Controversial Topic (Creation vs Evolution 2?)

Sort:
Avatar of MainframeSupertasker
hitthepin wrote:
Ginarook wrote:

It can most certainly be answered, if we survive long enough for Science to find the answer.

God becomes a factor because we crave certainty over that which is not certain....yet

I always thought religion existed in realms that science can’t touch.

I just discovered that yesterday........ Wow. So true.

Avatar of GRANDMASTER_100

When you go to the Bible, you should not look for facts, rather look for truth. I think, in trying to validate your secular views, you have forgotten the real essence of religion, in this case Christianity. The Bible is meant to be a guide for how we should live righteous lives, and within it, is undeniably deep truth.

Great video SoulMate!

Avatar of GRANDMASTER_100
Manatini wrote:

Flat earthers may want to use that picture, but that has nothing to do with my point.

As an easy example, in the book of Revelation, during the end of the world, it says all the stars in the sky will fall down to the earth... this is only possible if they thought of them as little points of light, not as enormous balls of gas, each many times larger than the earth itself, each impossibly far away.

As for "answering Islam" yes, there are many arguments against the silly claims that religions make. That was my point.

 

Avatar of GRANDMASTER_100

Manatini,

1. You are most certainly wrong.

2. Going to church and chapel frequently does not grant you unparalleled knowledge of Christianity. For Christians, that doesn't even make us good Christians. A very ignorant statement indeed.

Avatar of MainframeSupertasker

It was my pride which made me say I know more about science than Christians 5 months ago. Now I am revealed to the truth. I've seen how "faith" can increase accuracy in statistical outcomes. I have analyzed most scientific evidence that God exists. My life 5 months ago, could be rationally called "blind" when in comparison to my life right now. I have seen Him work mysteriously, making my predictions of no meaning. I have experimented Bible verses with faith in them, and they ALWAYS have worked out.

Avatar of MainframeSupertasker

Science can never calculate faith, hence God probably can never be proven by unbelievers who are limited to their "scientific proofs".

Avatar of autobunny

i don't know, so god?  is our pride so great that we'd rather say 'god' than admit we don't know?  only when we say we don't know, will we have any chance of truly knowing rather than pretending to have an answer. 

then there is the misunderstanding of science.  spontaneous generation was cited to support the wrong conclusion, then brought up again as a refuted idea with no regard to abiogenesis in general.

there are so many creation ideas.  are we only adopting the abrahamic one?

if we still prayed or exorcised for illnesses today, how many of you would still be alive or even be born?

just remember

Avatar of autobunny
SoulMate333 wrote:

True enough... one need only die.

why? what happens then?

Avatar of GRANDMASTER_100

autobunny it is not pride, it is faith. One of the reasons why Christians believe in God is because they do not know all the mysteries of the universe and they have belief backed by adequate evidence and reasoning to have faith in this belief. So I am not sure if you understand what you are insinuating.

Avatar of gingerninja2003

William Craig is basically a broken record of someone repeating the god of the gaps argument.

Avatar of gingerninja2003
Ginarook wrote:
gingerninja2003 wrote:

William Craig is basically a broken record of someone repeating the god of the gaps argument.

Agreed, their best spokesperson is Mr Lennox, he is very good.

He just says the same arguments as everyone else but he just words them slightly better.

Avatar of autobunny
GRANDMASTER_100 wrote:

autobunny it is not pride, it is faith. One of the reasons why Christians believe in God is because they do not know all the mysteries of the universe and they have belief backed by adequate evidence and reasoning to have faith in this belief. So I am not sure if you understand what you are insinuating.

I guess I don't, and you believe you do. 

"Adequate evidence and reasoning" - different levels for different people I guess. 

Avatar of gingerninja2003
Ginarook wrote:
gingerninja2003 wrote:
Ginarook wrote:
gingerninja2003 wrote:

William Craig is basically a broken record of someone repeating the god of the gaps argument.

Agreed, their best spokesperson is Mr Lennox, he is very good.

He just says the same arguments as everyone else but he just words them slightly better.

No, he is the only one I have seen who has left Dawkins spluttering to find a decent response, his points about the Logos are excellent.

Dawkins is crap at debating anyway. Lennox's debate with Hitchen's is much better. 

Avatar of Metar_Taf
Ginarook wrote:

"Frankly it's poor reading and reasoning like this that makes talking to religious people online uninteresting."

 

and yet you persist, are you very bored

The ad hominem has started! Finally!

Avatar of eryxc

Nice!!

Avatar of dbeleiu
@manatini

Earlier you said that it would be better for people to know the truth. I agree. This begs the question of what you believe is the truth. I haven’t had time to read all ten pages and I’d be interested in knowing! Lol.
Avatar of dbeleiu
I also kinda wanna see the proof that supports your beliefs
Avatar of dbeleiu
also Christians did not just “ throw out the apocryphal books” because they did not agree with the Bible. They simply didn’t belong, as stated by Jewish historians and religious leaders, who would know because these books are originally Jewish HISTORY books. They do not belong with religious literature.👍
Avatar of dbeleiu
Lol gina I also am confused on your views? Mind an explanation?? Again didn’t have time to read ten pages! 😆
Avatar of dbeleiu
@soulmate

Of course they did(n’t). What I mean by that is this. The books that are known as the apocryphal books and are often included by Catholics are actually books of Jewish history. When Jewish historians and religious leaders were asked about the origin of the books and whether they should be considered religious scriptures the Jewish historians and religious leaders stated that these books were historical and should not be considered Scripture.
This forum topic has been locked