How the universe came to be?

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:03 am

bizzt wrote:True Christianity was not around until Jesus

What has that to do with anything I said?

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:06 am

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:I don't see how see why someone would argue using that statement...

Me neither. Yet they do it all the time - albeit in different guises. On one multi-religion forum I post it is pretty much the only argument I ever hear from Christians, Muslims and New-agers. So much so that my sig on that forum is:

No-one knows everything therefore Jesus | Allah | Aliens | Mind Powers | Reincarnation (*delete as applicable*)

bizzt · Post by **bizzt** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:41 am

Blob wrote:
bizzt wrote:True Christianity was not around until Jesus
What has that to do with anything I said?

After re-reading it I read something the wrong way. Sorry

AttentionKMartShoppers · Tue Sep 27, 2005 4:52 pm

Blob wrote:
AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:I don't see how see why someone would argue using that statement...
Me neither. Yet they do it all the time - albeit in different guises. On one multi-religion forum I post it is pretty much the only argument I ever hear from Christians, Muslims and New-agers. So much so that my sig on that forum is:

No-one knows everything therefore Jesus | Allah | Aliens | Mind Powers | Reincarnation (*delete as applicable*)

That doesn't make sense-that's like saying, because I have two legs....2+2=5!

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 4:56 pm

Precisely.

AttentionKMartShoppers · Tue Sep 27, 2005 4:59 pm

Blob wrote:Precisely.

Also...why are you bringing up that nonsense argument you've heard in here...we aren't using it.

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:16 pm

If you trace back our exchange in this thread you'll find that someone did.

Above, on the previous page, a Christian (naming no names) said to an atheist (you'll never guess who) "we are capped off at human knowledge" within the context of trying to persuade the atheist that Christianity is true.

So to paraphrase...

"Human knowledge is limited therefore Jesus."

AttentionKMartShoppers · Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:55 pm

If that's all the unnamed person said...how can you come to that conclusion.

Jbuza · Post by **Jbuza** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 6:03 pm

Blob wrote:If you trace back our exchange in this thread you'll find that someone did.

Above, on the previous page, a Christian (naming no names) said to an atheist (you'll never guess who) "we are capped off at human knowledge" within the context of trying to persuade the atheist that Christianity is true.

So to paraphrase...

"Human knowledge is limited therefore Jesus."

I haven't, I don't think, used this one, but I think the thinking here is that from an atheistic evolutionary mindset, that it would seem reasonable that man would be the ultimate source of knowledge. If evolution is the creation of higher ordered beings from lower ordered beings, than Man would be the ultimate source of knowledge. Man intuitvely knowing that we don't have the answer to all things points to a greater source of knowledge somewhere. That is that there is something at least knowledge that is outside of the material existence. IT is not adequate and convincing evidence, but it is not entirely without merit

Believer · Post by **Believer** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 6:07 pm

Blob wrote:If you trace back our exchange in this thread you'll find that someone did.

Above, on the previous page, a Christian (naming no names) said to an atheist (you'll never guess who) "we are capped off at human knowledge" within the context of trying to persuade the atheist that Christianity is true.

So to paraphrase...

"Human knowledge is limited therefore Jesus."

I think Blob is talking about me, BUT, I didn't say Jesus is capped off, human knowledge is, so don't jump to quick asinine conclusions like that. Jesus was FULL human and FULL God at the same time, we aren't. Jesus had the body of a human AND the mind of God. He is still God but is also now existing as a spiritual being that CAN come in the form of a physical being.

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:08 am

Apologies Thinker - it's just that KMart and I got into a discussion that was triggered by my response to something you said. Sorry to drag you back into it - I shouldn't have done that. I'd hate to damage the fragile trust you and I have developed and will be more considerate next time.

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:09 am

Jbuza wrote:Man intuitvely knowing that we don't have the answer to all things points to a greater source of knowledge somewhere.

I honestly don't see how that follows.

Jbuza · Post by **Jbuza** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 7:18 am

Blob wrote:
Jbuza wrote:Man intuitvely knowing that we don't have the answer to all things points to a greater source of knowledge somewhere.
I honestly don't see how that follows.

Your right it is tenuos. But it does seem reasonable that there is at least truth and knowledge that are outside of the realm of an evolved mind doesn't it? Creation would say that God is the source of knowledge that we have an inborn desire to discover. Evolution may say that a drive to increase knowledge is simply adaptive. I personally find this explanation of the limits of human knowledge to be wanting. If it is so adaptive why wouldn't it be present in more species? We are all trying to explain, and to learn and I feel that creation explains these singular unique characteristics of man more completely than does evolution.

Blob · Post by **Blob** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 8:16 am

But it does seem reasonable that there is at least truth and knowledge that are outside of the realm of an evolved mind doesn't it?

It's certainly conceivable, but I find it highly doubtful.

Take the rules of chess. They are an internally consistent set of rules with referents to pieces and a board. It is meaningless to ask if the rules of chess are right or wrong, true or false. They have been constructed by human minds and (i) did not exist in any sense whatsoever before they were constructed and (ii) do not exist in any objective sense outside of human minds, IMO.

Kurieuo · Post by **Kurieuo** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 8:30 am

It has been pointed out by some that if we are the product of natural processes our rational faculties would not be calibrated towards truth, but towards surviving. Therefore we can't be certain that our rational faculties would lead us to truth.

Just thought I'd throw this in for some reflection.

Kurieuo