20 Jun 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadOK heres a challenge. Can you find one other theist with a decoder ring. Pick a passage from the Bible at random and without prior discussion both of you give your interpretation of that passage. If they are identical then we will consider further tests. If they are different then one of you has a faulty ring.
How does that work? Do you own the only "True" decoder ring?
Originally posted by josephw
Me and alot of others.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhat if the passage has multiple meanings? What if the differences of opinion are regarding placing of emphasis within the meaning rather than actual differences of meaning? What if the Holy Spirit is revealing one thing to one person and another to someone else in the hope they will learn from each other?
OK heres a challenge. Can you find one other theist with a decoder ring. Pick a passage from the Bible at random and without prior discussion both of you give your interpretation of that passage. If they are identical then we will consider further tests. If they are different then one of you has a faulty ring.
For example , you could easily get two theoretical physicists who basically agree on some issue but one of them might have a different angle on something or have a preference for one theory. Similarly , a methodist and a baptist will agree on the basic tenets of faith but have ideas about other things and the style in which they practice their faith.
I think you are setting up some kind of strawman and expecting some exact repeatable answer. I don't remember jesus saying it was a science or a maths problem. I wonder also if you are tempted to focus on minor differences rather than fundamental similarities.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by scottishinnzI seem to remember you actually used some constant Newtonian version of time to back up your position and there were some interesting changes of wording regarding time and God which I pointed out to you at the time. I don't remember you addressing this.
I have. Many times.
My experience is that many Atheists intellectually subscribe to theoretical physics and concepts of relative time , but when it comes to God arguments unconsciously revert to the old Newtonian version without REALLY thinking about it.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterreally? so it is wrong to use newtonian time when talking about the god that exists outside time? do you see your problem yet?
I seem to remember you actually used some constant Newtonian version of time to back up your position and there were some interesting changes of wording regarding time and God which I pointed out to you at the time. I don't remember you addressing this.
My experience is that many Atheists intellectually subscribe to theoretical physics and concept ...[text shortened]... d arguments unconsciously revert to the old Newtonian version without REALLY thinking about it.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterAll I expect are interpretations that the two of them can both agree on.
What if the passage has multiple meanings? What if the differences of opinion are regarding placing of emphasis within the meaning rather than actual differences of meaning? What if the Holy Spirit is revealing one thing to one person and another to someone else in the hope they will learn from each other?
For example , you could easily get two t ...[text shortened]... er also if you are tempted to focus on minor differences rather than fundamental similarities.
You are now saying that a given Bible passage can have multiple meanings. So when theist 1 says with confidence "It means A" and theist 2 says with confidence "it means B" then they could both be right? Yet when I say "It means C" both of them are guaranteed to shout "YOU ARE WRONG, you are not a true Christian and don't have a Genuine Secret Decoder Ring and cant possibly know the true meaning of this passage!"
So, is it possible that ThinkOfOne and knightmeister are in fact both correct? Then why do you keep arguing with him?
And now for the real problem:
josephw said "If there is a God, and the Bible is His word, then I'm your go to man."
That implies that not only does he have at least one correct interpretation but that he is capable of communicating that interpretation to me in an understandable form. So if I listen to his interpretation and an interpretation from another Secret Decoder Ring holder and in my opinion they do not hold compatible meanings then there is something wrong!
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo, is it possible that ThinkOfOne and knightmeister are in fact both correct? Then why do you keep arguing with him?--------------whitey--------
All I expect are interpretations that the two of them can both agree on.
You are now saying that a given Bible passage can have multiple meanings. So when theist 1 says with confidence "It means A" and theist 2 says with confidence "it means B" then they could both be right? Yet when I say "It means C" both of them are guaranteed to shout "YOU ARE WRON ...[text shortened]... nd in my opinion they do not hold compatible meanings then there is something wrong!
There is a difference between disagreements in fundamental theology (eg salvation) and offering a different emphasis on something.
ToO seems to deny the Holy Spirit , the purpose of Christ's death , the nature of salvation via grace etc. These are all fundamentals on which we disagree. There would be no disagreement between me and a Catholic on these issues even though I might take them to task on other things.
Surely you are able to discriminate between fundamental basics of Theology and stylistic differences of emphasis.
20 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterRelative time does not equal the complete nonsense that you post.
I seem to remember you actually used some constant Newtonian version of time to back up your position and there were some interesting changes of wording regarding time and God which I pointed out to you at the time. I don't remember you addressing this.
My experience is that many Atheists intellectually subscribe to theoretical physics and concept ...[text shortened]... d arguments unconsciously revert to the old Newtonian version without REALLY thinking about it.
Your "idea" is somehow that some entity, whoch you posit to the (conveniently, and quite without evidence) Judeo-Christian God, exists outwith time, and that knowledge of someones future does not preclude them from doing something other than the future they will be known to take.
If you know, without error, their futuure, then they logically must do what you know they will, even if they don't know it themselves.
For example, if I flip a coin, your God would know whether it will fall heads or tails before I flip it. I don't know this, however, for god's knowledge to be correct there is only one way it can fall.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by ZahlanziGod exists independently of the universe and time is an expression of a Universe in which things happen. I don't actually believe time exists in a substantial way. Time seems to be given some mystical status by some as if it is a force , or ether or something but no-one seems to know what it is made of.
really? so it is wrong to use newtonian time when talking about the god that exists outside time? do you see your problem yet?
Basically I am a reductionist and phenomenologist on time. Can you tell me what time actually is?
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterYes. It is a dimension of the universe. Same as length, or height.
God exists independently of the universe and time is an expression of a Universe in which things happen. I don't actually believe time exists in a substantial way. Time seems to be given some mystical status by some as if it is a force , or ether or something but no-one seems to know what it is made of.
Basically I am a reductionist and phenomenologist on time. Can you tell me what time actually is?
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by scottishinnzCan you tell me what time is? Can you even begin to postulate what it is made from? Do you even know it actually exists? Is it some all prevading ether that runs through everything? Until you start to think about these questions then how can you really talk about time with any certainty?
Relative time does not equal the complete nonsense that you post.
All I have done is question this certainty and it's just tooooo easy to dismiss it as nonesense.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by scottishinnzIf you know, without error, their futuure, then they logically must do what you know they will, even if they don't know it themselves. ----scotty------------
Relative time does not equal the complete nonsense that you post.
Your "idea" is somehow that some entity, whoch you posit to the (conveniently, and quite without evidence) Judeo-Christian God, exists outwith time, and that knowledge of someones future does not preclude them from doing something other than the future they will be known to take.
If ...[text shortened]... this, [b]however, for god's knowledge to be correct there is only one way it can fall.[/b]
And you know "without error" Hitler's future but how does that prove that at the moment he kills himself he could never ever have chosen not to?
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterAn omniscient God does, or the word omniscient is pointless.
If you know, without error, their futuure, then they logically must do what you know they will, even if they don't know it themselves. ----scotty------------
And you know "without error" Hitler's future but how does that prove that at the moment he kills himself he could never ever have chosen not to?
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterTime is a dimension, not matter energy.
Can you tell me what time is? Can you even begin to postulate what it is made from? Do you even know it actually exists? Is it some all prevading ether that runs through everything? Until you start to think about these questions then how can you really talk about time with any certainty?
All I have done is question this certainty and it's just tooooo easy to dismiss it as nonesense.
ALL things which exist exist in Space-Time and have Energy-mass.
That's it. That's all. Anything which doesn't conform to that doesn't exist.
20 Jun 08
Originally posted by scottishinnzYes. I wonder how many people actually do know the truth. A billion Muslims, a billion catholics, and billions of others throughout time believing what they believe.
But, more people don't agree with you than do. When it comes to religious, or even a-religious, ideas, we're ALL minorities.