by nicolaou 97 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Not all things are inexplicable, 1+1 must always equal 3 and I'm sorry, but to deny that does suggest that you have lost your ability to reason - at least where reason impinges on your faith.
I'm sure you meant 1+1=2, so I won't make an issue of that.
And, yes sir, I'm convinced the Universe was created by a powerful and benevolent Person.
Awakened, if I were born into a different culture, I wouldn't be who I am, so that renders your assertion moot.
Thank you both for your interest.
Sylvia
Snowbird.
Sorry to be boring but reaching any conclusion with you through logical debate is like trying to catch a dream in a bottle.
Still it is fun trying.
Snowbird.
Sorry to be boring but reaching any conclusion with you through logical debate is like trying to catch a dream in a bottle.
Still it is fun trying.
Ain't it though?
Sylvia
I'm sure you meant 1+1=2, so I won't make an issue of that.
See how much you've rattled me?! Seriously though, how can you be sure that I meant 1+1=2 if you don't accept that as an inviolable truth yourself? I know, I know - context, but you get my point.
Indulge me on matter of astronomical truth Sylvia. Do you believe that the following events happened as they are literally described in the Bible?
"Behold, I will cause the shadow on the stairway, which has gone down with the sun on the stairway of Ahaz, to go back ten steps." So the sun's shadow went back ten steps on the stairway on which it had gone down. Isaiah 38:8
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. Joshua 10:13
C'mon now, you don't really believe that do you?
snowbird:
If you can accept the fact that you came from something smaller than the question mark at the end of this sentence, why can't you accept the fact that some things, from our standpoint, are simply inexplicable?
Because that fact is something we have discovered by virtue of not accepting that things are inexplicable, but through examining and hypothesising and testing and probing. As a result we know not just in broad principle but in exquisite detail where babies come from. By not just accepting "stork theory" or "cabbage patch theory" our lives are enriched and the sum total of knowledge has increased. This approach is the exact opposite of what you seem to advocate.
The example you cited of Jesus' multiplying the loaves and fish was a miracle - neither you nor I can explain it, but that doesn't mean it couldn't and didn't happen.
True, but that's not the place to start. The first question to ask is: Did it happen? Well, did it? Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. Maybe it was completely made up, maybe it was an exaggeration, maybe it was a case of human generosity, and maybe it was a bona fide miracle. Is there any way to know? Why do you automatically take what seems to be the least likely explanation possible?
I believe it happened. My convictions are that as Creator, Jesus could overwrite, as it were, the creative process. What seems like the end to us may be only the beginning for Him.
Bu why do you believe that? Certainly not because there's any evidence that it happened. In fact, why do you believe that this Jesus character not only existed but created the universe? Again, not because there's any evidence for it. This is where you usually play the "faith" card but what is faith other than believing something for no reason? To me, it seems like a lazy copout. You've picked your beliefs, and when it's pointed out that the events you believe happened are impossible and have no evidence to support them, you merely claim that nobody can prove they didn't happen and that there's a special kind of magic involved that allows impossible things to happen. Do you at least see why some of us have difficulty accepting that?
Compared to creating a universe, what's multiplying a few loaves and fish?
Not a lot. In fact, it's such a trivial parlour trick that it's hard to imagine that a being who created a quadrillion solar systems even bothered to do it.
No, I haven't abandoned my reasoning abilities. I just know where to draw the line.
Of course. You couldn't function if you completely abandoned reason. You'd quickly starve to death or get hit by a bus. What many of us find fascinating is why a normally rational person is happily and defiantly irrational when it comes to the big questions. You'd check the identity of someone who came to read your meter but when it comes to who made the universe you're happy just to believe the first thing you were told.
Behold, I will cause the shadow on the stairway, which has gone down with the sun on the stairway of Ahaz, to go back ten steps." So the sun's shadow went back ten steps on the stairway on which it had gone down. Isaiah 38:8And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. Joshua 10:13
C'mon now, you don't really believe that do you?
I believe.
Sylvia
Some things must be accepted a priori.
That our senses accurately convey reality is a reasonable a priori. We can't prove it.
That other minds exist is a reasonable a priori that we engage in during our day to day lives as well. We can't prove it.
That human intellgence using logic and reason can solve problems and explain reality is a reasonable a priori.
Mathematics rests on a priori principles.
That the laws of the Universe always apply everywhere and at every time is an a priori assumption, and a useful one at that.
The existence of a creator of some sort is for most people a reasonable a priori.
I think this ganging up on Madame Snowbird is pretty despicable. Would you like me to give you a conviction or a reason for that assertion?
snowbird:
I believe.
Hmmmm.
Is there anything fantastically unlikely that you don't believe then? For example, do you believe that Ram Setu (a bridge between India and Sri Lanka) was built by Lord Ram and his army of monkeys? If not, why not?
Science rests on unprovable convictions.
You start with those convictions, and you reason from there.
These convictions are reasonable. I think belief in God is also reasonable.
Madame Snowbird, you are a tough lady.
BurnTheShips
I think this ganging up on Madame Snowbird is pretty despicable.
Oh please! We've been nothing but polite.
Twit.
