-->
@ethang5
I was there once, I am slightly embarrassed to say.
A Fallen, Fine Tuned Universe
Posts
Total:
83
-->
@ethang5
Something that cannot be perceived might or might not exist.....Other than that it can only be imagined.
-->
@Tradesecret
As ever, there are two obvious uniformities.
-->
@FLRW
It goes +MUCH+ deeper than that.
-->
@zedvictor4
You make a poor materialist then. They say that something that cannot be perceived, cannot exist.
-->
@janesix
I remember. Focus on your growth, not you past.
-->
@janesix
But you can have something that doesn't need to be designed without a designer.
All that is required is natural conformity rather than chaos.
Evolution has taken billions of years to create what a designer should be able to do in a day, or two.
And evolution is still ongoing and there is still no perceivable designer.
-->
@ethang5
Just being realistic....The limits of human perception are such that one cannot truly say otherwise.
That is not to say, that what cannot be perceived is not of the same stuff as you and I.
-->
@zedvictor4
Darwinian evolution is a crock of Shite. It does not take millions of years. It has nothing to do with mutations, random or not.
What is "natural conformity"?
-->
@FLRW
Hurricanes are normally a non-golden spiral. Until the coriolis effect is in balance.
-->
@Stephen
1. God's law as revealed in the Bible.Example of breaking gods law2. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.Example of a transgression of the law of god.
You asked two questions and I answered both. Sin has no meaning without God. Sin is not something humans do to each other. That is an offence. Sin is the breach of God's law. I also said as is revealed in the Bible. One example is murder. You shall not murder. If a human murders another human that is sinning.
Your second COMMAND is answered in the same way because sin is breaking God's law by a human or angel.
Just to throw you into convulsions and to send you down another rabbit hole. God cannot break his own law. God cannot sin. Sin is defined as an offence by human or angel against the law of God.
-->
@zedvictor4
As ever, there are two obvious uniformities.
Please be a good boy and explain to all of us what these two obvious uniformities are. Some of us are unable to read everyone else's motives and minds.
-->
@ethang5
Yes, an obsessive compulsion.
Do you think I should send him a Christmas Card?
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
There are two ideas I want to discuss in this forum, the idea of a fallen world, and a finely tuned Universe.The idea of a fallen world is a defense against the Problem of Evil, saying that evil entered the world when people sinned. thus, the Problem of Evil does not bring into question God's goodness and power, because it's man's fault. This "fallen world" idea is strictly contradicted by the Teleological ArgumentThe Teleological Argument (or the fine tuning argument) says that the world is so perfect, that a God must have created it.So what is the problem with these two mindsets?The fallen world describes an imperfect world around us, and the fine tuned world (from the Teleological Argument) describes a prefect world around us. These two ideas contradict each other, so the Christian must either drop the teleological argument (one of the best arguments for God), or drop the idea of a fallen world (the best response to the Problem of Evil)if you think the world is so fallen and bad because of sin, stop trying to find design in everything!
They do not contradict. You're misrepresenting the teleological argument. The teleological argument suggests that the complex phenomena of the Universe necessarily indicate an intelligent design, and thereby a "designer" (i.e. God.) A christian can sustain both the "fallen world" position and the teleological position without contradicting either because "perfect" is irrelevant--at least as far as Christian morality is concerned. Of course, there are logical issues with the teleological argument (i.e. bald assertion) given that conclusions (e.g. "there is a designer") are rendered without first substantiating the premise ("there is a design.")
Your contention is a straw-man.
-->
@zedvictor4
Evolution has taken billions of years to create what a designer should be able to do in a day, or two.
How do you know this? Did you read a "book"?
And evolution is still ongoing and there is still no perceivable designer.
If you subscribe to Evolutionary theory, I suppose you can render that conclusion. But "randomness" hasn't been substantiated, much less "no" designer.
-->
@zedvictor4
Just being realistic...
Realistic? No, you're being materialistic.
The limits of human perception are such that one cannot truly say otherwise.
I've "truly" said otherwise. What am I doing if not perceiving?
That is not to say, that what cannot be perceived is not of the same stuff as you and I.
You don't know this. And you'll never be able to rationalize it.
-->
@zedvictor4
That is not to say, that what cannot be perceived is not of the same stuff as you and I.
Anyone can write stupidity.
If it is the same stuff as you and I, then it should be perceived. And remember I told you, no one is going to simply accept your pronouncements. You cannot royally declare evolution into existence.
Evolution has taken billions of years to create what a designer should be able to do in a day, or two.
Well close down the shop. It's been decided. Evolution is a fact! Zed says.
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
The Teleological Argument
You should not be watching those teleological evangelists because they are fake and all they do is bull manure. That hin guy all he does is get his matys to fall over on the stage. But your onto the wrong idea here because God is not perfect and he never wanted the world to be perfect. Because you cant have love without hate and you cant have the yan without the ying so we aint never going to have the boring perfect world.
But what you will seeing though is that the world is getting better all the time which means that mens are fullfilling Gods wish.
-->
@Tradesecret
He would cherish it, but no addresses please.
Lol!
-->
@Athias
Nothing has been substantiated...That is the ongoing issue....And if you want to be picky...Nothing has not been substantiated either....That is the ongoing conundrum.
Floaty about bloke with a drawing board or BOOM or whatever....You Choose.
-->
@ethang5
And "you cannot royally declare" your imaginary god.
-->
@janesix
I never mentioned Darwin.
And "crock of shite" is poor evidence.
-->
@Tradesecret
If you cannot work it out.....That's your problem.
And patronization is often the level theists have to sink to.
-->
@Tradesecret
I also said as is revealed in the Bible. One example is murder. You shall not murder. If a human murders another human that is sinning.
So murder is a sin and a breach of gods law. OK . It also happens to be a criminal offence in mans law, too.
Then you say :
Sin is not something humans do to each other. That is an offence.
And an offence of murder committed by man is also a crime against god and man , is it not?
-->
@zedvictor4
I didn't.
Was it my "declaration" that brought you here atheist?
And "crock of shite" is poor evidence.
It's as good as your declared opinion. Hmm hypocrite?
-->
@ethang5
And "crock of shite", is as good as your declared opinion, in my opinion.
Though "crock of shite" is janesix's level of wisdom....Not mine.
And I'm "here" for the entertainment.
-->
@zedvictor4
None of that changes that her comment is as good as your declared opinion.
But notice she did not have a problem with your opinion, because she doesn't think her opinion should be truth for everyone else, like some do.
-->
@ethang5
Darwin is a crock of shite......Yep an opinion, if you like.
But I've never expressed the opinion that the Bible is a crock of shite.
I've always accepted the bible for what it is in my opinion.
And I've always accepted that others have an alternative opinion.
Disagreeing with alternative opinions is what it is.
And "crock of shite is what it is" and in my opinion clearly says a lot about janesix.
-->
@zedvictor4
Darwin is a crock of shite......Yep an opinion, if you like.
You know opinions can be true, right?
But I've never expressed the opinion that the Bible is a crock of shite.
You've never had to. You called it fakery.
I've always accepted the bible for what it is in my opinion.
I'm sure Christians the world over are relieved, your opinion being so important.
And I've always accepted that others have an alternative opinion.
Yet your behavior was different from that of Jane, who actually accepts that others have alternative opinions. Strange huh?
Disagreeing with alternative opinions is what it is.
Everything is what it is. Did you come up with that yourself?
And "crock of shite is what it is" and in my opinion clearly says a lot about janesix.
It doesn't say anything about her that your comment doesn't say about you. It is her behavior that makes her different from you. There is no hypocrisy between her comment and her behavior. You can't boast that.
-->
@ethang5
"It is her behaviour that makes her different from you"...Genetics as well?....But both truisms Homer.