Support NeoGAF

[Feep]

A lot of these issues stem from the human race's general disability to understand probability on a truly intuitive level (even for you "smart persons" out there, check out Monte's Three Door problem...MIND BLOWING).

Many people play the lottery. From an external perspective, someone wins every week. It's no big deal. The numbers say it has to happen. For the INDIVIDUAL, though, it's a fucking "miracle". What are the odds? So rare! So improbable! It must be providence!

It's a logical fallacy. We're the lottery winners. This universe happens to support our kind of life, which can observe the universe around it. Our universe seems "built" for us, when in fact, we were merely the type of advanced machinery that came about from its workings. Mayhap there are other universes, many others, where it didn't work out this way. No life at all, or an entirely different form. Even if there aren't, it's irrelevant. Just because it seems improbable to us doesn't mean it isn't completely normal.

Edit:

Science doesnt even have an explanation of gravity - what causes it (higgs) and what mediates it (gravitons) and he speaks like he knows it, mixing Philosophy and theoretical Physics ...

So?

Maybe you misunderstand how science works. It's the attempt to explore the mysteries around us. Are you suggesting that there is NOT a scientific explanation for gravity, even if we humans have not yet uncovered it?

The old adage here is quite true. The more you know, the more you realize you don't. And you seem awfully sure of yourself, pal.

 

[Igoritza]

In general, most arguments towards God fail on the grounds of Occam's razor.

wouldnt agree with you.

talking about the entropy - the lowest entropy is - nothing. philosophically speaking.

when there is something, and that something is in order, then you gotta put another variable in that logic.

the most likely variable should then be God

and yet, that is anthropic logic, human logic.

there are a number of things that science yet doesnt have even a theory, why does it happen, here is a list from the top of the head:


1. consciousness - biology fails at explaining why has consciousness waited for 28.000 years to emerge in humans - Cro Magnon, estimated to be old for 35.000 years, was perfectly capable of performing mind tasks as modern homo sapiens, so, there is no actual explanation of what has happened that "gave" men consciousness.

2. irreducible complexity - Behe was actually right about that one - his examples were shit. every day, more and more people find some evolutionary systems that would hardly be naturally "synchronized".

3. Abiogenesis - just cause it sounds like the most logical theory - you have to prove it, and yet - science fails.

4. gravity fuckups - there are many, that do not go alongside known and proven, long story, if anyone interested, ill write about it.

 

[Kinitari]

Ignoring the fact that you are essentially doing the "We don't know something yet? God did it." dance - could you give me some examples of irreducible complexity? Like... 2, or 3 even? 1 will suffice if you are hard pressed.

 

[Zaptruder]

blah blah blah

Insisting that pseudo science and misunderstandings are science does not in fact make it science.

Just like me insisting that you're a retarded chipmunk, does not in fact make you a retarded chipmunk.

You know big words and throw them around, but don't conflate that with a high level of intelligence. It means you like big words and like to throw them around.

Now that's science.

 

[Nocebo]

Science acts like it. specially atheists that are popular like Stephen Hawking. the dude just said that "gravity" is the reason why nothing created everything ..

you dont have to be a Physics doctor to know that it's a pure bullshit.

No, your statement is pure bullshit. Of course you would have to understand physics to understand why he said what he said.

 

[Igoritza]

Maybe you misunderstand how science works. It's the attempt to explore the mysteries around us. Are you suggesting that there is NOT a scientific explanation for gravity, even if we humans have not yet uncovered it?

The old adage here is quite true. The more you know, the more you realize you don't. And you seem awfully sure of yourself, pal.

im not saying that there is - but im saying that persons like Hawking cannot make Philosophical assumptions about God based on something that he knows almost nothing of. (gravity)

the problem with modern belief in god is, that now people know how big universe is. and all of a sudden - we must be a scrap, a coincidence, that universe doesnt give a shit about.

I myself am not a religion person - i believe in God, and the Jesus, without any other word written by other people. im a believer, not a religious person.

my confidence comes from reading all about Jesus, specially those documents that are considered heretical, and gnostic - made me see the whole picture. mixed that with historical findings, and i devised in my head, who or what Jesus was.

i recommend for all of you wanting to believe, to read the Gospel of Thomas, from Nag Hammadi Library, as it is the probably the true word of Jesus, being the only text with Jesus'es quotes not rewriten by a church.

 

[Nocebo]

my confidence comes from reading all about Jesus, specially those documents that are considered heretical, and gnostic - made me see the whole picture. mixed that with historical findings, and i devised in my head, who or what Jesus was.

Basically you like to make shit up that takes your fancy then? Glad we got that sorted out.

 

[jdogmoney]

im not saying that there is - but im saying that persons like Hawking cannot make Philosophical assumptions about God based on something that he knows almost nothing of. (gravity)

But you can? Knowing a lot less about gravity?

 

[JGS]

...why did i write all of this ? you might ask .. so, we come to the last philosophical question that i bother myself with in this topic - religion.


being certain that god exists - that leads to a logical conclusion that no religion is right. partially.

God, being all smart, creating this weird universe, quantum fields, gravity and stuff - surely did not want only a maximum of 20% randomly born people to believe in the right stuff.


When Howard Storm (former Atheist, and an OOBE surviver) asked the angels, which one is the right religion, they replied - "the one that would bring you closest to God".

Some could view this as flawed thinking for a couple of reasons although it's a common argument that even amongst human nature doesn't make much sense in reality.

1. The assumption is that only 20% of the population can know God which is incorrect. 20% attempt to worship God but the majority of people on the planet have definitely heard of God & the Bible and choose to not worship or are forced to not do so. What happens to these people is not our call to make.

2. The assumption that a person that is all good/all loving (& for the sake of religion all powerful) is somehow expected to get everyone to do as he wants is incorrect. If we think back to some of the more brilliant, smart, kind, &/or powerful people on the planet, they never spent their entire time thinking of ways to convince people of their right course. People had to learn and appreciate whatever it was they believed or proved and the word spread.

An all smart God would know you can't force people to do anything like you can force them to adhere to scientific laws. The mind is way too varied a thing for that, so a smart God leaves the option open for people to do what they want- even when it's contrary to their interests. People do it all the time with non-religious things like smoking, unprotected sex, & eating Brussel Sprouts.

Howard Storm's angels would be incorrect since God went through a lot of trouble to specifically spell out what he wants his worshippers to do, so it's kind of silly to think that God said "Ahhh forget it!"

However, it is true that a person who is drawn to God for the wrong reasons may be more willing to accept correction about God over a person who sees God as a fairy tale and is thus a tougher (Almost impossible) nut to crack.

 

[Nocebo]

But you can? Knowing a lot less about gravity?

He is super intelligent so whatever he thinks of that "feels" correct will automatically be the truth and 100% right.

 

[Igoritza]

No, your statement is pure bullshit. Of course you would have to understand physics to understand why he said what he said.

omg, do you know anything about physics ?

his, word to word quote:

"because there is such law as gravity, universe was created out of nothing"

Gravity -

one of the four fundamental interactions of nature.

Newton figured out how gravity works on a lower scale, Einstein figured out how gravity works in general relativity theory (big scale)

30-40 years after Einstein, it has been proposed that gravity is compatible with quantum mechanics.

that theory proposes that gravity is mediated by gravitons. same way as electromagnetical force mediates via photons.

LHC in Cern is trying to prove both Higs (what gives the mass to matter) and gravitons (what attracts mass to eachother)

there is NO theory that is even close to verifying the nature of gravity. gravity is NOT KNOWN to men.

the gravity fuckups i spoked about earlier:

Pioneer slowing down - 2 aircrafts are slowing down, in a way that is not consistent with gravity - and there COULD be an explanation if only one of them was doing it - leakage of material, bumping space stuff and so on - 2 of them are doing the same.

Slingshot maneuver - several of aircrafts in later years experienced faster speed, not explained.

biggest fuckup - photons should lose energy when exiting galaxy - they do not. a long story short - this proof suggests that gravity actually wears off on a big distance - a variable that totally screws up quantum mechanics presumptions.

so, yeah - Stephen hawking DOES NOT know a shit about gravity, and is making a philosophical statements that are valid, as my grandama speaking about computers.

 

[Mario]

so, yeah - Stephen hawking DOES NOT know a shit about gravity, and is making a philosophical statements that are valid, as my grandama speaking about computers.

He knows more about gravity than you, and likely more about gravity than almost anybody who has ever lived.

 

[the_concierge]

Igoritza, you are invoking classic 'God of the gaps' logic. Just because there are areas of scientific inquiry that science cannot fully explain, does not mean that the god is the singular, necessary alternative. Evolution is an excellent example. Even if Darwinian evolution by natural selection was proven to be incorrect tomorrow, 'god did it' would not automatically become the 'new' theory of the diversity of life on earth by default. Science is working on all these problems you invoke god to explain. History shows it is only a matter of time until we get there.

 

[Aristion]

Igoritza, you might have a point about Hawking being ignorant about the philosophical implications of his theory, but there's no denying the fact that Hawking knows vastly more about gravity than you do. :lol

I will stand with you however in condemning Hawking's remarks about the Universe coming into existence from nothing.

 

[Igoritza]

He knows more about gravity than you, and likely more about gravity than almost anybody who has ever lived.

it's not true. the guy is overhyped - he is NOT the Einstein of today. he is famous for his disability, and the fact that he is a smart dude in a wheel chair - but he is not the smartest person in the world. that fake info - him being the person with the biggest IQ - that's absolutely not true. and, counting his "philosophical exploits" of late - i'd say that he is a media person, like Dawkins, more than a scientist.

as i said before - Kip Thorne, and several other scientists are much bigger players in science today, than Hawking.

**proof of that being the fact that Hawking likes to make bets about discoveries, and he already lost 2 against Thorne.**

Igoritza, you might have a point about Hawking being ignorant about the philosophical implications of his theory, but there's no denying the fact that Hawking knows vastly more about gravity than you do. :lol

I will stand with you however in condemning Hawking's remarks about the Universe coming into existence from nothing.

yes, he knows a shitload of stuff. but let me tell you - i am from Serbia, where basic education is like - 20 times greater than USA. ex commy country, educational system stands in place, people here still believe that everyone has to know -

how worm takes a shit, what happened in the french british war, how does Shrodingers equation define energy levels, who are the people that composed corpus iuris civilis, how much diamonds SAR produces, and what the fuck did Mozzart in his life.

as far as i go - im well educated, got me self a programmer's degree, but i continued researching mostly Physics and Psychology on my own.

I actually understand the math behind the Quantum mechanics, so, when i hear such claims: "gravity justifies everything out of nothing" - it really bothers me. it is the same as if CEO of Toyota is claiming to a everyday mechanic, that they made a car that runs on dirt.

 

[Ashes]

Wow, this thread sure took a right turn onto the motorway.

 

[jdogmoney]

Wow, this thread sure took a right turn onto the motorway.

I, for one, am intrigued by recent events.

 

[Shanadeus]

Igoritza:

1. consciousness - biology fails at explaining why has consciousness waited for 28.000 years to emerge in humans - Cro Magnon, estimated to be old for 35.000 years, was perfectly capable of performing mind tasks as modern homo sapiens, so, there is no actual explanation of what has happened that "gave" men consciousness.

Why are you saying that biology fails at explaining why consciousness has waited for x years to emerge in humans when there is nothing suggesting that they didn't have a consciousness?

2. irreducible complexity - Behe was actually right about that one - his examples were shit. every day, more and more people find some evolutionary systems that would hardly be naturally "synchronized".

And what would some of those systems be?

3. Abiogenesis - just cause it sounds like the most logical theory - you have to prove it, and yet - science fails.

Fails?
Yet it is the hypothesis that has the most going for it, the building blocks of life has been re-created time after time.

4. gravity fuckups - there are many, that do not go alongside known and proven, long story, if anyone interested, ill write about it.

That gravity isn't fully understood doesn't mean anything, the scientific theories we have for gravity are superior and more useful than non-scientific theories and explanations.

And as for Lissi, we'll see if his theory holds up:

By matching 226 known standard model particles to some of the 248 symmetries of E8, Lisi is able to predict the existence and quantum numbers of 22 new particles.[1] Three of these, the B_1^\pm \, and B_2 \,, are the same new \mathrm{su}(2)_R \, and \mathrm{u}(1)_{B-L} \, gauge bosons as predicted in the Pati-Salam model, the W' and Z' bosons. Another, the w \,, is a new \mathrm{u}(1) \, gauge boson, with a corresponding new quantum number. And the remaining 18 new bosons predicted, the x \Phi \,, are new colored fields, interacting with the strong force. Lisi states that some of these 22 particles might be seen at the Large Hadron Collider.[16]

Since Lisi does not specify masses for these particles their prediction is not falsifiable by non-discovery in any given experiment, because the masses could exceed the experiment's reach. However, the discovery of new particles that do not fit in Lisi's classification, such as superpartners, would fall outside the model, and falsify Lisi's match to E8. Also, because the matching of the three fermion generations is tentative and problematic in the model, Lisi places a low confidence in these predictions.

And if he is correct then science will have improved once again, and gained a more accurate insight into the nature of the universe.

 

[Feep]

yes, he knows a shitload of stuff. but let me tell you - i am from Serbia, where basic education is like - 20 times greater than USA. ex commy country, educational system stands in place, people here still believe that everyone has to know -

how worm takes a shit, what happened in the french british war, how does Shrodingers equation define energy levels, who are the people that composed corpus iuris civilis, how much diamonds SAR produces, and what the fuck did Mozzart in his life.

as far as i go - im well educated, got me self a programmer's degree, but i continued researching mostly Physics and Psychology on my own.

I actually understand the math behind the Quantum mechanics, so, when i hear such claims: "gravity justifies everything out of nothing" - it really bothers me. it is the same as if CEO of Toyota is claiming to a everyday mechanic, that they made a car that runs on dirt.

Not that you had any credibility before, but holy shit.

It's great that you think that the Serbian education system is "twenty times greater" than the USA's, whatever the fuck that means. Not that I could even find Serbia on any formal classification or ranking system of country-wide literacy levels in reading, writing, or mathematics.

Of course, only one of the things you mentioned has anything to do with mathematics. You claim this remarkable educational system, then you go and mention that most of your studying you did "on your own". But you're literally implying that you more than Stephen Hawking on the subject of gravity.

You're an arrogant fool. If you want to discredit him, genius, you should formally publish your mathematical analyses and verified scientific data to proof him wrong. After all, Hawking has been published by over 120 peer-reviewed scientific journals, so it must be easy as hell for someone of your mental caliber to do it.

I've taken quantum physics, but that doesn't mean I can roll with the greatest luminaries in the field. Time to learn some humility, child.

 

[Igoritza]

Not that you had any credibility before, but holy shit.

It's great that you think that the Serbian education system is "twenty times greater" than the USA's, whatever the fuck that means. Not that I could even find Serbia on any formal classification or ranking system of country-wide literacy levels in reading, writing, or mathematics.

Of course, only one of the things you mentioned has anything to do with mathematics. You claim this remarkable educational system, then you go and mention that most of your studying you did "on your own". But you're literally implying that you more than Stephen Hawking on the subject of gravity.

You're an arrogant fool. If you want to discredit him, genius, you should formally publish your mathematical analyses and verified scientific data to proof him wrong. After all, Hawking has been published by over 120 peer-reviewed scientific journals, so it must be easy as hell for someone of your mental caliber to do it.

I've taken quantum physics, but that doesn't mean I can roll with the greatest luminaries in the field. Time to learn some humility, child.

and, im the fool . ?

first of all - Serbian scientists run about 30% of the world's shit. currently the best biologist in the world is Miodrag Stojkovic, with his research team from Valencia Spain, has made the biggest progress in cloning human cells.

LHC Cern has 13 Serbian scientists, which is the most, if you calculate population of the country/scientists in project.

10 of the Sukhoi technitians and experts are Serbians - and we all know that russian fighter jets own USA.

Nikola Tesla is the reason we heave this conversation, and pretty much the reason why the WORLD looks as it does today.

every big company that deals in Electrical engineering has a Serb somewhere high in the chain of command.


i DONT know more than Stephen Hawking, and you DONT know how to read, obviously -

i said - as much as he knows about Physics - he CAN NOT know the reason, and the cause of how come universe was created, because that goes beyond science

it is the same as if the best biologist in the world, claims that he knows how to deliver a healthy baby from one month pregnancy - no matter how good he is, its obvious that he is speaking bullshit

 

[elrechazado]

and, im the fool . ?

first of all - Serbian scientists run about 30% of the world's shit.

Well, I'm convinced by your nationalist bullshit!

 

[Shanadeus]

and, im the fool . ?

first of all - Serbian scientists run about 30% of the world's shit. currently the best biologist in the world is Miodrag Stojkovic, with his research team from Valencia Spain, has made the biggest progress in cloning human cells.

LHC Cern has 13 Serbian scientists, which is the most, if you calculate population of the country/scientists in project.

10 of the Sukhoi technitians and experts are Serbians - and we all know that russian fighter jets own USA.

Nikola Tesla is the reason we heave this conversation, and pretty much the reason why the WORLD looks as it does today.

every big company that deals in Electrical engineering has a Serb somewhere high in the chain of command.


i DONT know more than Stephen Hawking, and you DONT know how to read, obviously -

i said - as much as he knows about Physics - he CAN NOT know the reason, and the cause of how come universe was created, because that goes beyond science

it is the same as if the best biologist in the world, claims that he knows how to deliver a healthy baby from one month pregnancy - no matter how good he is, its obvious that he is speaking bullshit

First of all, what other people of your nationality is doing has nothing to do with your own knowledge of scientific matters. That a country has produced scientists doesn't really say anything useful about the average persons scientific knowledge - the US has produced more noble winners than any other country in the world while it looks like it has a large uneducated population.

As for the whole universe debacle that Hawking has initiated, I won't go on and say much about it as I haven't read his reasoning on the matter but to say that one cannot know how the universe was created because it goes beyond what science knows today is a pretty weak argument.

 

[Igoritza]

yeah, about education - please come to Serbia, and ask the set of the following questions, to the people on the street:

1. Who was the most famous ruler of Egypt ?

2. where on a world map is Tunis

3. who is the president of France

4. what is the chemical formula of Salt, and Ozone

5. who invented the steam engine

6. how do you calculate the area of the circle

if you dont get 8 out of 10 people with all the correct answers, i will literally kill myself.

and, there you go, USA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

I haven't read his reasoning on the matter but to say that one cannot know how the universe was created because it goes beyond what science knows today is a pretty weak argument.

it is not a weak argument. When will you realize that this Hawking's statement is based on his personal philosophical view, rahter than it is based on science ?

Science DOES NOT know how big bang occurred, or if it even did. you cant say anything about the creation, with the current level of human scientific development, nor there is a way, except in a theory, to say anything about there being (no) God.

 

[Mario]

and, there you go, USA:

Why do you keep comparing the Serbian education system to that of the USA? What does that have to do with anything?

 

[Shanadeus]

it is not a weak argument. When will you realize that this Hawking's statement is based on his personal philosophical view, rahter than it is based on science ?

Science DOES NOT know how big bang occurred, or if it even did. you cant say anything about the creation, with the current level of human scientific development, nor there is a way, except in a theory, to say anything about there being (no) God.

I have no idea if it is based on philosophy or science as I haven't read what he's said in detail, but I know that it's silly to presume that science will have no way of finding out cosmological truths like that simply because we have no idea today. That's what I was complaining about, you saying that it is beyond the scope of science when the same has been said countless of times throughout history.

There has always been a point where people have believed that some particular issue was beyond science, yet it has been explained by science some time afterwards.

And of course it can't say anything about there being no God, but since the whole idea of an omnipotent being can't be falsified or proven then it's not really relevant. If you can't prove the existence of a God then belief in one is at the same level as belief in any other being which existence cannot be tested.

 

[JGS]

I'm not sure what the debate is, but I want to visit Serbia now. I even Wiki'd it.

 

[Seep]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

That's fake right? Please tell me it's fake.

 

[Dude Abides]

yeah, about education - please come to Serbia, and ask the set of the following questions, to the people on the street:

Why would anyone want to go to a third-world shithole full of genocidal maniacs?

 

[Zapages]

Seriously WTF! What good does it do this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-of-Bible-and-Koran-asking-Which-is-best.html

 

[Igoritza]

That's fake right? Please tell me it's fake.

noup. 100% legit.

 

[Davidion]

noup. 100% legit.

While that's entertaining, tell me, what does a random video about stupid people in the USA have to do with discrediting a British physicist?

 

[Dever]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

You can do that in any country. Just ask enough people and cut out all the ones who answer correctly. Though admittedly the US doesn't have the best education from what I know.

As far as this Hawking stuff goes, I don't have a clue. I have zero understanding of M-theory or gravity as it relates to quantum mechanics etc. So I can't comment whether Hawking makes any sense with his statements, whether the existence of gravity rules out the need for a god... I don't know. I can't comment on or subscribe to a statement I fundamentally do not understand. So yeah. But it's not like the God hypothesis was in any good shape before this latest controversy.

 

[Igoritza]

You can do that in any country. Just ask enough people and cut out all the ones who answer correctly. Though admittedly the US doesn't have the best education from what I know.

every student that left Serbia in a US learning program, from my high school - got the best grades, scholarships, and whatnot, and was named as one of the best students of the school he went to.

it is not my rambling, it is the fact -

we learn calculus in our 15teens, US students do that much later.

we learn the whole world's history, and US people learn only theirs (90%)

we finish DNA sequences, in our high schools, US students must specialize for it.

we read almost every notable book from every movement (realism, romanticism, symbolism, expressionism etc.) in our literature class, US students do not even hear about the name like "Fyodor Dostoyevsky".

we learn about Quantum mechanics in High school - something probably nowhere else in the world is a practice.

and so on.

 

[Davidion]

every student that left Serbia in a US learning program, from my high school - got the best grades, scholarships, and whatnot, and was named as one of the best students of the school he went to.

it is not my rambling, it is the fact -

we learn calculus in our 15teens, US students do that much later.

we learn the whole world's history, and US people learn only theirs (90%)

we finish DNA sequences, in our high schools, US students must specialize for it.

we read almost every notable book from every movement (realism, romanticism, symbolism, expressionism etc.) in our literature class, US students do not even hear about the name like "Fyodor Dostoyevsky".

we learn about Quantum mechanics in High school - something probably nowhere else in the world is a practice.

and so on.

While it's true that the US education system is lacking in certain respects, it's also not true across the board.

You've been throwing around a lot of book knowledge, which is important. But the philosophies you use to prop up your points are also full of holes and often based on incomplete information and generalization.

 

[Feep]

every student that left Serbia in a US learning program, from my high school - got the best grades, scholarships, and whatnot, and was named as one of the best students of the school he went to.

it is not my rambling, it is the fact -

we learn calculus in our 15teens, US students do that much later.

we learn the whole world's history, and US people learn only theirs (90%)

we finish DNA sequences, in our high schools, US students must specialize for it.

we read almost every notable book from every movement (realism, romanticism, symbolism, expressionism etc.) in our literature class, US students do not even hear about the name like "Fyodor Dostoyevsky".

we learn about Quantum mechanics in High school - something probably nowhere else in the world is a practice.

and so on.

Apparently your argument has turned into a "my country is better than yours" jingoist rant.

No one gives a shit. You are not the numerical average of your countries' educational system, nor are we attempting to compare ANY American citizen or scientist's views to your own. Wasn't this about Hawking?

That said, American school children take world history classes, study calculus, read books from most major literary movements, and get a fair glimpse into quantum states in standard chemistry and physics classes. I'm glad you're proud of your country, but I'm fairly sure we've produced a whole lot more in the field of science. Get over yourself.

If you want to argue against Hawking, how about you do it directly, instead of trying to insult an entire country that isn't even related to what you're talking about?

 

[jdogmoney]

Igoritza =

 

[Chaplain]

Simple Truths Conference—
“God’s Word vs. The Emerging Church Movement”
For two-thousand years the Church has been the target of every aberrant practice and teaching. From outside the body of Christ our adversary sought to undermine the truth of God. Today we face the greater threat of ‘professing believers’ who are actively seeking to nullify the authority of God’s truth, and depart from the leading of the Holy Spirit.

We invite all to join us on Saturday, September 18th, from 9:00 am pst to 3:00 pm pst, as noted speakers Ray Yungen and Warren Smith will address this most critical and conspicuous attack against the family of God in the last days

Watch the live webcast right now:

http://azulweb.streamguys.com/calvary.mov

 

[Karram]

Seriously WTF! What good does it do this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-of-Bible-and-Koran-asking-Which-is-best.html

This is brilliant. :lol

 

[jdogmoney]

Watch the live webcast right now:

http://azulweb.streamguys.com/calvary.mov

Was this recorded anywhere?

 

[Joel Was Right]

I've met some Catholics who do not believe Adam & Eve ever existed, and instead they were metaphorical. I haven't come across any scripture evidence to suggest this. Anyone help explaining it to me? Thanks

 

[SmokyDave]

Seriously WTF! What good does it do this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-of-Bible-and-Koran-asking-Which-is-best.html

I think this kind of thing is happening because people don't take well to threats of intimidation. When threats came forward over the prior Qur' an burning, it seems to have inspired the 'fuck you, that's utterly irrational' spirit in some people.

I smoked a couple of pages from the bible when I was in secondary school. It wasn't a big, political thing, we just didn't have any Rizla and we were given bibles that we didn't need.

 

[jdogmoney]

I've met some Catholics who do not believe Adam & Eve ever existed, and instead they were metaphorical. I haven't come across any scripture evidence to suggest this. Anyone help explaining it to me? Thanks

Ummm...the slightly differing accounts of creation leading people to believe that they aren't literal people?

 

[Laughing Banana]

I think this kind of thing is happening because people don't take well to threats of intimidation. When threats came forward over the prior Qur' an burning, it seems to have inspired the 'fuck you, that's utterly irrational' spirit in some people.

Ironically, 'fuck you, that's utterly irrational' can also be said to those burning holy books just for spiting people.

 

[gerg]

I've met some Catholics who do not believe Adam & Eve ever existed, and instead they were metaphorical. I haven't come across any scripture evidence to suggest this. Anyone help explaining it to me? Thanks

What jdogmoney said.

There's also the fact that believing that the scripture is literal on the basis of the scripture saying so itself is a circular argument. Finally, one might just believe both in God and in scientifically-proven empirical facts.

 

[JGS]

I've met some Catholics who do not believe Adam & Eve ever existed, and instead they were metaphorical. I haven't come across any scripture evidence to suggest this. Anyone help explaining it to me? Thanks

There isn't. I mentioned this earlier, New Testament writers never viewed them as metaphors and tied Jesus' lineage directly to them and explained repeatedly that his sacrifice was needed to cover over Adam's sin. I'll just quote:

Originally Posted by soul creator:
I always wonder if the whole Adam and Eve story is now just a metaphor/allegory/fable/etc., then what exactly is Jesus' sacrifice supposed to save us from? If the original sin thing doesn't *really* happen, doesn't that sort of lessen its impact? "Jesus gave his life...for one branch of descendents of an ape-like creature" doesn't seem to have quite the same ring to it.

And of course, this ignores the whole "Adam and Eve is obviously just an exaggerated story...but that Jesus resurrection thing totally happened for realz" discussion...

The Bible really is an all or nothing book based on Jesus' teachings about it.That doesn't mean all of it is literal, but all of it is accepted.

Adam & Eve are considered literal by Jesus & the Gospels. They are directly connected to Jesus' lineage (As everyone would be) and there appears to never have been a controversy about their existence throughout the entiriety of the Bible and centuries beyond that.

So from the Bible's viewpoint at least, there is a very specific chain of events connecting Jesus with Adam and the need for a perpetual sacrifice to deliver us from perpetual sin.

There's no real middle ground because if Adam & Eve were allegories, then the purpose of the sacrifice is a lie, so Jesus lied, thus making the sacrifice too corrupt to carry out that purpose.[/

 

[jdogmoney]

The Bible really is an all or nothing book based on Jesus' teachings about it.That doesn't mean all of it is literal, but all of it is accepted.

I noticed this earlier but didn't say anything...

...what?

 

[KingGondo]

I noticed this earlier but didn't say anything...

...what?

This thread is really much better if you put JGS on ignore, or simply accept that his posts are full of the most tortured logical gymnastics you'll find on GAF.

 

[Dever]

Here's a cool documentary on science and religion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQjYm3niI2E&feature=PlayList&p=EBD571E4415B3CFB&index=0&playnext=1

 

[Joel Was Right]

Ummm...the slightly differing accounts of creation leading people to believe that they aren't literal people?

Differing accounts?

What jdogmoney said.

There's also the fact that believing that the scripture is literal on the basis of the scripture saying so itself is a circular argument. Finally, one might just believe both in God and in scientifically-proven empirical facts.

Not everything is literal in scripture, however that fact doesn't legitimise every claim that X is metaphorical

 

[gerg]

Differing accounts?

Yes. There are a number of distinct differences between Genesis 1 and 2 which actively contradict each other.

Not everything is literal in scripture, however that fact doesn't legitimise every claim that X is metaphorical

I'm not arguing towards the proposition that the entirity of the Bible mkaes metaphorical statements; I'm arguing against the propsotion that the entirity of the Bible makes literal claims.