Reasons for Joy; In Gentleness, and Respect.

Profile of madmartigan83

Show Posts

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - madmartigan83

Apologetics and Theology / Parsimony
« on: February 16, 2017, 02:03:20 pm »
In a recent thread Jabberwock and I got into a discussion about a theory being preferred because it is more parsimonious than another.  Here is an article that I think explained what was on my mind  in a way better than I ever could.  I thought the point about parsimony being a reflection of the individuals preference over the content of the theory was well stated and there was a  point that seemed rather similar to Plantingas EAAN which i found interesting as well.  If there are any arguments as to why one should accept a more parsimonious theory i would like to hear it
Simplicity as Theoretical Virtue

Apologetics and Theology / Evolution waiting time question
« on: January 28, 2017, 07:59:03 am »
link    I don't want this to be a creationism vs evolution thing I just want to know whether the evolution waiting time thing the dark haired guy in the video is pseudo science or is a legitimate concern for evolution.  The video is long and badly taped but both of them seem well informed.  The Scottish guy has a masters in evolutionary biology but I'm not sure from where, not sure of the qualifications of the other guy.

Apologetics and Theology / XO God's deception
« on: November 15, 2016, 05:54:12 pm »
While reading 2 Thess 2 I came across verse 11 and it struck me as odd it seems that God is authoring deception here which doesn't fit well with scripture as God can't be the author of sin. Any thoughts or good commentary on the issue

Apologetics and Theology / Cosmic Time
« on: September 03, 2016, 10:33:11 am »
So  I enjoy conversations about time even though my understanding is seriously limited (thanks to those who have had patience explaining things).  Reading Dr. Craig's Time and eternity he talks about something called Cosmic Time and mentions that it may be a privileged frame and that relativity would be local phenomena.  Im having trouble figuring out all of the implications it would have and if there are any good reasons to think his view to be untrue
He quotes P.C.W. Davies (quoted in God and Real Time) TIME

 "At any given place in the universe, there is only one reference frame in which the universe expands isotropically. This privileged reference frame defines a privileged time scale (the time as told by a clock at rest in that frame). Two separated places have their privileged reference frames in mutual motion, because of the expansion of the universe. Nevertheless, the time measured by the entire collection of imaginary standard clocks are obviously correlated such that the global condition (e.g. average separation of two galaxies) of the universe appears the same at equal times as registered by every privileged clock (assuming they are all properly synchronized). Happily, the earth is moving very slowly relatively to the local privileged frame in our vicinity of the universe, so that Earth time is a fairly accurate measure of cosmic time. "
And concludes that
"One of the interesting implications of this understanding is that a Lorentzian rather than an Einsteinian interpretation of the Special Theory of Relativity is correct: there is a preferred reference frame in which light is propagated with the velocity c, and relativistic effects are due to local motion relative to this frame"

Is this plausible why or why not?
Does time dilation counter this idea?

Apologetics and Theology / Israel
« on: October 28, 2015, 06:38:49 am »
In what way do you view (if at all) the Jewish people to be God's chosen people

Apologetics and Theology / QM and Molinism
« on: October 21, 2015, 01:07:18 pm »
I have an odd sort of question for some of the brainiacs out there.  Ive been watching some videos on QM (i like the ensuing headaches for some reason) and someone in one made the statement that " our choice affects how the particle acted in the past" .  my specific question is how would this relate if true to WLC's view of Molinism (i just finished reading "The Only Wise God") given that one of the statements Dr Craig makes is that one cannot change someones knowledge of past events. It seems in QM there is the potential for a choice to affect the past (although from what i understand there are issues with information transfer, but im not sure how that would exactly apply)  hope this question is coherent.

Apologetics and Theology / Does Paul quote Luke
« on: September 08, 2015, 02:28:21 pm »
I began reading Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology and came across this

A second instance is found in 1 Timothy 5.17-18. Paul says, “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; for the scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,’ and, “The laborer deserves his wages.”’ The first quotation from “Scripture” is found in Deuteronomy 25.4, but the second quotation, “The laborer deserves his wages,” is found nowhere in the Old Testament. It does occur, however, in Luke 10.7 (with exactly the same words in the Greek text). So here we have Paul apparently quoting a portion of Luke’s gospel3:21 and calling it “Scripture,” that is, something that is to be considered part of the canon.3:22 In both of these passages (2 Peter 3.16 and 1 Tim. 5:17-18) we see evidence that very early in the history of the church the writings of the New Testament began to be accepted as part of the canon.
[/size]i found this interesting any thoughts

Apologetics and Theology / Showing God's love?
« on: April 16, 2015, 07:58:55 am »

The question for me is how do we do something like this in the much discussed area of SSM.  As a matter of public policy I dont agree with SSM, but I also dont agree with the porn industry or strip clubs for both policy issues and moral issues.  What are we as Christians supposed to do?  My thoughts are going along the lines of Romans 12:20 If your enemy is hungry give him something eat and if he is thirsty give him drink, in so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.  I would think that whatever service you would be providing would have to be free of charge so as not to profit off of sin.  It doesnt seem to matter to Paul about what is done with the gift that is given, for all we know the enemy that you just fed may attempt to do evil with the strength received from the food.  Thoughts?    Burning Coals idiom

Apologetics and Theology / Resources on the Canon
« on: February 23, 2015, 03:49:51 pm »
I was in a discussion with a co-worker about the Bible and he was of the opinion that since  the Catholic Church (he is RCC) burned the gnostic gospels and tried to remove them from existence we dont know what was in the bible originally. he thought that since the gnostic gospels were found with the dead sea scrolls that they were originally intended to be canon.   He also somehow tied the burning of the gnostic gospels to the creating of the canon and that they altered the bible to be more passive.  I told him about the Muratorian canon and his response was that they could have changed that document as well.  it seems his info comes from the history channel and i was wondering if anyone has a good video source that doesnt need to be apologetic but at least gives a scholarly look at the issue.  Ive checked out daniel wallace and dr tim mcgrew but they arent quite easy watching or listening (though i find them to be) for a general audience.  Thanks

Apologetics and Theology / Migdal Eder (Tower of the Flock)
« on: December 14, 2014, 03:44:31 pm »
An interesting view on the shepherds role in the nativity story.
Migdal Eder

Apologetics and Theology / Witch of Endor
« on: October 06, 2014, 09:47:38 pm »
How does the story of Samuel being called up by the witch of Endor influence, if at all, your view of the afterlife (prior to the Resurrection)

1 Samuel 28
[/size] Saul vowed to her by the Lord, saying, “As the Lord lives, no punishment shall come upon you for this thing.” Then the woman said, “Whom shall I bring up for you?” And he said, “Bring up Samuel for me.” When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice; and the woman spoke to Saul, saying, “Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul.” The king said to her, “Do not be afraid; but what do you see?” And the woman said to Saul, “I see a divine being coming up out of the earth.” He said to her, “What is his form?” And she said, “An old man is coming up, and he is wrapped with a robe.” And Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground and did homage.
[/size]Then Samuel said to Saul, “Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?” And Saul answered, “I am greatly distressed; for the Philistines are waging war against me, and God has departed from me and no longer answers me, either through prophets or by dreams; therefore I have called you, that you may make known to me what I should do.” Samuel said, “Why then do you ask me, since the Lord has departed from you and has become your adversary? The Lord has done accordingly as He spoke through me; for the Lord has torn the kingdom out of your hand and given it to your neighbor, to David. As you did not obey the Lord and did not execute His fierce wrath on Amalek, so the Lord has done this thing to you this day. Moreover the Lord will also give over Israel along with you into the hands of the Philistines, therefore tomorrow you and your sons will be with me. Indeed the Lord will give over the army of Israel into the hands of the Philistines!”
Then Saul immediately fell full length upon the ground and was very afraid because of the words of Samuel; also there was no strength in him, for he had eaten no food all day and all night.[/font]

Apologetics and Theology / Infant Baptism according to the Didache
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:47:55 pm »
In the Didache,  The author in Chapter 7:1-4 writes
Didache 7:1
But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize. Having first recited all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living (running) water.
Didache 7:2
But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water; and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm.
Didache 7:3
But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Didache 7:4
But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able; and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before.

Do you think that the author or the early church had Infant baptism in mind if the individual getting baptized was to be ordered to fast a day or two before?

Apologetics and Theology / Ecumenical Council Questions
« on: September 15, 2014, 07:39:22 pm »
A couple of questions for Roman Catholic brothers.  Ive been doing some reading on the Councils of the church and I am having trouble finding information any help you could give would be appreciated.

1.  Are the canons of Ecumenical Councils considered to be (specifically  the Council of Chalcedon binding or authoritative in the same way the Papal inerrancy is?
2.  If the Council canons is ratified but one of the canons is protested by the Bishop of Rome, is that canon still valid?

3. Ive seen different versions of what the Council of Chalcedon's 28th canon states, do you have any sources on this.


Pages : [1]