[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:<<< Tiribulus were you hinting at reformed epistemology in your responses to BackInAction?[/quote]Absolutely not. I was proclaiming reformed epistemology (Christian epistemology =] ) outright. The only way I know how. You appear to be inching pretty close.
Science is scientific because it reflects the character of it’s designer who created it. The question cannot first be “what does the evidence tell us” without asking beforehand what seminal all governing principle we start with when approaching ANYTHING whatsoever. The once born children of Adam start with themselves. I I I will on my own authority “objectively” examine the data and determine for myself whether the God who is infinitely above me both exists and whether he has dominion over me.
The born again children of the last Adam begin with not just some generic impersonal first principle, but THE triune God of holy scripture. He for whom no mystery, uncertainty or contingency is possible. Even if they don’t recognize it.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
There are some people that do use reason as well as faith in order to prove that things are true. [/quote]
Give me one example where people use faith in order to prove that something is true.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
There are some people that do use reason as well as faith in order to prove that things are true. [/quote]<< Give me one example where people use faith in order to prove that something is true.[/quote]The incarnation? Or maybe nobody’s trying to prove that the ONE TRUE self existent unchanging absolute and infinite God was born of a virgin conceived by the Holy Spirit, who is also God and lived among us eating and drinking and doing the will of His Father who was God as well. I know I’m not. Lemme know my dear brother Joab when you have some “gap-less” “proof” for these things that we both are trusting our lives to.
[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< No amount of spin will lift religious belief to the same level of aquity science has.[/quote]No amount of sin will exalt science over the God who is it’s author and owner. I just had to help ya with that. Sorry.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
There are some people that do use reason as well as faith in order to prove that things are true. [/quote]<< Give me one example where people use faith in order to prove that something is true.[/quote]The incarnation? Or maybe nobody’s trying to prove that the ONE TRUE self existent unchanging absolute and infinite God was born of a virgin conceived by the Holy Spirit, who is also God and lived among us eating and drinking and doing the will of His Father who was God as well. I know I’m not. Lemme know my dear brother Joab when you have some “gap-less” “proof” for these things that we both are trusting our lives to.
[/quote]
You didn’t understand what I meant.
FAITH in itself cannot prove that things are true. It never was meant to do this.
Definition of faith:
“Faith is the confident belief or trust in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, concept or thing, or a belief that is NOT BASED ON PROOF.”
You CANNOT PROVE anything with FAITH because it’s a set of beliefs, not a way to any answers.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:<<< You didn’t understand what I meant.<<<>>>You CANNOT PROVE anything with FAITH because it’s a set of beliefs, not a way to any answers.[/quote]My response was hurried and wasn’t actually to you. It was to Joab through you. However, I gotta tell ya friend. I have had this debate far more times before ever having it here than I have since I’ve been here. I haven’t heard anything new in a couple decades. I can’t help how snooty that sounds, but I understood exactly what you meant. Let’s try it this way. What about the scientific method convinces you it’s true?
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
There are some people that do use reason as well as faith in order to prove that things are true. [/quote]
Give me one example where people use faith in order to prove that something is true.[/quote]
Reliability of the senses. You have to use your faith in the reliability of one’s senses and ability to observe in order prove something.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I know you don’t mean me Chris. I just said this on this very page.
[/quote]
Yes, I do. It’s a generalization and anecdotal, but most fundamental Christians believe you either use reason or faith.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
What about the scientific method convinces you it’s true?
[/quote]
The scientific method isn’t truth, it’s a method. What about this is so hard to understand? You use science to get closer to the truth.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
There are some people that do use reason as well as faith in order to prove that things are true. [/quote]<< Give me one example where people use faith in order to prove that something is true.[/quote]The incarnation? Or maybe nobody’s trying to prove that the ONE TRUE self existent unchanging absolute and infinite God was born of a virgin conceived by the Holy Spirit, who is also God and lived among us eating and drinking and doing the will of His Father who was God as well. I know I’m not. Lemme know my dear brother Joab when you have some “gap-less” “proof” for these things that we both are trusting our lives to.
[/quote]
You didn’t understand what I meant.
FAITH in itself cannot prove that things are true. It never was meant to do this.
Definition of faith:
“Faith is the confident belief or trust in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, concept or thing, or a belief that is NOT BASED ON PROOF.”
You CANNOT PROVE anything with FAITH because it’s a set of beliefs, not a way to any answers.
[/quote]
That’s short changing the word ‘prove.’ Like we already pointed out, you cannot prove the scientific method to be true, because you cannot prove your senses to be reliable. However, we do have faith (or an assumption) that our senses are reliable, and therefore we accept the scientific method.
[quote]Makavali wrote:<<< The scientific method isn’t truth, it’s a method. What about this is so hard to understand? You use science to get closer to the truth.[/quote]How do you know the method or it’s fruit are in any sense of the word “true”. What is truth?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:<<< The scientific method isn’t truth, it’s a method. What about this is so hard to understand? You use science to get closer to the truth.[/quote]How do you know the method or it’s fruit are in any sense of the word “true”. What is truth?
[/quote]
Are you doing this on purpose? Re-read what I wrote instead of seeing what you want to see.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< That’s short changing the word ‘prove.’ Like we already pointed out, you cannot prove the scientific method to be true, because you cannot prove your senses to be reliable. However, we do have faith (or an assumption) that our senses are reliable, and therefore we accept the scientific method.
[/quote]Ohhhhh Christopher!!! If you were my son I’d take you over my knee for this. This is a disastrous statement and one I hope represents a position you have abandoned before bedtime tonight. Imagine standing before the throne of He who commanded light to exist and explaining to Him that you accept the scientific method that HE authored because you have faith in your senses. I need to get you some anti Aquinas pills. Oh wait I have some. They’re called holy scripture. Actually Aquinas wouldn’t probably even go along with this. Do you have any idea the concession you just made? The big heavy club you just handed these guys to beat you to death with? The data of the senses is routinely defeated as evidence in pagan courts of law. Please Lord Jesus let me meet this man in person.
You’re an able kid. Get somebody to put a plunger to your ear and get this outta yer brain before it takes hold.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:<<< The scientific method isn’t truth, it’s a method. What about this is so hard to understand? You use science to get closer to the truth.[/quote]How do you know the method or it’s fruit are in any sense of the word “true”. What is truth?[/quote]Are you doing this on purpose? Re-read what I wrote instead of seeing what you want to see.[/quote]I see what you wrote. How do you know what truth is and that you’re getting closer to it? That’s not a legitimate question?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
There are some people that do use reason as well as faith in order to prove that things are true. [/quote]<< Give me one example where people use faith in order to prove that something is true.[/quote]The incarnation? Or maybe nobody’s trying to prove that the ONE TRUE self existent unchanging absolute and infinite God was born of a virgin conceived by the Holy Spirit, who is also God and lived among us eating and drinking and doing the will of His Father who was God as well. I know I’m not. Lemme know my dear brother Joab when you have some “gap-less” “proof” for these things that we both are trusting our lives to.
[/quote]
I didn’t know this was directed toward me but certainly the witness of the Holy Spirit is sufficient for the both of us.
“And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. . . . If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son (1 John 5:6-10).”
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:<<< I didn’t know this was directed toward me but certainly the witness of the Holy Spirit is sufficient for the both of us.
“And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. . . . If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son (1 John 5:6-10).”[/quote]I’m tryin to fix 2 computers, watch the Red Wings maybe be eliminated from the playoffs and post in these forums all at the same time. I forgot the intro. Sorry.
Explain to me what is being referred to as “God as the gaps” before I comment further because properly understood that’s what He is. I wouldn’t phrase it terms of “gaps” though. Wings just scored their 3rd in a row unanswered to take the lead. Nevermind.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:<<< I didn’t know this was directed toward me but certainly the witness of the Holy Spirit is sufficient for the both of us.
“And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. . . . If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son (1 John 5:6-10).”[/quote]I’m tryin to fix 2 computers, watch the Red Wings maybe be eliminated from the playoffs and post in these forums all at the same time. I forgot the intro. Sorry.
Explain to me what are referring to as “God as the gaps” before I comment further because properly understood that’s what He is. I wouldn’t phrase it terms of “gaps” though. Wings just scored their 3rd in a row unanswered to take the lead. Nevermind.
[/quote]
Atheist usually accuse the theist of claiming “God of the gaps” in that the “theist” is just plugin gaps in understanding not explained by naturalism with God and that our God will have less space to hide in as those gaps are filled.
Of course we don’t believe that, we believe that God is evident in every fact of reality and all things consist in him and not as the naturalist says that our God only exist in the gaps.
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:Atheist usually accuse the theist of claiming “God of the gaps” in that the “theist” is just plugin gaps in understanding not explained by naturalism with God and that our God will have less space to hide in as those gaps are filled. >>>[/quote]I can’t believe I somehow missed, or at least don’t remember having heard this this way before. [quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:<<< Of course we don’t believe that, we believe that God is evident in every fact of reality and all things consist in him and not as the naturalist says that our God only exist in the gaps.[/quote]Amen. =] 2+2 does not equal 4 without Him because two, plus, equals and four all have no meaning without Him. The statement I just made has no meaning without Him. Every upcoming protestation to the contrary has no meaning without Him. As my man Van Til was fond of saying. God is Himself the emplacement upon which men mount they very weapons they attempt to use to destroy Him. They can’t help it.
You were pretty close BTW. Pagans jump and down, stamp their feet with red face glowing while they demand there be no circular reasoning. That is humorous at best. When forced to face the foundation of their alleged beliefs, every time it comes down to the laws of logic. Laws which are invisible, immaterial, absolute and universal. Sound familiar? When I demand proof of the validity of the laws of logic they are trapped either re-appealing to those same laws which is circular or hypothetically looking somewhere else which destroys their authority.
Of course I also engage in circular reasoning and make no pretense otherwise because ALL finite reason is by definition and in the nature of the case eventually circular. It never reaches the termination point of ultimate resolution because it’s like finite see? The dead logic of unbelievers circles around THEM and hence never ultimately explains anything whatsoever. Mine circles around an infinite intellect and ultimately explains everything. They by utterly preeminent unconditional faith in themselves loudly proclaim the brilliance of their own unavoidably content-less existence. I by utterly preeminent unconditional faith in the triune God of Christianity loudly proclaim HIS brilliance and rest assured that He is the explanation for everything.
It’s not that unbelievers do not advance true knowledge and hence contribute much good to the world. Of course they do, but they do it in spite of and not because of their own foundational beliefs. It’s only because my foundational beliefs are true that anything they do bears fruit. They hate that. They hate God. They are His enemies. Same as I was. That’s why Paul told us in Romans 1 that they “suppress” or as the Greek has it, they “hold under” the truth in their unrighteousness. Picture a beach ball in the water. They keep holding it down, while it keeps popping up. That’s how they attempt to hide from their true selves and the God who created them. Paul says they are without excuse. God has reveled Himself unavoidably everywhere and especially IN themselves as created in His very image fractured though it is.
THAT is the discussion that has to happen or any quibbling about this or that particular proof or evidence has no genuine framework to even legitimately take place.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< That’s short changing the word ‘prove.’ Like we already pointed out, you cannot prove the scientific method to be true, because you cannot prove your senses to be reliable. However, we do have faith (or an assumption) that our senses are reliable, and therefore we accept the scientific method.
[/quote]Ohhhhh Christopher!!! If you were my son I’d take you over my knee for this. This is a disastrous statement and one I hope represents a position you have abandoned before bedtime tonight. Imagine standing before the throne of He who commanded light to exist and explaining to Him that you accept the scientific method that HE authored because you have faith in your senses. I need to get you some anti Aquinas pills. Oh wait I have some. They’re called holy scripture. Actually Aquinas wouldn’t probably even go along with this. Do you have any idea the concession you just made? The big heavy club you just handed these guys to beat you to death with? The data of the senses is routinely defeated as evidence in pagan courts of law. Please Lord Jesus let me meet this man in person.
You’re an able kid. Get somebody to put a plunger to your ear and get this outta yer brain before it takes hold.
[/quote]
No, you wouldn’t even try unless you wanted your jaw jacked. Moreover, speak plainly please.
P.S. Where does the Bible come from?