history... Science itself is built upon our past experiences...

Where atheist say, we started in ignorance, knowing nothing, and then some how stumbled upon truth... (where? or when? they dont say...)

And where theist say that knowledge and truth has a beginning, from the start with God, and builds upon these things...

I think its pretty clear.. All the evidence, including all the "psychical" evidence is on the side of God, the unmoved mover... And nothing but a void of truth on the side of atheism, where we cant even make sense out of induction itself, or our past.

Post by **Tcg** » Tue May 15, 2018 5:08 pm

JehovahsWitness wrote:
rikuoamero wrote: Except...i remember in the past debating you on the topic of "fulfilled prophecies", with the one from Micah among them and you arguing they had been fulfilled.
Well I do believe that, that's what we call "faith". You as you said need more, so I appreciate you won't be satisfied with anything i have to say so that's fine. I'm just expressing my faith (not implying you are interested I'm just making a statement of faith ie what I believe).

JW

That's odd, on another thread you stated this:

"If I want to hear a testimony I'll go to church not to a debate forum..."

This is a debate forum and you are sharing your testimony. Why is it okay when you do it, but bad when others do?

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Tue May 15, 2018 5:14 pm

Tcg wrote:
JehovahsWitness wrote:
rikuoamero wrote: Except...i remember in the past debating you on the topic of "fulfilled prophecies", with the one from Micah among them and you arguing they had been fulfilled.
Well I do believe that, that's what we call "faith". You as you said need more, so I appreciate you won't be satisfied with anything i have to say so that's fine. I'm just expressing my faith (not implying you are interested I'm just making a statement of faith ie what I believe).

JW
That's odd, on another thread you stated this:

"If I want to hear a testimony I'll go to church not to a debate forum..."

This is a debate forum and you are sharing your testimony. Why is it okay when you do it, but bad when others do?

I didn't say it was bad I said I'm NOT INTERESTED. I'm not obliged to be interested in people's personal statements. They are free to make as many as they want.

Plus this is random ramblings - this subforum is not for debate. And even if it were there is no prohibit on faith statements in any debate forums, as long as those statements are not presented as proof. If I'm presenting evidence I'm presenting evidence, if I'm talking about my beliefs Ill talk about beliefs nobody has to agree or accept what I have to say.

otseng wrote: There is no rule that says anyone has to prove anything. If someone insists you must prove something, challenge them where is it a requirement on the forum that something needs to be proved.

JW.

Post by **Tcg** » Tue May 15, 2018 5:20 pm

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Plus there is no prohibit on faith statements in any debate forums, as long as those statements are not presented as proof.

And yet you complain when others share their experience. You haven't addressed this double standard.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Tue May 15, 2018 5:25 pm

Tcg wrote:
JehovahsWitness wrote:
Plus there is no prohibit on faith statements in any debate forums, as long as those statements are not presented as proof.

And yet you complain when others share their experience. You haven't addressed this double standard.

I don't HAVE to address what you perceive as a double standard. If you think I have violated forum guidelines feel free to report the post. Otherwise I do believe there is a sliding mechanism on most computers that allows a person to just skip posts that they find uninteresting.

Anything else?

Post by **Tcg** » Wed May 16, 2018 12:20 am

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Tcg wrote:
JehovahsWitness wrote:
Plus there is no prohibit on faith statements in any debate forums, as long as those statements are not presented as proof.

And yet you complain when others share their experience. You haven't addressed this double standard.
I don't HAVE to address what you perceive as a double standard.

You certainly don't. No poster is required to justify their use of a double standard.

Otherwise I do believe there is a sliding mechanism on most computers that allows a person to just skip posts that they find uninteresting.

How would a person know if they find posts uninteresting if they skip them?

Anything else?

Of course. I would suppose there are an infinite number of subjects that could be discussed.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Wed May 16, 2018 3:01 am

[Replying to post 214 by Tcg]

Yes, well I see where you're coming from.

Well have an excellent day,

JW

Post by **Tcg** » Wed May 16, 2018 3:17 am

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Yes, well I see where you're coming from.

Once again we reach accord through your agreement with my post. Glad to see you making such progress.

brunumb · Post by **brunumb** » Wed May 16, 2018 3:51 am

[Replying to post 205 by JehovahsWitness]

Well the Jehovah's Witness interpretation is that Jesus is a spiritual not a physical ruler.

come forth for us means exist.

And someone else will have a different interpretation that suits their particular beliefs.

I find it incredibly amusing that an omnipotent God could create a universe, fine tune it to a gazillionth of a unit to allow life and then fail to apply the same stringent standards to what should be the most important book ever written. Instead of doing it himself, he shops it out to dozens of unknown hacks to write distorted records of what has happened and then let another eclectic group cobble it together into a clumsy omnibus to guide humanity. What was it all for anyway? Hardly a book to inspire converts. The majority of Christians are believers long before they can even read, let alone having read the Bible. The art of biblical interpretation is akin to taking a sledgehammer and using it to pound square pegs into round holes. Many of those who do actually read the Bible thoroughly and with an open mind see it for what it really is and lose their faith as a result. God didn't do such a good job choosing his holy ghost writers it would seem.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Wed May 16, 2018 5:29 pm

brunumb wrote: [Replying to post 205 by JehovahsWitness]

Well the Jehovah's Witness interpretation is that Jesus is a spiritual not a physical ruler.

come forth for us means exist.
And someone else will have a different interpretation that suits their particular beliefs.

Yes that is true, I agree that what you here state is a verifiable fact, that various individuals and groups have various interpretations. I presented the JW interpretation but that is not to say that is the only interpretation that exists. I can live with that, personally it's not a problem for me.

JW

brunumb · Post by **brunumb** » Wed May 16, 2018 6:44 pm

[Replying to post 218 by JehovahsWitness]

I presented the JW interpretation but that is not to say that is the only interpretation that exists. I can live with that, personally it's not a problem for me.

That just tells me that the truth doesn't really matter to believers. Cognitive dissonance compels you to protect the belief, even if it is wrong.