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.
so you agree that creationism is science because we can falsify it? and can you give me the calculation for why it will be impossible to change a cat into a dog in a single step?
Why should we give you a calculation for something we think is impossible?so you agree that creationism is science because we can falsify it? and can you give me the calculation for why it will be impossible to change a cat into a dog in a single step?
In the work of many scientists 200 years ago and more. Christian scientists, many of them clergymen, set out to test their newly developed science of systematic geology by finding evidence of the Flood. There wasn't any. The evidence they found instead convinced them, despite their religious preconceptions, that the Earth was ancient.where?
so you agree that creationism is science because we can falsify it?
and can you give me the calculation for why it will be impossible to change a cat into a dog in a single step?
Any truth supports truth. It may perhaps not be taken to do so, but it does.The idea of a "first cause" implies classical causality. If the origin of the universe involves a situation where such causality doesn't apply, then the very idea of the universe requiring a cause becomes moot.
The idea of using classical physics to support the idea of a supernatural creator of the entire universe seems a bit trite.
But that is classical causality. The "essence" you speak of is Telos, Aristotle's fourth cause.Any truth supports truth. It may perhaps not be taken to do so, but it does.
As for classical causality, that is simple cause and effect, but when the cause is First Cause, Deism doesn't work, frankly. It is simply silly, as though to the being that invented time, cause and effect, logic, and all other principle and fact, it makes any difference whether he sets it in order to accomplish every detail that has come to pass, or "inhabits" the very essence that keeps the universe running exactly as planned, is really any different!
Justify what to themselves? They're trying to figure out abiogenesis as best they can, though we all know they haven't done it yet. You go on as if it was some kind of secret.There are no scientifically valid theories for origination. In fact, science tells us that the origination of anything from nothing is impossible. Either you believe through faith that God has done the impossible, or you believe in something which is nonsense at its core. Evolution proponents contend that their theory begins on the second rung of the ladder; that the first doesn't matter. That's how they justify it to themselves.
As for classical causality, that is simple cause and effect, but when the cause is First Cause, Deism doesn't work, frankly.
I suppose you DO realize, that classical physics is how they have gotten to where they are now? Cause and effect is basic, for approaching the place of questioning where cause and effect may not apply?I'm not talking about Deism. I'm talking about the idea that causality may not even apply to something like the origin of our universe, since classical physics no longer applies.
A "first cause" argument is just applying classical physics where it may not apply.
You are playing with words, I think. Aristotle's first cause is not what I am referring to by First Cause. The essence I speak of is endemic to what I call First Cause, and only from or produced by First Cause.But that is classical causality. The "essence" you speak of is Telos, Aristotle's fourth cause.
scientists prove it but you also need to watch out for theories that are not facts.
I believe science is here to show us how God works
does anyone know how old the earth is?
if you think the earth is only as old as the creation of adam and eve then let me ask you a question. gen 1:1 states that God created the heavens and the earth. gen 1:2 states the the earth was a wasteland, formless, void, and ect. the bible tells us that everything God does is good. how can a world that is formless and void be good? so now we need to find out what happened between gen 1:1 and 1:2. ez talks of satan being casted out of heaven and corrupting the world. satan was cast out of heaven before adam and eve were created so what civilization was satan cast out into? could it be possible that there was life on earth before adam and eve. if so how long were they around before they were wiped out. also if you check the wording of the creation making the bible talks about in gen you will find that some of the words used refer to recreate and not create from scratch. this can support that theory that there was an earlier civilization than adam and eve. this does not mean that what I said is 100% certain but only that it is possible. each and every person according to scripture is supposed to be able to have a view and be able to scripturally have a stance that they can stand upon. this is so everyone's belief will be solid and not be persuaded by every idea that comes along. if you can scripturally support you ideas/beliefs with at least 2-3 scriptures as support then you have a basis to start discussing your ideas as being scripturally sound. maybe not correct but that is why we should be here discussing our ideas to see if they stand up to others beliefs. sometimes I see others who believe different from me but both of us have scriptures that support our claims so we just agree to disagree and go on. it takes a lot of maturity to walk away from a discussion that neither can win.
God bless
TIn fact, science tells us that the origination of anything from nothing is impossible.
Either you believe through faith that God has done the impossible, or you believe in something which is nonsense at its core.
Evolution proponents contend that their theory begins on the second rung of the ladder; that the first doesn't matter
That's how they justify it to themselves.
When data contradicts their beliefs, they go with their beliefs and call the data wrong.
if so why you said that it cant happen if evolution is true? ("such a thing can't happen if evolution is accurate").That's math I can't even do.
I am curious if any Christians believe that evolution occurs (take careful note of the phrase, "evolution occurs" it means if it has happened or will happen, regardless of whether or not humans evolved from other primates). Please take the time to answer, thanks for any responses.
(For full disclosure I am atheist)
** Convenient definition of evolution for those unsure: Evolution is changes in a life form due to mutations in their genetic code, leading to the success or failure (or neither) of the mutation, leading to the mutated creature having more success mating, therefore passing on the improved gene or no success, leading to the gene not being passed on. Or to put it simply, changes in a life form over time. **
There are the terms micro evolution and macro evolution.
Micro evolution changes within their own kind, ie different kinds of cats, dogs etc. and we see this
Macro evolution - not after their kind ... we do not see, ie cats and dogs don't cross breed etc.
Note: Biblically micro evolution is supported and accepted, macro evolution is not.