Page 10 of 26 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 251

Thread: When does proving one's truth claims come to an end?

  1. #91
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,974
    Amen (Given)
    2592
    Amen (Received)
    1887
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Again: Are you suggesting that we can only know things, true things, by scientific testing?
    We cannot verify facts via subjective feelings and experiences; for facts we need scientific testing.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  2. #92
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,321
    Amen (Given)
    1956
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    We cannot verify facts via subjective feelings and experiences; for facts we need scientific testing.
    That is just nonsense Tass, most of the facts you know have nothing to do with scientific testing they are historical, personal or otherwise. You had breakfast last Thursday morning, the specifics are facts learned via personal experience and historical. No science necessary.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  3. #93
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    156
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    One believes what can be supported by evidence. Science is supported by empirically testing observations and deriving conclusions. Religious beliefs have no such methodology to test its claims.
    One can test religious beliefs with what the Bible teaches. The Bible is inspired by God and it is the final authority.

  4. #94
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    694
    Amen (Given)
    16
    Amen (Received)
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    “Love” can be viewed as an extension of the evolved nurturing instinct common to many living creatures and therefore explainable by science – just as any verifiable factual knowledge is explainable by science.
    You're trying to reduce a complex, multi-dimensional phenomenon such as "love" to a single explanatory level. That's called 'explanatory monism'. Your explanation is useful as long as it's understood to apply to that one descriptive level. An explanation or description at a single level is never meant to be exhaustive.

  5. #95
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    694
    Amen (Given)
    16
    Amen (Received)
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Jim that was not the point I was making, whether I decide God is real or not has nothing to do with it. I'm asking theoretically on what basis could we ever object to a moral act of God?
    In theory, it's not metaphysically possible, although logically possible, to object to a moral act of God's if God's character aligns with the good and with love. My point was that morality is based on reasons and reasons are equally accessible to all moral agents.




    I agree, and they line up with the morally qualities of God.
    Yes, they line up with the moral qualities of God, but that doesn't mean that God is the source of or identical with those qualities.




    No I'm saying that without God there are no universal moral truths, only relative moral beliefs.
    Whether moral truths are universal or relative has nothing to do with whether or not God is the source of them. In fact, positing God as the source relativizes them more than not doing so, IMO, because it makes them brute, and without reasons for being.



    No, there is nothing prior in God's moral nature. Mercy, love, forgiveness, justice that make up his goodness are just as eternal and immutable as His overall goodness.
    I think you've got two problems.

    You've got the redundancy problem I already mentioned. If God sets His own standard of goodness, then you're not ascribing meaning to words the way we normally do. When we ascribe a property P to X, we mean that there is a separate standard for judging and applying P to X, something separate from X. If X can set its own standard for P, then all we're saying is that "X is being X," or "X is doing Xness". X loses the meaning that we usually associate with words for properties. If God sets His own standard for goodness, then 'the good' means 'what God is, commands, or wills.' So that 'God is good' comes to mean "God is or does whatever God is or does."

    The second problem is the emptiness problem based on logical priority.

    http://faculty.georgetown.edu/koonsj.../Euthyphro.pdf




    What on earth are you talking about? And I will ask again, what effect or influence could your standard have on an immutable moral character? It would be completely superfluous to a morally unchanging being.
    God's unchanging nature is eternally one with the truth, whether that's mathematical, logical, moral, or otherwise. There is no effect or influence, any more than He's 'influenced' by the number 7. Effect and influence connote time and change and these are timeless abstractions.

    I do believe God is influenced by the world, answers prayers, intervenes in history, etc, but that's another aspect of His being.

  6. #96
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,974
    Amen (Given)
    2592
    Amen (Received)
    1887
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post
    One can test religious beliefs with what the Bible teaches.
    Disagreement about what the bible teaches has been the cause of many religious wars. Plus it has been the origin of a multiplicity of denominations each of which just "knows" its got it right and the others have got it "wrong".

    The Bible is inspired by God
    No it's not.

    and it is the final authority
    Only for those who agree it is inspired by God. And can agree on what it means. See above.
    Last edited by Tassman; 01-21-2020 at 10:38 PM.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  7. #97
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,974
    Amen (Given)
    2592
    Amen (Received)
    1887
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    That is just nonsense Tass, most of the facts you know have nothing to do with scientific testing they are historical, personal or otherwise. You had breakfast last Thursday morning, the specifics are facts learned via personal experience and historical. No science necessary.
    OR you may have imagined that you “had breakfast last Thursday morning” - you may have been dreaming, you may be deluded. In short, if the fact of your claiming to have breakfast ever became an issue it can be scientifically determined – at least potentially. Same applies to your belief in a deity and your claim of a personal relationship with it. But, unlike your breakfast, there is no scientific way to determine the truth or otherwise of your claim.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  8. #98
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,974
    Amen (Given)
    2592
    Amen (Received)
    1887
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
    You're trying to reduce a complex, multi-dimensional phenomenon such as "love" to a single explanatory level. .
    No, I’m referring to the origins of “love” as an evolved instinct common to many living creatures and therefore explainable by science. I am not elaborating on the multi-dimensional nature of "love" as a phenomenon. Although, there is no good reason to think that it too cannot be explained by science.
    Last edited by Tassman; 01-21-2020 at 11:00 PM.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  9. #99
    tWebber Chrawnus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,995
    Amen (Given)
    5275
    Amen (Received)
    3614
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    No, I’m referring to the origins of “love” as an evolved instinct common to many living creatures and therefore explainable by science. I am not elaborating on the multi-dimensional nature of "love" as a phenomenon. Although, there is no good reason to think that it too cannot be explained by science.
    Given that "science" has been unable to explain anything other than the mechanical/physical aspects of the universe so far I'm not really sure from where you're getting this utterly unfounded confidence in the capabilities of science.

  10. #100
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,321
    Amen (Given)
    1956
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    OR you may have imagined that you “had breakfast last Thursday morning” - you may have been dreaming, you may be deluded. In short, if the fact of your claiming to have breakfast ever became an issue it can be scientifically determined – at least potentially. Same applies to your belief in a deity and your claim of a personal relationship with it. But, unlike your breakfast, there is no scientific way to determine the truth or otherwise of your claim.
    Tass you may have imagined that science works, or that there is such a thing as science - you may be dreaming, or deluded.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •