SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Faith Statements

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 )
PosterThread
Gloryandgrace
Member



Joined: 2017/7/14
Posts: 1063
Snoqualmie, WA

 Re: Religious faith is not approved


We have a scientific community...as I shall call them and if I may borrow a piece of text from Hebrews...

They claim, western science is above all the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen.

Ah yes, they have faith. Though modern science is saturated with faith in a wide variety of disciplines, these folks cannot see the forest for the trees. They're resolute in ignoring an elephant in the room or even a herd of them if need be.

Physicist Clifford Johnson observed...failure is a possibility in any worth while endeavor. But his stance on the necessity of his faith being 'unfailing' is over against those who have religious truth-searching. He cannot afford to lose.

To put it as clearly as I can, a 19th century British mathematician W.K. Clifford said "It is wrong always, everywhere and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence". Powerful statement, but the dear math-man couldn't see his own statement was merely a statement of faith that had no scientific evidence to validate it's claim. It's this very sentiment that becomes a premise for the popular argument regarding the non-existence of God. It starts off with an assertion with built in defeaters, that would fail the first test given in logic 101.

Now the word battles begin and the question that should be asked "who is making the rules that approve faith in science and disapprove faith in God"? Well, as we will find out, they are happy to make the rules.
Remember, if you are privy at all to scientific disciplines 'evidence' is really slippery, its elastic, it bends and molds into a variety of shapes. Evidence for the presence of cancer and evidence for the presence of a multiverse (as if there is such a thing) needs to be reinterpreted a little don't you think? One mans evidence is another man's sci-fi channel.
Now, dont forget, they know this, but want our 'evidence' to conform the strictest forms of evidence for metallurgy or chemistry. So, I hope you can see the obvious duplicity, the term double-standard never seems to cross their minds.
But, we as Christians are intimidated, we cower at the Dr. So-and-so when he says "but we dont have evidence for God".
Pastors go into damage control and young Christians just hope they dont meet someone who will challenge them with such a question.
Have no fear, they have nothing, zero, zilch. They are offering their faith over against ours that is all.

But to make sure the smoke is thick, the reality of an open and empty cravasse plunging into the unknown depths must be hidden from the public. Why? Because if we know they don't know, they know we cannot trust in them; to get the dollars, the accolades, the grants, the meetings and the prestige you cannot for a second concede the emperor is wearing no clothes.

But what Clifford lacked as a logician others ran quickly to shore up with other statements. Far more advanced theories begin to come into play and these alarm our culture and we like them join in the run...away from something and toward something else.


_________________
Marvin

 2019/1/11 0:21Profile
Gloryandgrace
Member



Joined: 2017/7/14
Posts: 1063
Snoqualmie, WA

 Re: That nasty ole big bang


Nasty is the word. Since Einstein's theory was working so well, others Aleksandr Friedmann and Georges Lamaitre discovered the answer to Einsteins field equations...and cosmology has never been the same. The expanding universe as i said in an earlier post can now be looked upon as a cone. It's now traceable backwards towards that 'singularity'.

But the question to ask, "What is a this 'singularity' that brought the known universe into existence?
Well the FL cosmology disrupted Einstein in that he wanted his equations to point to a single world model.
The problem was later exacerbated by the Hawking Penrose singularity...where all physics begin to collapse into infinity. There is no description that science can give for something like that. So, what is the singularity?

Is if physical or is it not?

We just dont know. So if there is an initial singularity and we really cannot describe it and cannot understand it...it seems to be irrelevant or the universe DID NOT begin as they said.

But, the reality of what was found concludes clearly the universe had a beginning. But what is that beginning?
Some will jump into the deep end of the pool.
Here too is where theologians and scientists also meet at the stop light, the faith of one takes them forward, the other must turn and so he does.


_________________
Marvin

 2019/1/11 0:47Profile
Gloryandgrace
Member



Joined: 2017/7/14
Posts: 1063
Snoqualmie, WA

 Re: heads up

Some of you might not know...

Physics math that has been 'proven' IS the evidence offered for the theories of Quantum Mechanics or String Theory or Landscape Theory.

It's not as though atomic particles that are here and gone or photons that wave at us or just poke out and disappear have been test-tubed weighed and packaged. The mathematics behind these theories VALIDATE the theory.

It is this deep end of the pool that the best of the best mathematicians swim with complex equations which baffle the other 99.99999999 percent of the world.

It's in this pool of theory that someone dives deep and finds quantum theory.
Now, I think all this stuff is really cool, I enjoy it. But where it takes a turn and ends in an out-house is when these theories spawn philosophical postulates.

Remember Naturalism is the spirit in which all of this scientific/mathematics/physics is approached and warranted. Because of that the birth of Methodological naturalism proceeds to inform the philosophers how and what to make of Neutrinos, Quarks etc.

Now, philosophy and science are old wrestling adversaries, they are not in actuality friends. However, they both exploit each others "advantageous claims" to further their own agendas.
If Naturalism as a philosophy is advantageous to modern scientific thought, the scientist goes one step further and designs Methodological Naturalism.
If the philosopher can use mathematical 'multi-dimension' an extrapolation into multiverses is perfectly acceptable. In this way they win together.

It's at this stage the regular Joe reads "in a vast amount of universes it is possible that God is existent". But a quick caveat pops up... in THIS universe the court is out and we should not make claims when the findings are inconclusive.

The discerning reader must take note here: who's court are we talking about? The court that has as a working methodology a philosophy that negates the existence of God as a working premise? Does Jury-rigging come to mind?


_________________
Marvin

 2019/1/11 13:40Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5312
NC, USA

 Re:

Do you think the “spiritual realm” is another dimension, or something else?

For example, if we had the most advanced starships etc that could go anywhere in *our* universe, could we find “heaven?” If not, where is it?


_________________
Todd

 2019/1/11 14:59Profile
Gloryandgrace
Member



Joined: 2017/7/14
Posts: 1063
Snoqualmie, WA

 Re:


Hi Todd: Since God is Spirit, his domain is everywhere at all times. The realm of the Spirit has no boundaries.

An analogy ( this could be considered very cheesy so if someone balks I don't blame them) If I were to consider God a 'blue smoke', this blue smoke would be everywhere in all places at all times surrounding us, we drive through it we look into the long expanse of the universe and the universe is filled with it. So I consider God's Spirit unbounded where if its physical manifestation were to be 'blue smoke' we would know it as permeating all things physical and spiritual at once.

DO NOT LOAD THE GUNS this is analogy...I don't want to hear claims I am a Panentheist. I know what they believe and this aint it.

Error joined to Omnipresence produces panentheism...but that's another thread.


_________________
Marvin

 2019/1/11 15:39Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5312
NC, USA

 Re:

I don’t disagree- at least I don’t think I do. But the fact that we can’t see the spiritual realm (recall Elijah’s servant who had to have his eyes opened to see the angelic army) suggests that that realm is alongside, but not part of, our physical realm. There is a veil of separation between these two realms. I don’t know if I would necessarily call it another dimension because I cannot imagine what another dimension would be like.

Maybe you saw the episode of the Twilight Zone called “Little Girl Lost” that explores the idea of two dimensions that exist in seemingly the same space.


_________________
Todd

 2019/1/11 18:52Profile
Gloryandgrace
Member



Joined: 2017/7/14
Posts: 1063
Snoqualmie, WA

 Re:


Hi Todd: I still enjoy those old twilight zones. I did see that episode and I didn't like the word dimension either, it just didn't seem to fit God's Spirit realm.


_________________
Marvin

 2019/1/11 21:40Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy