Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Science and God

13»

Comments

  • #62
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    john47832 wrote: »
    "Entirely Possible" would imply this has naturally happend before... is this true?

    English Language 101.

    No, it doesn't imply any such thing.

    If I say, "It is entirely possible that someone will invent a car that drives at the speed of sound" that in no way implies that such a car has been invented before.


  • #63
    mark renton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭mark renton


    Thanks for the lesson PDN -

    usually those who speak english would say it is "entirely possible" that Messi will score for Barcelona tonight, or that it is "entirely possible" that rain will at some point follow our glorious sunshine...


    for clarity sake there should be rules aligned with the english language that states that possibilities should only be preceded by the likelihood of the occurence of that possibility


  • #64
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    john47832 wrote: »
    Thanks for the lesson PDN -

    usually those who speak english would say it is "entirely possible" that Messi will score for Barcelona tonight, or that it is "entirely possible" that rain will at some point follow our glorious sunshine...


    for clarity sake there should be rules aligned with the english language that states that possibilities should only be preceded by the likelihood of the occurence of that possibility

    While your one-man campaign to change the usage of the English language is intriguing, I suggest that in this Forum we concentrate on communicating in the English language according to current usage and meaning.

    'Entirely possible' is a very straightforward term. It refers to what is possible, as opposed to what is is probable.


  • #65
    Festus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Festus


    john47832 wrote: »
    Thanks for the lesson PDN -

    usually those who speak english would say it is "entirely possible" that Messi will score for Barcelona tonight, or that it is "entirely possible" that rain will at some point follow our glorious sunshine...


    for clarity sake there should be rules aligned with the english language that states that possibilities should only be preceded by the likelihood of the occurence of that possibility

    what is the probability of a possibility?


  • #66
    mark renton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭mark renton


    Festus wrote: »
    what is the probability of a possibility?


    Entirely possible...


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Dont believe the bible to be literal but also dont think science can play a part in the bible
    If I can believe that God created the earth, I don't believe it's hugely difficult to believe that God can act within it. I think to treat the miracles of Jesus in that manner is trivial, presenting Him as a mere magician. I've been blown away over the past while looking into the significance and the meaning behind the miracles of Jesus, both in Mark's Gospel and in John's Gospel in particular. Jesus performs miracles for a reason, generally in order to teach a higher truth about His mission and His purpose. Peter coming out on the water was to demonstrate the importance of faith. Blind Bartimeus given sight in Mark's Gospel is in order to show the revelation of truth to the disciples, in part first, and then in full in the following section.


  • #68
    mark renton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭mark renton


    What is the possibility that either immaculate conception or virgin birth actually occurred?

    Or would it be fair to say that it is entirely possible these did occur?


  • #69
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    john47832 wrote: »
    What is the possibility that either immaculate conception or virgin birth actually occurred?

    Or would it be fair to say that it is entirely possible these did occur?

    Well those are just examples. There is many.

    But the point to christians I presume is that these were miracles, not just phenomena that can happen to just anyone.

    So a miracle:

    miracle (ˈmɪrək ə l)
    — n
    1.
    an event that is contrary to the established laws of nature and attributed to a supernatural cause

    What I gather here is that Christians don't want these events to be explained as a plausible scientific natural phenomena but as something that is completely impossible(only God can do them) and has to be unexplainable essentially.

    What I don't get is the juxtaposition of believing in the theory of evolution based on evidence and sound logical reasoning, with believing in miracles which every shred of scientific evidence would point to the contrary of these things occuring.


  • #70
    mark renton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭mark renton


    So should this thread title be changed to "Either Science OR God"?

    For those with english structural language difficulties -ie, PDN

    Either or

    Either/or means "one or the other (of two)." Its usage, versus the simple or structure, is often for emphatic purposes, sometimes intending to emphasize that only one option is possible


  • #71
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    john47832 wrote: »
    What is the possibility that either immaculate conception or virgin birth actually occurred?

    Or would it be fair to say that it is entirely possible these did occur?

    That would depend on your presuppositions.

    If you have dogmatically decided that God does not exist, then you will be more inclined to say they are impossible.

    If you have dogmatically decided that God does exist then you will say they are possible, maybe even probable.

    If you are open minded enough to allow for the possibility of God's existence, without being dogmatic about it, then you will also allow for the possibility that such a God can work miracles.

    So, in the end, the answer to your question depends on how dogmatic or open minded you are.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    john47832 wrote: »
    So should this thread title be changed to "Either Science OR God"?
    No, because, as the OP makes clear, he is not such an idiot as to assume that belief in God and science are mutually exclusive. He was asking a question of other believers on the board (before non-believers tried to hijack the thread).
    For those with english structural language difficulties -ie, PDN
    I did you a favour by pointing out a rather elementary English language mistake you made. While I don't expect you to have the grace to be grateful, there's no need to get snippy about it.


  • #73
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    PDN wrote: »
    If you are open minded enough to allow for the possibility of God's existence, without being dogmatic about it, then you will also allow for the possibility that such a God can work miracles.

    Are you suggesting that someone who does not allow for the possibility of God's existence is close-minded? Would that be extended to Zeus, unicorns, fairies, goblins, and vampires?


  • #74
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that someone who does not allow for the possibility of God's existence is close-minded? Would that be extended to Zeus, unicorns, fairies, goblins, and vampires?

    Someone who allows for the possible existence of those things is evidently more open-minded than someone who denies their possibility.


  • #75
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    PDN wrote: »
    Someone who allows for the possible existence of those things is evidently more open-minded than someone who denies their possibility.

    Let's suppose there is a 0.00000001% chance of a God existing (and that's being very generous) - To reject that one exists, or could exist - is a perfectly reasoned stance to take, and has no bearing on how open or closed minded someone is.


  • #76
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Let's suppose there is a 0.00000001% chance of a God existing (and that's being very generous) - To reject that one exists, or could exist - is a perfectly reasoned stance to take, and has no bearing on how open or closed minded someone is.

    That would be so if your supposition of the probabilities was correct. Of course, since you have zero evidence to support such a supposition and plucked your probability percentage out of thin air, you are merely making a faith statement.

    Now, just to show that two can play at your game, let's suppose that that there is a 99.999% chance of a God existing (after all, if you can pluck a figure out of thin air then so can I). To reject that one exists would be a very unreasoned stance to take.

    Now, having disposed of that bit of silliness, I'll put my mod hat and remind you that there is a thread for Atheist/Christian debates about the existence of God - so feel free to crib away on that thread. This thread was started by the OP to ask believers about the interaction between their faith in God and their approach to science.


  • #77
    mark renton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭mark renton


    PDN wrote: »
    That would depend on your presuppositions.

    If you have dogmatically decided that God does not exist, then you will be more inclined to say they are impossible.

    If you have dogmatically decided that God does exist then you will say they are possible, maybe even probable.

    If you are open minded enough to allow for the possibility of God's existence, without being dogmatic about it, then you will also allow for the possibility that such a God can work miracles.

    So, in the end, the answer to your question depends on how dogmatic or open minded you are.

    Kind of works both ways PDN - are those who believe in god open minded to the possibility that there may be no god... (and this is on topic as only science, or a second coming, will conclude the outcome one day, thereby assisting my descision on how to vote)

    me personally I am very open minded, I reaslised a long time ago that when I stopped believing in santa claus I stopped getting presents :(

    I have a policy when attempting to learn the non scientific, that is to compare such to the opposite, its like if I want to learn how white is white, then I would compare to black - the openmindedness is contained within the act of learning, and accusations of closed mindedness should not be thrown on those who compare

    ... also just in case there are pearly gates I gotta have some cover


  • #78
    mark renton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭mark renton


    PDN wrote: »

    I did you a favour by pointing out a rather elementary English language mistake you made. While I don't expect you to have the grace to be grateful, there's no need to get snippy about it.

    No actually there was no mistake - I just believe a word that precedes an adjective, emphasizing greatly that same adjective, then defines what a person is attempting to say

    you seem to believe different, fair enough


  • #79
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that someone who does not allow for the possibility of God's existence is close-minded? Would that be extended to Zeus, unicorns, fairies, goblins, and vampires?

    I think "possible" is being used in a variety of contexts in this thread, and not all posters are on the same page as to what that context is.

    For example, if you asked me "Can you Zombrex get up and walk through that wall?" I would happily say "No, that is impossible"

    Now, what do I actually mean by that. Well in common usage what I mean by that is that based on all experience and current understanding of both myself (a human) and the wall (a strong solid collection of bricks) if I attempt to walk through the wall I will not be able to.

    This common usage though, like so many things, does not apply up to extreme edge cases. For example, the entire laws of reality might, for some unknown reason, change while I am walking up to the wall and by the time I get to the wall I will be able to pass straight through it. Or the wall might actually be a holographic projection from an alien space craft in orbit around the Earth, and give my body no more resistance than air would.

    Can I say for absolute 100% proven certainty that none of these (infinite) possibilities can happen? No. It is always possible to imagine a case were something that we consider impossible actually is possible if you are prepared to introduce extreme scenarios.

    So in a fundamental way it is unwise to say that anything is absolutely impossible when the person you are debating with is happy to consider such extreme scenarios when they themselves are assessing the possibility something might happen.


  • #80
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    john47832 wrote: »
    What is the possibility that either immaculate conception or virgin birth actually occurred?

    Or would it be fair to say that it is entirely possible these did occur?

    John, I'm puzzled by your questions about the Immaculate Conception (a dogma that, as a non-Catholic, I don't personally believe in).

    The concept of Original Sin is a theological concept rather than something that can be demonstrated scientifically. So why, in a thread dealing with faith and science, do you want to discuss whether Mary was free from Original sin or not? :confused:


  • #81
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Dont believe the bible to be literal but also dont think science can play a part in the bible
    john47832 wrote: »
    What is the possibility that either immaculate conception or virgin birth actually occurred?

    Or would it be fair to say that it is entirely possible these did occur?


    If you're an atheist, it is zero probability and it never could have happened.

    If you believe and trust that God is the Creator of the world, it's reasonable to accept that He could act in Creation. That's by and large why I have no difficulty believing the Virgin Birth of Jesus.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement