Henry B. Smith Jr #fundie

Henry B. Smith Jr #fundie biblearchaeology.org

At the very bottom, this is what it all really comes down to. So, in a manner of speaking, nothing could convince us that Christianity were untrue, because the world would not be possible without the triune God of Biblical revelation. All other worldviews destroy themselves on their own metaphysical and epistemological assumptions

56 comments

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"All other worldviews destroy themselves on their own metaphysical and epistemological assumptions"

So even Reality = the "Matrix", eh? So, something based on a mere 'book' has more credibility than a mere Sci-Fi film(s) that at least can be seen?

You - and your 'metaphysisical and epistemological assumptions' as put forward in said 'book', i.e. the Bible - are gonna be fucked when you try and prove the physical existence of a rainbow, which can be seen, then.

Atoms & molecules: Electron Microscopes. Air/Wind: smoke introduced into the airstream during wind tunnel tests [/hyper-smartarse]. Thus the previously unseen can be seen.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 (especially the KJV Cambridge Edition) is gonna further fuck you up: 'Prove all things'. As in the Scientific Method, based on Observation. Your 'God', for a start. A Christian can always convince [i]himself[/i].

No evidencee, no acceptee. Rainbows don't actually physically exist, but at least they can be seen. Easily explainable, nay replicatable too. So much for 'Mysteries', which science destroys with evidence. Proof. Good. I [i]like[/i] 'mysteries' explained, and the bullshit that is metaphysics, i.e. 'faith' annihilated. Problem, fundies? What [i]is[/i] so wrong with knowing [i]everything[/i]?!

As demonstrated by Jonathan Edwards, and your own 'Word of God' no less, your worldview destroys itself.

'Read properly, the Bible is the most potent force for Atheism ever conceived'

-Isaac Asimov

tracer, by definition everyone who is conservative here must be a "troll". Its your catchcry for "no-one sane could be conservative" "No serious thinker could disagree with US intellectual giants in the field of public discourse"

Liberal equates to intellectual arrogance such as there has never been the likes. Gay MUST be good. Evolution MUST have been proven. Scientists MUST be right, we saw it on the Discovery Channel and the Washington Post agree. Abortion CAN'T be murder. Religion MUST be mythical. All spiritualism MUST be snake oil salesmen. All supernatural MUST be chemical imbalances in the brain. Sentience/ Consciousness MUST be physical attributes of brain chemistry.

What don't I understand about you Tracer? The challenge is to complete your sentences before you do. I can argue the liberal case here without breaking into a sweat. I've rejected most of their arguments years ago.

old comment by Seems Legit

@Local troll (PG)

1. 'Gay MUST be good' There exists no proper evidence to support the argument "gay is inherently bad", just like there is no evidence to support "gay is inherently good", gay just is, just like straight just is.

2. 'Evolution MUST have been proven.' Evolution has been tested for over 200 years and so far nobody has been able to falsify it, it has on the other hand been verified in labs using fruit flies in a 20+ year study and the many generations of flies in said study.

3. 'Scientists MUST be right' No, Science isn't always right, they disprove theories and hypotheses previously held as true quite often. Science does however strive to be right by always testing the results and updating their findings as they make new discoveries.

4. 'Abortion CAN'T be murder' Wrong again, abortion can be murder if performed at a stage after which the fetus could be delivered and survive, current technology puts that at around 21-24 weeks with medical aid if the fetus is far enough into development.

5. 'Religion MUST be mythical' If the Norse faith is mythology, why aren't the current world religions? What do they have that the Norse faith did not, beyond immense monetary wealth and a large follower base? There is no evidence to support them outside of their own scripture. Why wouldn't a god simply show itself to its people and settle the matter? On that note, people are free to practice (or not) which ever religion they want as long as they don't harm themselves or others or try to impose their faith on those who do not share it.

cont.

old comment by Seems Legit

cont.

6. 'Spiritualism' has never been proven, those who practice it are free to do so as long as they don't harm others or themselves. This also extends to those who claim people do not require medicine for ailments if they follow what ever the spiritualist claims. Examples of snake oil spiritualists who harm others are widespread; the most recent example of which is the psychic who told Amanda Berrys mother that Amanda was dead, clearly she was not.

7. 'All supernatural MUST be chemical imbalances in the brain.' this is not an assertion made by liberals, what most people think of as supernatural events have natural explanations, for the most part not even remotely related to the brain.

8. 'Sentience/ Consciousness MUST be physical attributes of brain chemistry' Sentience/Consciousness is not entirely understood, but we can make hypotheses on the subject using current knowledge; if you add to or deprive the brain of certain chemicals or make physical changes to the brain, the person changes f.ex. physical or chemical lobotomy.

9. 'I've rejected most of their arguments years ago.' Why? I personally find no issue with equating my statements above with conservatism, the only major difference between liberalism and conservatism now is how quickly you accept change and how willing you (or like-minded individuals) are to go out and look for facts or test previously held conceptions to check their continued validity.

Dear Seems Legit social evolutionist.

Evolution has been tested for over 200 years and so far nobody has been able to falsify it, it has on the other hand been verified in labs using fruit flies in a 20+ year study and the many generations of flies in said study.

Sure, they have a short life, genetic drift occurs, epigenetics triggers cause various expressions....

And they're still fruit flies.

There's nothing to falsify/ Again Karl Popper. Evolution is a faith.
http://www.pnas.org/content/91/15/6808.full.pdf

You want to extrapolite genetic drift or point variations into entropy lowering macro morphic cross genera changes.

I'm going for a swim. Now that proves just how poorly adapted humans are. cf. so very many animals. Humans are weak, have poor eyesight, tolerate little weather variations,poor hearing, poor smell, swim slowly. I was an evolutionist...

old comment by Seems Legit

@PG
But evolution is falsifiable, it's just nobody has managed to do it, their attempts to do it have so far only strengthened the theory itself, and as such it is currently the most likely answer. Creation cannot be falsified, it goes entirely against Poppers philosophy of critical rationalism. The study you quoted does not in any way go against Poppers philosophy or the general theory of evolution.

As for the other part, to the extent humans are weak, we have still managed to climb to the top of every food chain on Earth by using creativity, advantage in brainpower and use of tools. Yes, humans have poor eyesight and sense of smell compared to a lot of animals, but humans have not needed exceptional eyesight or smell. Humans are land dwelling mammals and as such swim slow, like most land dwelling mammals do, dolphins swim quickly, like most ocean dwelling mammals do. As for weather variations, we learned to make clothes and spread around the entire globe, living on all continents except for the South Pole (until recently), the human ability to compensate for physical weaknesses is what puts us apart from most other animals.

On that note: have fun on your swim, enjoy and don't accidentally yourself.

Henry B. Smith Jr #fundie biblearchaeology.org

56 comments

Confused?