An atheists world (3)

[StormanNorman]

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? (Romans 10:14 KJV)

That's why.

Well, that makes sense. Gosh, how did I not think of that??

 

[Davian]

I can't really determine what other Christians argue for or against.

Whatever in whatever you don't really care?

I don't really care. It is just another point of inconsistency by theists.

God is saying He created heaven and earth. It then gives the run down of what happened in doing so.

No, you are reading a book. You have yet to establish that this "God" is anything other than a character in that book as this point.

Most if not all inconsistencies in the Bible are interpretive.

That's why I try to stay clear of arguing bible interpretations. They are all different.

So you think that everyone should know what everything means at all times in all areas without exception?

That is not what I said.

Example?

You referenced mainstream cosmology (in error) for a "beginning" of the universe, and then rejected the same science when it came to determining the timing of the formation of the heavier elements through to the Sun, Earth, and Moon. You are cherry-picking.

No, I am saying that there is no way to test either the Bible or the theories that are out there in proving whether the earth was in fact created prior to the sun or moon.

Science doesn't "prove" anything. There are however, ways to test and falsify theories of the earth and moon formation.

If the bible cannot be tested, why look to it as a source of knowledge. How would one validate it?

Disagreement of like minds does not mean Truth cannot be had. Evidence is not always agreed upon in all realms of knowledge.

Agreed, but the problem with theism is the absence of a mechanism for resolving differences of opinion (barring war, torture, crusades, splits, etc). Scientific methodology and scientific consensus are beyond their reach.

I believe that it is inspired by God.

That tells me as much as saying that it was inspired by Bob.

Scientific evidence changes with new discoveries all the time. I find my interest in science never waivers but that does not mean that science is my authority in life and those things most important. My faith is based not on outward forces but is based on my experience with God. Once you have the knowledge of God, that God does indeed exist, you don't just suddenly forget that knowledge. It doesn't work that way.

So this is an exercise in futility. Meshing the bible with science gains no new knowledge, and persuades no one. I suppose it may make you more comfortable in your beliefs. Is that your goal?

 

[toolmanjantzi]

Well, that makes sense. Gosh, how did I not think of that??

Because you lack the Holy Spirit.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

I don't really care. It is just another point of inconsistency by theists.

No, you are reading a book. You have yet to establish that this "God" is anything other than a character in that book as this point.

That's why I try to stay clear of arguing bible interpretations. They are all different.

That is not what I said.

You referenced mainstream cosmology (in error) for a "beginning" of the universe, and then rejected the same science when it came to determining the timing of the formation of the heavier elements through to the Sun, Earth, and Moon. You are cherry-picking.

Science doesn't "prove" anything. There are however, ways to test and falsify theories of the earth and moon formation.

If the bible cannot be tested, why look to it as a source of knowledge. How would one validate it?

Agreed, but the problem with theism is the absence of a mechanism for resolving differences of opinion (barring war, torture, crusades, splits, etc). Scientific methodology and scientific consensus are beyond their reach.

That tells me as much as saying that it was inspired by Bob.

So this is an exercise in futility. Meshing the bible with science gains no new knowledge, and persuades no one. I suppose it may make you more comfortable in your beliefs. Is that your goal?

Which books do you read?

 

[CarlosTomy]

Because scientists will totally ruin a nation;

Just as they've ruined the nation you live in now?

They don't carry clipboards and talk over our heads.

So if someone talks over your head you find fault with THEM?

Ok.

 

[CarlosTomy]

When scientists want the 10 Commandments off of our public land because someone might get saved passing (or going into) the courthouse, I get perturbed.

I'm willing to contend that YOU CANNOT SHOW THAT THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED.

When scientists want "Merry Christmas" plutoed to "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons Greetings" because someone might get saved, I get perturbed.

NOr that...

 

[StormanNorman]

Because you lack the Holy Spirit.

That's probably true. At any rate, religion (or lack thereof) is a private matter and should not be supported, denied, persuaded, etc. using public monies. You can believe what you want, toolman, just not on my dime.

 

[Loudmouth]

At the end of the day, some christians rationalize their irrational beliefs by picturing people getting punished for disagreeing with them. Sad, but true.

 

[CabVet]

When scientists want the 10 Commandments off of our public land because someone might get saved passing (or going into) the courthouse, I get perturbed.

I don't care about the others, but this one, why? You bear false witness here every single time you use the word "scientist", so why do you care if the 10 commandments are posted somewhere if you don't follow them?

 

[toolmanjantzi]

Ok, you call yourselves scientist. Have you heard of the four blood moons theory?

You can call them harvest moons. If one were to go to NASAs website and look into these 4 blood moons. And one solar eclipse between. One can find the evidence from scientists that these 4 blood moons have a specific pattern when aligned with Jewish Holidays.

Supposedly they have happened three times so far, once during the Spanish Inquisition, once during 1948 and 1967. Every time there was a time of hardship then after, a time of rejoicing all have to do with both the Jewish People and their holy days. None of this happened for some 500 from the time of the Spanish Inquisition to the time of 1948 when Israel became a nation and then the six day war in 1967. The next 4 start next Passover 2014 to 2015.

What are the scientific possibilities of this happening?

For a Christian it's God. And his creation story says:

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be FOR SIGNS,
and for seasons, and for days, and years: (Genesis 1:14 KJV)

 

[toolmanjantzi]

That's probably true. At any rate, religion (or lack thereof) is a private matter and should not be supported, denied, persuaded, etc. using public monies. You can believe what you want, toolman, just not on my dime.

Is it not true? Probably is not certainty?

 

[Loudmouth]

What are the scientific possibilities of this happening?

1 in 1, because it happened. You are committing the sharpshooter fallacy.

Texas sharpshooter fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For a Christian it's God. And his creation story says:

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be FOR SIGNS,
and for seasons, and for days, and years: (Genesis 1:14 KJV)

And yet no one predicted that this would happen beforehand. So much for prophecies.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

1 in 1, because it happened. You are committing the sharpshooter fallacy.

Texas sharpshooter fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And yet no one predicted that this would happen beforehand. So much for prophecies.

Are you for real? Why because it would be evidence against any pattern that we see in DNA right? Yet how do you know scientific journals are accurate because it can be repeated. Well guess what a repeat is coming.

 

[bhsmte]

I don't need an inquisition ... okay?

AV,

You make claims as you do, you better be sure you need to justify the same. If you aren't willing to, than be man enough not to make them.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

http://www.bloodmoonprophecy.com/?gclid=CO2mydS6sLkCFexDMgodQjQAyQ

And

http://www.pray4zion.org/TheComingBloodMoons.html

 

[createdtoworship]

I don't mind all that stuff you just typed here, but when scientists insist that that baby [whomever] is carrying is a "fetus" and not a "child," I get perturbed.

When scientists want the 10 Commandments off of our public land because someone might get saved passing (or going into) the courthouse, I get perturbed.

When scientists want "Merry Christmas" plutoed to "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons Greetings" because someone might get saved, I get perturbed.

When scientists want IN GOD WE TRUST and UNDER GOD removed, because someone might mistake us for a Christian nation, I get perturbed.

I was wondering when they would go after the crosses in federal cemetaries, claiming separation. Arlington would get a face lift thats for sure.

 

[createdtoworship]

In which scientific study did the scientists observe a supernatural deity coming down from the sky and creating life?

red herring #1

strawman #2

 

[createdtoworship]

The point of the experiment was never to produce life. Read about it from a source that isn't a shill for ID.

The Miller/Urey Experiment

Miller–Urey experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

what are earth are they trying to do here, electrifying water vapor and simulating an early earth atmosphere, if not trying to create something living? Roasting marshmallows? seriously, what was their motive? Everything I read on it (even non ICR material ) makes it sound like they were simulating abiogenesis (early earth atmosphere). I think you are wrong here.

 

[createdtoworship]

Nothing in the link you provided talks about life getting started because of electricity.

NOTHING.

are you retracting this comment yet?

 

[Subduction Zone]

what are earth are they trying to do here, electrifying water vapor and simulating an early earth atmosphere, if not trying to create something living? Roasting marshmallows? seriously, what was their motive? Everything I read on it (even non ICR material ) makes it sound like they were simulating abiogenesis (early earth atmosphere). I think you are wrong here.

Then you have no clue.

What you just claimed is similar to saying a Boeing 747 could not fly since the Wright Brothers experimented with a wind up plane that barely flew.