Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: ought-six

But the God of the New Testament states in that document that he’s the God of the Old Testament.

It’s only your imagination that leads you to a different conclusion.

Here’s an intelligence test for you: If your reference to particular parts of Biblical text presumes to validate it, then it’s logically incoherent to consider other parts randomly invalid.

As for the value of intuition, Richard Feynman himself described it as a product of multiple, repeated experiential events. In other words, it’s a step up from simple empiricism. Intuition is the foundation of scientific hypothesis. But the low IQ cabal has devised an educational and social system which teaches us to disregard intuition. My advice to you is use your intuition.


54 posted on 01/17/2024 10:56:15 AM PST by reasonisfaith (What are the personal implications if the Resurrection of Christ is a true event in history?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: reasonisfaith

“It’s only your imagination that leads you to a different conclusion.”

Not at all. If the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New, that God is a schizo.

“Here’s an intelligence test for you: If your reference to particular parts of Biblical text presumes to validate it, then it’s logically incoherent to consider other parts randomly invalid.”

Nice try. There are historical aspects of the Bible that do track with known and accepted history. But because those elements are validated by historical scholarship it does not imply that those elements that are NOT so validated are supportable.

“As for the value of intuition, Richard Feynman himself described it as a product of multiple, repeated experiential events. In other words, it’s a step up from simple empiricism.”

No, it’s actually the opposite; so I have my doubts that Feynman said that intuition is a step UP from empiricism. Please provide me with his quote that said that; a link or source would be nice. Because Feynman was a rationalist, and could not abide pedants. Remember, he said that if one can’t explain one’s subject simply, one does not understand one’s subject.

Do you even have a clue as to what intuition is? It’s a feeling drawn without any conscious experience or rational thought process. That’s why it’s called a “sixth sense,” or a “gut feeling.”

I think you are confusing “intuition” with “intuitiveness,” but they are most assuredly NOT the same thing. Now, INTUITIVENESS can result from empiricism; but INTIUITION cannot. So, either you are confused, or you are a bullshitter (which you have shown yourself to be on previous threads).

Yet, you seem convinced of your beliefs, to the point of zealotry (which could explain your filling your profile age with religion and scripture). Do you want to know what Feynman said about that kind of thing? I found this quote of his: “Looking back at the worst times, it always seems that they were times in which there were people who believed with absolute faith and absolute dogmatism in something. And they were so serious in this matter that they insisted that the rest of the world agree with them. And then they would do things that were directly inconsistent with their own beliefs in order to maintain that what they said was true.”

Peddle your snake oil somewhere else; I’m not buying.


55 posted on 01/17/2024 1:42:28 PM PST by ought-six (Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson