how is the idea of evolution anymore illogical than 1 single person creating everything, and since then, no-one has seen this being again. matter of fact, no-one has seen this being ever.
Upvote
0
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.
No. Nobody is throwing any logic conclusion out. All logic conclusions demonstrate the wisdom of God. This includes all evidences presented by paleontology. The only thing wrong with paleontology is its "interpretation" which is, sometimes, not logical. One such example is the idea of evolution.
No. Nobody is throwing any logic conclusion out.
All logic conclusions demonstrate the wisdom of God.
This includes all evidences presented by paleontology. The only thing wrong with paleontology is its "interpretation" which is, sometimes, not logical. One such example is the idea of evolution.
But what the Bible says are much superior than any logic conclusions
(those seemingly illogical part. Noticed that the Bible never says the evaluational origin of human being).
Of course, some Bible verses verify many logic conclusions as we know them.
Not at all. I am talking about science in the Bible, not faith in the Bible.
If I illustrated:
The Bible says this and this.
Now the current science says that and that.
And "this" is obviously related to "that".
So, what said in the Bible is scientific.
Do you buy the argument?
No. Not a single one of these things, that is in any way interesting, was found in the Bible before it was found through the process of science. They're always post-hoc reinterpretations.Not at all. I am talking about science in the Bible, not faith in the Bible.
If I illustrated:
The Bible says this and this.
Now the current science says that and that.
And "this" is obviously related to "that".
So, what said in the Bible is scientific.
Do you buy the argument?
Oh good grief. Haven't you been torn up enough with that?
"For AV so loved the sound of his own voice that he gave his only begotten idea -- again and again and again..." -- Poe 3:16
No. It is not. Both are illogical.how is the idea of evolution anymore illogical than 1 single person creating everything, and since then, no-one has seen this being again. matter of fact, no-one has seen this being ever.
LOL --- coming from someone who has his own law named after him, I'd say that sounds --- shall we say, ironic?
The only difference though, is that I showed your law to be an affront to you guys - not us.
Quote:
Like what? I bet there isn't one.Of course, some Bible verses verify many logic conclusions as we know them.
Methods lead to a conclusion (answer or not). We are talking about conclusions. Would that be science or scientific?No.
Science is a method, not an answer.
I suppose, in the spirit of your "Apple Challenge" you neither have nor want to show any evidence to support this asinine claim.
In science, reinterpret old conclusions is a very common and valuable process. Why can't it apply to Biblical descriptions?No. Not a single one of these things, that is in any way interesting, was found in the Bible before it was found through the process of science. They're always post-hoc reinterpretations.
Um --- first of all --- my challenge is for you to show it --- not me.
And second of all, due to repeated requests, I actually did answer my own challenge with --- dare it say it --- physical evidence. And more than once.
You must have been absent those days.
Sometimes, yes. But good theories also make predictions of the outcomes of future experiments. Why is it that this seems to be impossible when talking about the Bible's "predictions"?In science, reinterpret old conclusions is a very common and valuable process. Why can't it apply to Biblical descriptions?
Nope. Either a prediction comes out to be true or it doesn't. Any "reinterpretation" is an indication that the prediction was wrong, for one reason or another.Also, what is the test of any "prediction"? Is the evaluation of any prediction also reinterpretation?
Um --- first of all --- my challenge is for you to show it --- not me.
And second of all, due to repeated requests, I actually did answer my own challenge with --- dare it say it --- physical evidence. And more than once.
You must have been absent those days.
In science, reinterpret old conclusions is a very common and valuable process.
Also, what is the test of any "prediction"? Is the evaluation of any prediction also reinterpretation?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?