Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Because Christians do not spend time working on Creation Science to develop it they way they should. The theory of Evolution is a lot more developed because so many people spend time on developing it. That and they try to include things like Genetics as a part of evolution, when Genetics has nothing to do with it. Darwin associated with the theory of evolution, and Mendal did the work on genetics. Darwin never even bothered to read Mendals book.
But creationists haven't found any evidence, which is why scientists tend to say that there is no evidence for creationism.
TE's do not believe in a literal reading of the Bible. My point was personal though, so I wasn't generalizing.
Creationism is the process in Which God created. Genesis 1 is the narrative for that process.
That would be an assumption, right?
That doesn't matter. What does matter is that the book you hold to be the truths of God include these ancient misconceptions.
My point, as before, is that people who looked to the Bible for ultimate truth proclaimed that they had ultimate truth and acted upon that truth to punish others for what appeared to be "heresy". But we today know that the Bible is wrong and those punished were right. Yet many still refuse to see that the Bible contains many claims which are simply untrue. And if those which can be applied to physical testing are untrue, why are we to be compelled to believe those claims which are untestable by physical means to be any more accurate?
Even when that persecution comes from those proclaiming the Bible to be ultimate truth. Obviously, it is not yet people still insist that it is, even when they are willing to admit that persecution has come from adherence to biblical scripture.
Around here, I'm often persecuted for speaking out about my beliefs. And that persecution comes from those who believe as did the persecutors of Giordano and Galileo, who refuse to accept the evidence against that which they desire to believe.
No. The unbeliever doesn't believe that it was created because that's not what the evidence says. The only thing that is necessary is that the unbeliever believes that any creator will not be a deceiver. Thus it is enough to simply assume that if there is a creator, then that creator would leave evidence of creation.
From what we see on this forum Christians tend to believe in miracles as events which occur despite being well outside of the laws and processes of the known universe. They believe in miracles, rising from death, spirits and many other events which are strictly contradictory to the physical laws.
I see no evidence that it was created and the logic in reasoning that it was not created, certainly not by an all-knowing, sentient being, which itself, must have either been created or ever-existing. When have you ever seen anything created? Transformation is not the same as creation. I would suggest that you have never witnessed an act of creation, never been privy to a credible documentation of creation and yet you suggest that unbelievers are incorrect in reasoning that acts of creation do not, and have not, occurred.
Where is the reason in assuming that alongside nothingness, existed a sentience of complete knowledge and total power which then brought everything aside from itself into being? Where is your evidence of creation? Where is the evidence of this proposed being? How many beings of similar properties have been proposed by multitudes of cultures throughout the years only to have been eventually dismissed and forgotten? What you assert to be reason seems very much to be the absence of reason as viewed from a position of observer of reality.
This is not true. Science is the study of reality. All of known reality is subject to science because there is evidence. That for which there exists no evidence can therefore be reasoned to be other than real.
Without cohesive and uniform properties it is unlikely that any portion of reality could continue to exist. If God created the world, it would seem it was created with this concept well defined. Yet it is the belief in this God which leads people to believe that events occur which are outside of this necessary construct and property of reality. It is, in fact, the very book most believers attribute to this God which proclaims events which violate these laws and properties.
But surely you must recognize that science does not subscribe to creationism, has been offered zero credible evidence of creationism, and has sufficient evidence to be compelling of mechanisms which would account for that for which creationism claims credit. Creationism lacks credible evidence and without credible evidence, no matter how much one might wish to subscribe to both science and Christianity, they will find the two to be incompatible on any level ruled by rationality and objectivity.
Which again is contrary to the evidence. God is said to be metaphysical; people are physical. God is said to be incapable of sin; humans are said to be incapable of complete avoidance of sin. God is said to be perfect; humans are certainly far from any claim of perfection. Where is it, exactly, that humans and God are supposed to offer a similar image?
Less so, it would seem. The conclusions of science are based in evidence. The conclusions of the Christian worldview are based in blind belief and adherence to an ancient book which demonstrates all the expected properties and traits of a book of ancient tales, cultural traditions and traditional beliefs.
Steelerbred said:
