RE: If there was a loving God, would you accept him?
May 3, 2014 at 11:12 am
(This post was last modified: May 3, 2014 at 11:16 am by Coffee Jesus.)
(May 2, 2014 at 10:25 pm)ns1452 Wrote: If your paradigm is that all experience is simply chemical reactions than in your system these concepts don't exist. People are simply responding to stimuli. That is not a concept of beauty.
Experience is the basis for our paradigm. Empiricism is knowledge through use of the five senses, i.e. sensory experience.
(May 2, 2014 at 9:39 pm)ns1452 Wrote: 2) What basis do we have to put empirical investigation before any other alternative?
Many of you have challenged me on what basis could an alternative be made. Let me ask first, on what basis do we make empiricism the first paradigm for understanding the world? It is an assumption that empiricism should be the first criteria for there is no basis for There is no rational reason to do so above any other reason. You could argue that we can touch and feel it, but how often have we misinterpreted what we could touch and feel. The fact is we all work from a philosophy of history (atheist or theist) in which we interpret the world in light of. Therefore, if we began with empiricism it is not surprising we do not come to know God. God is beyond the physical realm that we are investigating. Many of you have challenged me where is the evidence? I propose that the reason you can't find the evidence is because you have elevated empiricism to a level that is in appropriate. Your method ignores anything that is not physically observable even though there are realities that are not physically discernible.
Conclusion:
My only hope from my postings is that I would bring awareness to the fact that there is a world that exists beyond empiricism. To rely on empiricism alone is to only evaluate half of reality. We all must also evaluate where our paradigm (empericism) breaks down to truly have an understanding of reality.
What other basis is there that doesn't first assume empiricism? Oh yeah... The Bible...
(May 2, 2014 at 9:39 pm)ns1452 Wrote: That option is interpreting the world not first on the basis of empirical observation, but on the the transcendent nature of God as defined by Scripture (Bible).
You can only see The Bible through use of vision. That's empiricism. You can only verify your reading comprehension by comparing your understandings to others' understandings, others whom you know to exist through empiricism. I'm sorry, but the word of God doesn't exist without empiricism. If empirical reality is a trick made by Satan, then so is the word of God.
