rjh4 when it comes to your worldview there is not much to say. Christians in general base their beliefs on the bible which in more ways than one has been shown to be incorrect in the most mundane matters such as the various verified claims made and proven by the various scientific disciplines. My point is that your worldview makes unsubstantiated claims based on nothing other than a series of ancient texts. Not only do you make these claims but you assert that these claims are absolutely true.

My worldview does not make such claims unless it has been observed, experimented, and repeated by others following the same methodology. When it comes to origins I am content to say that I honestly don't know, but my lack of knowledge would not allow me to accept a so called claim of divine inspiration as the final answer. I consider myself a well grounded individual and am open to other worldviews considering they have some sort of evidence to substantiate their claims, other than "I feel, or have faith that such and such a thing is true". Blessed assurance is not a valid way to judge truth claims.

2 Timothy 3:15-17
15.And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16.All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17.That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

These verses sum up your entire worldview faith in Christ leads you to believe that the bible is inspired by your god. Very simple and not very convincing as any sort of evidence to support any argument.

(January 20, 2010 at 1:43 pm)chatpilot Wrote: rjh4 when it comes to your worldview there is not much to say. Christians in general base their beliefs on the bible which in more ways than one has been shown to be incorrect in the most mundane matters such as the various verified claims made and proven by the various scientific disciplines. My point is that your worldview makes unsubstantiated claims based on nothing other than a series of ancient texts. Not only do you make these claims but you assert that these claims are absolutely true.

My worldview does not make such claims unless it has been observed, experimented, and repeated by others following the same methodology. When it comes to origins I am content to say that I honestly don't know, but my lack of knowledge would not allow me to accept a so called claim of divine inspiration as the final answer. I consider myself a well grounded individual and am open to other worldviews considering they have some sort of evidence to substantiate their claims, other than "I feel, or have faith that such and such a thing is true". Blessed assurance is not a valid way to judge truth claims.

2 Timothy 3:15-17
15.And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16.All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17.That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

These verses sum up your entire worldview faith in Christ leads you to believe that the bible is inspired by your god. Very simple and not very convincing as any sort of evidence to support any argument.

I honestly do not see why you keep telling me about my world view, CP. I already know what it is and why you do not subscribe to it. I asked about the following:

Quote:Lastly, in two previous posts I said the following:

"You seem to hold to an atheistic/materialistic/evolutionary world view. It does not seem to me that such an atheistic/materialistic/evolutionary world view can support anything other than relativistic truth since it seems that truth, morals, logic are accounted for in such a world view as being solely due to the genetics of a person and the electrical impulses in a person’s mind (possibly as a result of other causes, such as environmental ones). If this is the case, from your world view how can you say that any other person’s view or interpretation of evidence is any more accurate than yours? Wouldn’t it just mean that they have merely different electrical impulses in the brain that are no better or worse than yours? Furthermore, it would seem to follow from this that interpretations and conclusions made in the scientific method would be subject to this same relativism. This, in turn, seems to lead to the conclusion that an atheistic/materialistic/evolutionary world view cannot account for any truth claims in any objective sense, even given the scientific method."

Please answer the questions embedded in there and/or explain where I went wrong in characterizing your worldview.

Does this characterize your worldview or not? If not, where do you differ.

You say that your worldview does not make such claims unless it has been observed, experimented, and repeated by others following the same methodology. Please explain then who observed the formation of the universe? When was it repeated? How many have done it? Or does your world view just omit everything regarding origins? Surely your worldview has a position on how the universe came to be...otherwise it wouldn't be much of a worldview. Certainly not one to take seriously.

Okay, you are ignoring the fact that I stated that when it comes to origins I was content with a simple I don't know. Of course in astronomy the most prevalent theory of the origin of the universe is that of the "Big Bang" and according to science this happened approximately 13.5- 14 billion years ago. Obviously there was no one around to physically observe this but there are tell tale signs in our universe itself that point to the occurrence of this event. The two main reasons astronomers have come to believe this is according to wikipedia:

The uncertainty range has been obtained by the agreement of a number of scientific research projects. These projects included background radiation measurements and more ways to measure the expansion of the universe. Background radiation measurements give the cooling time of the universe since the Big Bang. Expansion of the universe measurements give accurate data to calculate the age of the universe.

There are several theoretical and scientific models used to determine the age of the universe and most of it can be studied and researched if you choose to do so. All of these models have been formulated through direct observance of the cosmos and the remnants of the above mentioned event. Now as far as where the energy came from (first cause) to cause the big bang whether it was a singularity or not we are still looking into those things. That is the beauty of science! Just because we don't know for certain does not mean that we stop looking and call it god.

God is the easy way out to mans curiosities and life's most pressing questions. We don't know so it must be god. What was the first cause to a Christian? God!! What evidence do you have of that? Because the bible say's so and there could be no other explanation. That answer does not work for me.

(January 20, 2010 at 4:27 pm)chatpilot Wrote: Okay, you are ignoring the fact that I stated that when it comes to origins I was content with a simple I don't know. Of course in astronomy the most prevalent theory of the origin of the universe is that of the "Big Bang" and according to science this happened approximately 13.5- 14 billion years ago. Obviously there was no one around to physically observe this but there are tell tale signs in our universe itself that point to the occurrence of this event. The two main reasons astronomers have come to believe this is according to wikipedia:

The uncertainty range has been obtained by the agreement of a number of scientific research projects. These projects included background radiation measurements and more ways to measure the expansion of the universe. Background radiation measurements give the cooling time of the universe since the Big Bang. Expansion of the universe measurements give accurate data to calculate the age of the universe.

There are several theoretical and scientific models used to determine the age of the universe and most of it can be studied and researched if you choose to do so. All of these models have been formulated through direct observance of the cosmos and the remnants of the above mentioned event. Now as far as where the energy came from (first cause) to cause the big bang whether it was a singularity or not we are still looking into those things. That is the beauty of science! Just because we don't know for certain does not mean that we stop looking and call it god.

God is the easy way out to mans curiosities and life's most pressing questions. We don't know so it must be god. What was the first cause to a Christian? God!! What evidence do you have of that? Because the bible say's so and there could be no other explanation. That answer does not work for me.

Sounds like you are saying: "I don't know how the universe came to be...but many scientists believe it was forms in such a way because of X, Y, and Z. Because I cannot/will not believe God did it, I am resolved to either agree with the prevailing view of scientists or just say 'I don't know'."

If that is accurate, it is not much of a worldview to take seriously.

Do you think that truth, morals, logic are solely due to the genetics of a person and the electrical impulses in a person’s mind (possibly as a result of other causes, such as environmental ones)?

rjh4 said "Do you think that truth, morals, logic are solely due to the genetics of a person and the electrical impulses in a person’s mind (possibly as a result of other causes, such as environmental ones)?"

Truth comes from what is known,morals are a result of your environment, culture, and society, logic comes with the development of the intellect. All of these are natural processes of the mind and there is no need for god in any of it.

"Sounds like you are saying: "I don't know how the universe came to be...but many scientists believe it was forms in such a way because of X, Y, and Z. Because I cannot/will not believe God did it, I am resolved to either agree with the prevailing view of scientists or just say 'I don't know'."
Not much of a worldview to take seriously."

That is exactly what I am saying! But basing my so called knowledge on a book claiming to be inspired by god is even more ridiculous. You are as ignorant as I am when it comes to the origins of the universe whether you admit it or not. Because you have no way to substantiate the claims of your so called holy book.

(January 20, 2010 at 5:06 pm)chatpilot Wrote: Truth comes from what is known,morals are a result of your environment, culture, and society, logic comes with the development of the intellect. All of these are natural processes of the mind and there is no need for god in any of it.

Would it then follow that you think there is no objective truth (only what is going on in a particular person's mind at the time, i.e., the electrical impulses)?

My answer is no, there is objective truth and as I stated before that truth comes from what is known.
Objectiveur beliefs, whatever they are, have no bearing on the facts of the world around us. That which is true is always true — even if we stop believing it and even if we stop existing at all.

I like this definition although it's not mine. The mind processes the world around us and in turn interprets it to us. For example if you touch a hot object such as a pan or pot you will get burned. That my friend is true no matter what you think or believe. Unless you own the Ov glove lol.

(January 20, 2010 at 5:29 pm)chatpilot Wrote: My answer is no, there is objective truth and as I stated before that truth comes from what is known.
Objectiveur beliefs, whatever they are, have no bearing on the facts of the world around us. That which is true is always true — even if we stop believing it and even if we stop existing at all.

I like this definition although it's not mine. The mind processes the world around us and in turn interprets it to us.

How do we discover this objective truth? In other words, how can one determine that which is true and that which is not true?

Try that hot pan experiment and then give me your answer. Nothing like a good 3rd degree burn to establish that truth.

(January 20, 2010 at 5:38 pm)chatpilot Wrote: Try that hot pan experiment and then give me your answer. Nothing like a good 3rd degree burn to establish that truth.

Are you saying that the only way we can know what objective truth is is through our senses?