It’s Open Blog Friday
July 27th, 2007All natural and steroid-free.
39 Responses to “It’s Open Blog Friday”
Tim Ellsworth
My book
About
Links
Christian parenting resources
E-mail me
Recent Comments
- Joel Maners on Just a man with an ego: This article reminded me of...
- Adam Winters on Just a man with an ego: But for the record, I think...
- Adam Winters on Just a man with an ego: Tim, I don't think we are...
- Bill Nettles on The audacity of vanity: McCain: Knows he has...
- Cineaste on The audacity of vanity: More education contrast, this...
- Marilyn on The audacity of vanity: Oh, but Obama has two very, very...
- Lisa M on Just a man with an ego: I grew up a pastor's kid. But my...
Categories
Search:
Cornerstone Connection
Archives
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
Compare the two tables in the picture below. Which would be easier to get through a narrow door? How do size and shape of the two table tops compare?
- Roger Shepard’s “Turning the Tables”
“These tabletops are exactly the same size and shape. Once you have used a ruler or tracing paper to satisfy yourself that this is true, they will still look different to you, based upon the way your brain has been hard-wired to interpret spatial cues. It seems quite likely that every person who has ever lived would perceive these figures as being different in shape and size - a far higher percentage than believe in God. The fact is that our intuitions are not always a reliable guide to the truth; and in certain situations, they can be relied upon to be wrong. So why should we think that our inability/reluctance to conceive of our own nonexistence offers an indication of what happens after death”
- Sam Harris
Intuition can’t be trusted. Be skeptical. Use science to uncover the truth.
And I thought at this time I would be first!
The Red Sox will still win the AL East but whoah they are making it much more intersting than I care for. Go Sox!
Visual intuition, then, in your book, is parallel to all other forms of intuition? But you do make an excellent point.
The problem with this image is that the perspective of the viewer is forced to be at differing planes while the tables are side by side. Furthermore, there are no contextual clues (i.e., the variation in the ground) to signify this discrepancy.
Unfortunately, what I see is an example of how unreliable empirical data can be at times. If you must always “see” to believe, well, you may just have a faulty perspective. Truth, however, corresponds to reality. As such, the perspective of the viewer on these objects must change. When this occurs, the tables will be perceived according to reality.
Have a blessed Friday!
How’s that for “Turning the Tables” ?
You can’t trust what you see. Be skeptical. Use Scripture to uncover the truth.
They would be equally as easy to get through a narrow door once the legs have been removed.
It’s an exercise in skepticism. The leap of faith is believing what your eyes tell you about the table sizes. Then when science is applied, and one measures the tables, the truth is revealed.
Phew. It’s a good thing we Christians use science then. Like textual criticism, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, molecular biology and the sort.
Science points to a Creator. Deal with it.
“Science points to a Creator. Deal with it.”
Well, if that were true, most scientists would be theists.
Cineaste,
I am not sure what percentage of scientists actually believe in God. I guess some of that would depend of the field of science they are studying. However with that being said, science is not capable of proving or disproving God’s existence. Scientist often wrap themselves in the false presupposition that all “truth” is that which is measurable and verifiable through the scientific method. I find it interesting that many (possibly most) scientists believe in the concept of an infinite universe, which by definition they can neither measure nor verify outside of conjectural theory. Yet, many assertively venture into the world of philosophy to make claims they know nothing of. I suspect that much of what they believe about the existence of God is a product of their only presuppositions rather than actual science.
“However with that being said, science is not capable of proving or disproving God’s existence.”
Richard, this is true. It is also true that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of leprechauns. Here is what I am trying to say.
That’s a pretty lame comparison. The New Testament was written based on eyewitness testimony, and the reliability of the original manuscripts can’t be denied.
http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm
A leprechaun is but folklore.
As for scientists that believe in God, there is a huge list. Francis Collins, Galilei, Einstein, Doyle to name a few.
“A leprechaun is but folklore.”
Prove it scientifically.
“As for scientists that believe in God…”
Francis Collins - theist but also an evolutionist.
Galileo - imprisoned by the church because he supported heliocentric theory. According to the church, Heliocentric theory contradicted…
“Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, and Chronicles 16:30 state that “the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved.” Psalm 104:5 says, “[the LORD] set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.” Ecclesiastes 1:5 states that “the sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.”"
For this, the church imprisoned him.
Einstein - believed in Spinoza’s god.
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
– Albert Einstein, 1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press”
I would add that the term “scientist” is particularly vague.
Generally, thought leaders among the “scientific atheiest community” are not necessarily leaders among “physical sciences”. Why? Because physical scientists don’t wrestle with the same ambiguousness.
Further, I believe limiting the term “scientist” to only those lab-confined creatures (as opposed to applied scientists including medical professionals, etc) is not only discrediting to those professionals (of which I have similar training), but excluding a significant body of critical, intelligent thinkers.
Frankly, though I am a “God of Abraham fearing believer in Jesus Christ”, I do not believe “Science” (whatever that is) will prove God. If it could, why have faith? To continue that logic, it would mean that God would prohibit Himself from being 100% proven scientifically.
Cineaste, I respect your committment to your views. You probably categorize many Christians as only believing as they’ve been taught (ie, from our parents), but in fact, many of them adhere and can defend their beliefs as much as you can defend yours. But there will ALWAYS be a gap on my end - that gap is when a simple belief turns into my faith.
I’m glad your here, friend. Maybe one day I can call you “brother”.
Cineaste,
To compare the belief in God with leprechauns (or unicorns or invisible fairies) it not insulting to me as your cartoon might suggest. The comparison is, however, a logical categorical mistake and imploys the use of the informal fallacy of the argument from ignorance. I often sigh when I have to explain this to atheists.
First, the concept of God from an ontological standpoint is a necessary being. Leprechauns and unicorns are not. While you may not believe there is a need for God, the practice of comparing the belief in God with imaginary beings is in essence comparing apples to oranges. Secondly, you have used the argument from ignorance which states that something exists because there is no evidence to demonstrate it doesn’t exist OR something does not exist, because there is no evidence to prove otherwise. The theist often uses the former statement and the atheist often use the latter. Neither is using good logic.
Actually the burden of proof in regard to leprechauns is on you–as funny as that may seem.
To add a bit to what Jason said, from your posts on this topic and others on this site, you seem to think as if we are simply relying on faith. The heart and the head can agree–faith plus reason is why I believe in Christ, not simply because I want to or need to. I am intellectually convinced that Jesus Christ was the Son of God and the Bible is indeed God’s inspired word.
My wife and I took in the Southern Illinois Miners game last night in Marion. It was great seeing Marty again. And we had the wonderful privilege of meeting his fiance. Blessings to you both in your upcoming marriage. May your blessed union be much more error-free than the Miners’ defense!
Anybody up for Fantasy Football (TEFFL) this year?
I had been wondering about that, Joel. A couple of thoughts:
1. We probably should first extend an invitation to those who participated last year. If we have some openings, then we can ask if anyone new would like to join.
2. It’s got to have a different name.
“To compare the belief in God with leprechauns (or unicorns or invisible fairies) it not insulting to me as your cartoon might suggest.”
Hi Richard, I am glad to hear this. It is not an insult.
“I often sigh when I have to explain this to atheists.
First, the concept of God from an ontological standpoint is a necessary being. Leprechauns and unicorns are not. While you may not believe there is a need for God, the practice of comparing the belief in God with imaginary beings is in essence comparing apples to oranges.”
There is nothing to differentiate your concept of God from other supernatural beings like leprechauns, fairies, the Flying Spaghetti monster, etc. From an ontological standpoint, one has just as much justification positing an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent leprechaun as a necessary being. It is indeed an apples to apples comparison. More accurately, a supernatural to supernatural comparison.
“The theist often uses the former statement and the atheist often use the latter.”
Only a strong atheist would use the latter. I’m a weak atheist meaning, I don’t deny the possibility of God.
“…Actually the burden of proof in regard to leprechauns is on you”
Zoner, that’s correct, if I make the claim leprechauns exist. I don’t. Are you not making the claim the God exists? If so, doesn’t that place the burden of proof of God on you?
Maybe one day I can call you “brother”
Hi Jason, I won’t wait. I’ll call you brother now.
May I join the Fantasy Football League?
Consider yourself first on the waiting list, Cineaste, if we have any owners from last year who don’t return.
I’m definitely back in.
I’m interested in Fantasy Football again.
Hey Tony, I tried to email you the recipe to my “Better Than a Wendy’s Frosty” ice cream, but it got rejected. Wanna send me an email and have me send it back, or just post it wherever on your blog?
Thanks Tony. It was good to see you and Cheryl again too!
I am totally in for Fantasy Football.
Cineaste–exactly. And Christian apologists have presented archaeological, scientific, documented evidence and as I stated the NT is based on eyewitness testimony.
Jesus Christ fulfilled over 300 messianic prophecies, many of which only He could have fulfilled.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster hasn’t fulfilled any.
I’m pretty sure you are here in Chicago. I invite you to come with me to my church. I have a feeling it is much different than you perceive church would be.
“And Christian apologists have presented archaeological, scientific, documented evidence and as I stated the NT is based on eyewitness testimony.”
You make it sound as if there is no doubt. But we all know there is doubt. As Jason asked earlier, if God is proved, “Why have faith?”
“I’m pretty sure you are here in Chicago. I invite you to come with me to my church. I have a feeling it is much different than you perceive church would be.”
Thank you Zoner. That sounds interesting but I have some reservations about it. Mostly because it wouldn’t be in keeping with what I believe, or in this case, not believe. It wouldn’t genuine. I’d just be pretending, a sham. I wouldn’t do that to you or others.
“I wouldn’t do it because it’s disrespectful to me. I think it’s disrespectful to them. Why would they want an atheist in their circle saying the Lord’s Prayer? I mean, if I was a Jew or Muslim or Hindu, I would have a problem with that prayer.”
- Nicole Smalkowski
How about going to a baseball cathedral? Wrigley Field. Are you a Cubs fan or a Sox fan?
I am saddened by all this flippant dismissal of the little people. Even mentioning their name in the same sentence with disbelief is cause for mischevious evils of all kinds.
Be carefull, all ye who’d be disgracin’ those wee wanes.
I’m warning ye.
Tim, Count me in again in for this year’s fantasy football.
This one should really impress Zoner.
Really amazing trivia: Only two men in history have played in both the Final Four in college basketball and the World Series in baseball: Tim Stoddard and Kenny Lofton. Stoddard is the only person to have won both; starting forward for ‘74 N.C. State’s men’s hoops team and the ‘83 Orioles WS champs.
Here’s the amazing trivia: both Stoddard and Lofton are alumni of Washington High in East Chicago, Indiana.
Tim,
I may be interested in the fantasy football. Please put me on your waiting list.
Misawa,
I would be interested than the better than frosty recipe also.
Well, if we have to change the name, what would you suggest?
I say the person who wins each year decides on the name for the next year.
Verne (and any others interested), here’s the recipe. Enjoy!
Brett–
I am certainly impressed by that nugget. And they are both ex-Cubs.
Cineaste–
Consider it an open invitation should you want to just check it out. Fear not, I wouldn’t proseltyze or push you; just thought you might want to see how much different it is as depicted in tv, movies, etc.
I am the rare breed of Chicgaoans that like both the Cubs and Sox. Have you not been visiting Zoner Sports? =0p
My father took me to both when I was a kid and I always appreciated both, and the differences between the two. My brother hates the Sox.
Have a great weekend all–I’m off to shank the little white orb all over the place!
Cineaste,
You’re in the football league. We’ve had one owner bow out so far. Verne, if there’s another opening, it’s yours.
Woot!
Thanks Misawa! I am looking forward to trying that.
Thanks Tim! Let me know if a spot opens up.