Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 28, 2024, 12:03 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Credible/Honest Apologetics?
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
(July 27, 2022 at 4:37 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Scientific first principles are universal, things like the Conservation laws, empirical observation, testability, repeatability, predictability and falsifiability of theories, philosophical realism, methodological naturalism, etc.

Conservation laws aren't first principles.  Just saying Smile

I agree with the rest, but there is the philosophy of science is an ongoing thing.  Popper wasn't the end of it.
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
(July 27, 2022 at 4:55 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote:
(July 27, 2022 at 4:37 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Scientific first principles are universal, things like the Conservation laws, empirical observation, testability, repeatability, predictability and falsifiability of theories, philosophical realism, methodological naturalism, etc.

Conservation laws aren't first principles.  Just saying Smile

I agree with the rest, but there is the philosophy of science is an ongoing thing.  Popper wasn't the end of it.

I'm not a practicing scientist nor do I have a PhD, but, the professional chemists that I have read presume the basis of things like Conservation of Mass, entropy, etc.; in fact, such is the basis of stoichiometry, as far as I can tell. Granted, such principles are ultimately testable, but chemists simply presume such when they are designing and testing their reactions.
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
-because the laws of chemistry could have been some other way - but they aren't.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
Turning water into wine is, chemically speaking, physically impossible. For those who say such happened, please provide the stoichiometric calculations.
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
Didn't a famous female mathematician prove that where certain symmetries exist, and they do, conservation laws are inevitable.

Quote:Noether's theorem or Noether's first theorem states that every differentiable symmetry of the action of a physical system with conservative forces has a corresponding conservation law. The theorem was proven by mathematician Emmy Noether in 1915 and published in 1918. The action of a physical system is the integral over time of a Lagrangian function, from which the system's behavior can be determined by the principle of least action. This theorem only applies to continuous and smooth symmetries over physical space.

Noether's theorem is used in theoretical physics and the calculus of variations. A generalization of the formulations on constants of motion in Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics (developed in 1788 and 1833, respectively), it does not apply to systems that cannot be modeled with a Lagrangian alone (e.g., systems with a Rayleigh dissipation function). In particular, dissipative systems with continuous symmetries need not have a corresponding conservation law.

Wikipedia || Noether's theorem
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
(July 27, 2022 at 5:57 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Turning water into wine is, chemically speaking, physically impossible. For those who say such happened, please provide the stoichiometric calculations.

Ummmm....its called brewing.
<insert profound quote here>
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
(July 27, 2022 at 8:38 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:
(July 27, 2022 at 5:57 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Turning water into wine is, chemically speaking, physically impossible. For those who say such happened, please provide the stoichiometric calculations.

Ummmm....its called brewing.

Oh, and so, Jesus had a portable still with him that day??
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
(July 27, 2022 at 9:08 pm)Jehanne Wrote:
(July 27, 2022 at 8:38 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Ummmm....its called brewing.

Oh, and so, Jesus had a portable still with him that day??

First, the meager scriptural description and the broad meaning of "wine" leaves open a few possibilities. As a home brewer, I can say that all you need to make something to fit the OT definition of wine is water, yeast, and sugar source. So, no, not impossible...unlikely maybe
<insert profound quote here>
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
Last I checked Jesus turned water into wine via touch so........ Dodgy
"Change was inevitable"


Nemo sicut deus debet esse!

[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]



 “No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM


      
Reply
RE: Credible/Honest Apologetics?
(July 27, 2022 at 9:31 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:
(July 27, 2022 at 9:08 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Oh, and so, Jesus had a portable still with him that day??

First, the meager scriptural description and the broad meaning of "wine" leaves open a few possibilities. As a home brewer, I can say that all you need to make something to fit the OT definition of wine is water, yeast, and sugar source. So, no, not impossible...unlikely maybe

I think that the Gospels are better understood along the lines of heroic literature, akin to the works of Homer, which involved the mishmash of various stories that were in circulation about Jesus.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Let's see how many apologetics take the bait Joods 127 19145 July 16, 2016 at 10:54 pm
Last Post: Foxaèr
  Ignorant apologetics aside, your god does not exist. Foxaèr 10 2571 April 16, 2016 at 12:26 pm
Last Post: Mystic
  Priestly apologetics in a sermon this a.m. drfuzzy 13 3242 April 1, 2016 at 2:08 pm
Last Post: Drich
  Honest Question to Atheists - Best Argument? SamS 141 17369 July 26, 2015 at 9:22 am
Last Post: loganonekenobi
  Thoughts on Atheism and Apologetics Randy Carson 105 19001 July 4, 2015 at 5:39 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Non-fundamentalist apologetics is about obfuscation RobbyPants 6 2236 May 9, 2015 at 1:52 pm
Last Post: Pyrrho
  Be honest, am I going to hell for "my" atheism? LivingNumbers6.626 156 23550 April 12, 2015 at 5:32 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  GOOD Apologetics? ThePinsir 31 6643 January 28, 2014 at 3:11 pm
Last Post: Ryantology
  Apologetics Psychonaut 9 2998 October 1, 2013 at 10:57 am
Last Post: Lemonvariable72
  Apologetics blog domain name John V 54 19381 August 13, 2013 at 11:04 pm
Last Post: rexbeccarox



Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)