DeletedUser
I just read this load of crap posted on the Daily Gospel thread: Load of Crap. <-- Read it and then read my response on this post.
There are so many things wrong with this load of crap that it's hard to point them all out without confusing everyone here, but i'll give it a shot, while i'm still awake. But first I want to say that Divest is right, the imaginary professor in that story is an idiot, and definitely not a professor of any science (could be a professor of crochet). Okay, onward:Alright, that's enough comedic relief.
There are so many things wrong with this load of crap that it's hard to point them all out without confusing everyone here, but i'll give it a shot, while i'm still awake. But first I want to say that Divest is right, the imaginary professor in that story is an idiot, and definitely not a professor of any science (could be a professor of crochet). Okay, onward:
Crap: A false premise is presented, claiming good and evil are polar opposites, wherein good pulls one direction and evil pulls another. This false premise, this strawman, is the basis for the entire argument presented to this so-called professor. I.e., the faux professor presents the strawman, allowing the student to then rip apart the strawman and eventually impose his own unsubstantiated premise (via a faulty reasoning process).
Answer: Good and evil are ethical concepts, defined in both relativistic and absolutist terms, the combination of which is termed universalism.
Crap: The conclusion, which is that of imposing the unsubstantiated premise that Good = God and Evil = No God, conveniently oversimplifies these ethical concepts. I.e., "Evil is simply the absence of God."
Answer: The Bible, in so many words ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Matthew, Psalms, Jeremiah, Ephesians, Kings, Hebrews, Corinthians, & Romans[/FONT]), indicates that God is omnipresent, and thus in all things. And yet, this contradicts the aforementioned conclusion. So which is correct, the ramblings of a student or the Bible?
Crap: Satan was mentioned as argument for the initial premise, but from there-on was absent in the debate (if you can call it a debate).
Answer: Satan was absent from the debate because it throws a massive wrench into the student's conclusion. As indicated at the beginning of this debate, God created Satan, an archangel who rebelled, and thus was cast down. But, more to the point, Satan is clearly identified as, "the evil one" ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Matthew 13:19 & 1 John 2:13[/FONT]) as the, "author of all evil" ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Luke 10:19[/FONT]) and as a, "murderer and father of all lies" ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]John 8:44[/FONT]). Merely inserting him into the debate at the end would have deflated the student's assertions.
Crap: The imaginary professor states, "according to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist."
Answer: What a load of crap. Oh, you wanted a more detailed answer? Fine, the professor is dead wrong. There are a multitude of methods used, the most commonly known being the Scientific Method. It is in the scientific method a question is posed, it is then researched, then a hypothesis (premise) is constructed. The hypothesis is then tested via experiments, the data is collated & analyzed, a conclusion (theory) is drawn and then this conclusion is thrown to the wolves (i.e., reviewed by peers from around the globe). With a belief (in this instance, the belief in God), there is nothing for which to experiment on, and thus the Scientific Method cannot be applied. That doesn't mean God doesn't exist, nor does it mean God does. Scientific analysis cannot be applied to an "idea." Just as the Onion, or the Spaghetti Monster, there is nothing to measure. They are merely concepts, immeasurable and inconstant.
Crap: A one-sided debate ensues about evolution, the conclusion of which goes like so, "Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"
Answer: This absolutely incorrect. Evolution has been observed, via the examination of fossils, generations, DNA, and through controlled lab tests. Just because the student never bothered to open a book doesn't mean there are no pages in it, or no words, or no sentences. The student here is merely ignorant, and has decided to universally project his ignorance. Also, man did not evolve from a monkey. The students comment on this further demonstrates his gross lack of knowledge on both the facts and theories on evolution.
Crap: The student proceeds to argue that the professor has no brain because nobody in the room has ever seen his brain.
Answer: Well thank you, imaginary student, for making it so easy to demonstrate who is the one without a brain, or at least without functioning braincells. Human brains have been examined, in detail, for centuries. In fact, for tens of thousands of years brains have been witnessed (and described) spilling out of crushed human & animal skulls. But, if we wish to address only the professor's brain for the argument, all you would need to do is grab an MRI and *poof*, there's the brain. Seriously, what an idiotic, not to mention insulting, argument.
Answer: Good and evil are ethical concepts, defined in both relativistic and absolutist terms, the combination of which is termed universalism.
Crap: The conclusion, which is that of imposing the unsubstantiated premise that Good = God and Evil = No God, conveniently oversimplifies these ethical concepts. I.e., "Evil is simply the absence of God."
Answer: The Bible, in so many words ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Matthew, Psalms, Jeremiah, Ephesians, Kings, Hebrews, Corinthians, & Romans[/FONT]), indicates that God is omnipresent, and thus in all things. And yet, this contradicts the aforementioned conclusion. So which is correct, the ramblings of a student or the Bible?
Crap: Satan was mentioned as argument for the initial premise, but from there-on was absent in the debate (if you can call it a debate).
Answer: Satan was absent from the debate because it throws a massive wrench into the student's conclusion. As indicated at the beginning of this debate, God created Satan, an archangel who rebelled, and thus was cast down. But, more to the point, Satan is clearly identified as, "the evil one" ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Matthew 13:19 & 1 John 2:13[/FONT]) as the, "author of all evil" ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Luke 10:19[/FONT]) and as a, "murderer and father of all lies" ([FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]John 8:44[/FONT]). Merely inserting him into the debate at the end would have deflated the student's assertions.
Crap: The imaginary professor states, "according to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist."
Answer: What a load of crap. Oh, you wanted a more detailed answer? Fine, the professor is dead wrong. There are a multitude of methods used, the most commonly known being the Scientific Method. It is in the scientific method a question is posed, it is then researched, then a hypothesis (premise) is constructed. The hypothesis is then tested via experiments, the data is collated & analyzed, a conclusion (theory) is drawn and then this conclusion is thrown to the wolves (i.e., reviewed by peers from around the globe). With a belief (in this instance, the belief in God), there is nothing for which to experiment on, and thus the Scientific Method cannot be applied. That doesn't mean God doesn't exist, nor does it mean God does. Scientific analysis cannot be applied to an "idea." Just as the Onion, or the Spaghetti Monster, there is nothing to measure. They are merely concepts, immeasurable and inconstant.
Crap: A one-sided debate ensues about evolution, the conclusion of which goes like so, "Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"
Answer: This absolutely incorrect. Evolution has been observed, via the examination of fossils, generations, DNA, and through controlled lab tests. Just because the student never bothered to open a book doesn't mean there are no pages in it, or no words, or no sentences. The student here is merely ignorant, and has decided to universally project his ignorance. Also, man did not evolve from a monkey. The students comment on this further demonstrates his gross lack of knowledge on both the facts and theories on evolution.
Crap: The student proceeds to argue that the professor has no brain because nobody in the room has ever seen his brain.
Answer: Well thank you, imaginary student, for making it so easy to demonstrate who is the one without a brain, or at least without functioning braincells. Human brains have been examined, in detail, for centuries. In fact, for tens of thousands of years brains have been witnessed (and described) spilling out of crushed human & animal skulls. But, if we wish to address only the professor's brain for the argument, all you would need to do is grab an MRI and *poof*, there's the brain. Seriously, what an idiotic, not to mention insulting, argument.
