The Philosophy Thread

[Brothgar]

How can an atheist rest their argument on anything thought up by Newton? The guy was a devout Arian Christian, who spent a large portion of his life examining scripture along with science.

Same goes for Gaileo, Copernicus, Bacon, Leibniz,Kepler and most other who laid the foundations for modern science. Modern science as we know it owes its roots to many Christians.

Prolly because back then athiests were burnt at the stake.

[CJSchneider]

Isaiah 55:9
Just because you can not understand how free will could exist with in the scope of how a all powerful deity has pre-planned a special purpose for your life doesn't mean that said deity can not make it happen.

[TitleTown088]

Prolly because back then athiests were burnt at the stake.

Back then atheists as we know it today didn't exist. That came after the enlightenment.

Not to mention if you read the works but these guys you can see in their writing that they were genuine Christians. Galileo calls Theology "the queen of all sciences" in his letter to the Grand Duchess.

By reading that Newton was an Arian Christian ( which was a heresy btw) one can infer that his intentions with religion was genuine, he spend the better part of a decade studying scripture instead of "science".

Science and Theology do not disagree with each other, Scientists and theologians do.

* Sorry I keep editing these, I keep needing to add more.

[CJSchneider]

I"m no theologian...

I want to get in on that statement also. I know more scripture than the average person, but there is a great deal of church / religious history I know little of.

[Ward]

Isaiah 55:9
Just because you can not understand how free will could exist with in the scope of how a all powerful deity has pre-planned a special purpose for your life doesn't mean that said deity can not make it happen.

Isaiah was a book written by men, not (a) god. I still don't understand a universe with an all knowing and powerful god leaves room for free will.

[TitleTown088]

I want to get in on that statement also. I know more scripture than the average person, but there is a great deal of church / religious history I know little of.

Not us lay people are alone on that either. You talk to people who have spent their whole life studying Religion/Philosophy (you know the kind who have forgotten more on the subject than you'll ever know) and they'll tell you they feel the same way. There's just to much out there too know. The most intelligent person you'll ever meet is the one who not only knows the most, but will also admit their ignorance.

Isaiah was a book written by men, not (a) god. I still don't understand a universe with an all knowing and powerful god leaves room for free will.

Agian, no theologian but... I think According to Christian dogma it may be argued that Man may have authored the book, but God authored man and creation (nature). So in a sense, essentially he wrote it?

[steve buscemi]

[RoyHall#1]

Isaiah was a book written by men, not (a) god. I still don't understand a universe with an all knowing and powerful god leaves room for free will.

Just throwing this out there. If he's all powerful then he has the power to limit his own powers, if that makes sense. :D

[steve buscemi]

Just throwing this out there. If he's all powerful then he has the power to limit his own powers, if that makes sense. :D

Come on professor....

[TitleTown088]

Come on professor....

I can debunk your intentions of that pic/quote from a historical perspective...
Epicurus is from the 3rd century BC, therefore he's not talking about a Christian ( probably not even a monotheistic) God, which didn't come around until hundreds of years later.

[Brothgar]

I can debunk your intentions of that pic/quote from a historical perspective...
Epicurus is from the 3rd century BC, therefore he's not talking about a Christian ( probably not even a monotheistic) God, which didn't come around until hundreds of years later.

That is not true the Christian god is the same as the Jewish god.

[steve buscemi]

I can debunk your intentions of that pic/quote from a historical perspective...
Epicurus is from the 3rd century BC, therefore he's not talking about a Christian ( probably not even a monotheistic) God, which didn't come around until hundreds of years later.

So he proved it wrong before it was even invented! Even more brilliant! Although monotheism was around before Epicurus.

[The Unseen]

The problem of evil isn't supposed to cast doubt on theism, just religions which accepts a god that 1) is omnipotent 2) omniscient and 3) all good.

[TitleTown088]

That is not true the Christian god is the same as the Jewish god.

That's why I said probably not even a monotheistic God in my post.

So he proved it wrong before it was even invented! Even more brilliant! Although monotheism was around before Epicurus.

Do a little more reading on Epicureanism, it's not a atheistic belief. When you take a quote like that out of context it can look like it is.

[TitleTown088]

The problem of evil isn't supposed to cast doubt on theism, just religions which accepts a god that 1) is omnipotent 2) omniscient and 3) all good.[/b]

Who's to determine if there is evil though? Not just a twisting of what is good?