Common Design and Phylogenies

[pitabread]

It's kind of like atheistic gravity, or atheistic thermodynamics. It is the idea that science looks for natural processes to explain natural phenomenon. Most of us just call it science, but creationists have it in their mind that all scientists are atheists, hence the tag of "atheistic science".

Oh, I know, it's a rhetorical question. I just can't help drawing attention to the absurdity of it.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What reasonable possible observation would show your idea to be wrong?

What "idea" are you talking about?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What "idea" are you talking about?

What? You can't even follow your own claims? Your claim of theological evolution? If you can't test it all that you have is an ad hoc explanation at best and they are worthless in the real world.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What? You can't even follow your own claims? Your claim of theological evolution? If you can't test it all that you have is an ad hoc explanation at best and they are worthless in the real world.

Not everything in the Bible can be tested. For me enough of the Bible can be tested so that I accept all of the Bible as true. Because nothing in the Bible has ever been falsified.

 

[bhsmte]

More of the same folks.

 

[pitabread]

Not everything in the Bible can be tested. For me enough of the Bible can be tested so that I accept all of the Bible as true. Because nothing in the Bible has ever been falsified.

That seems like weak reasoning to me. For example, if I had a novel that made reference to real events and I could prove those events were real, does that mean the rest of the book is also true? Just because I didn't disprove it?

 

[bhsmte]

That seems like weak reasoning to me. For example, if I had a novel that made reference to real events and I could prove those events were real, does that mean the rest of the book is also true? Just because I didn't disprove it?

Of course not. But for those looking to cling to anything to provide comfort for their personal beliefs, that lack evidence, this type of thinking comes in handy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not everything in the Bible can be tested. For me enough of the Bible can be tested so that I accept all of the Bible as true. Because nothing in the Bible has ever been falsified.

That is not correct, but management here gets a bit ticked off when people do so. Of course a lot depends upon ones interpretation of the Bible. It is easy to show that there never was a worldwide flood, or that there were ever just two people. Yet I have heard many Christians explain those stories as being allegory so in that sense the Bible has not be shown to be wrong. One can always reinterpret the Bible after the fact it seems.

 

[AV1611VET]

It is easy to show that there never was a worldwide flood, or that there were ever just two people.

It's easy to show that we never went to the moon either; but looks can be deceiving.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's easy to show that we never went to the moon either; but looks can be deceiving.

As usual you are wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

As usual you are wrong.

Really?

You think it's hard to do?

Then if it's so hard, why do people work hard to stage those photos, then claim the moon landings where hoaxed?

 

[joshua 1 9]

It is easy to show that there never was a worldwide flood

Exactly, as I have said over and over again. Science shows us when we do not get it right. Because Science always backs up the Bible and shows us the way to proper understanding of the Bible. Noah's flood was a local flood. Only Noah's flood was a shadow and a type of the world wide flood that took place at the time of Pangea when the world began to drift apart. What we use to call continental drift but we now call plate tectonics.

 

[joshua 1 9]

That seems like weak reasoning to me. For example, if I had a novel that made reference to real events and I could prove those events were real, does that mean the rest of the book is also true? Just because I didn't disprove it?

The point is that the Bible is to advanced for us and Science is not mature enough to handle all there is in the word of God. We still have another 1,000 years to go and we will be making a lot of advances in the next 1,000 years and all of that is already in the Bible waiting for us to discover what God has for us to learn and understand.

 

[bhsmte]

The point is that the Bible is to advanced for us and Science is not mature enough to handle all there is in the word of God. We still have another 1,000 years to go and we will be making a lot of advances in the next 1,000 years and all of that is already in the Bible waiting for us to discover what God has for us to learn and understand.

LOL. You claim the bible is too advanced but yet state, science shows the bible is 100% true. Just another contradiction you have provided for us.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Then if it's so hard, why do people work hard to stage those photos, then claim the moon landings where hoaxed?

You do not trust myth busters on this one? They claim the Laser Light Reflectors on the moon are real.

 

[joshua 1 9]

LOL. You claim the bible is too advanced but yet state, science shows the bible is 100% true. Just another contradiction you have provided for us.

I can not say for sure the Bible is 100% because some corruption could have found it's way in. After all the Bible was hand copied for thousands of years. Other than man made error the Bible is 100% accurate and true. The problem is with man's understanding and interpretation. After all the Bible was written 3500 years ago and never once have we need an update or a revision. The Bible is just as accurate and true today as the Bible was when Moses gave us the Pentateuch or Torah. Science still does not fully understand what Moses knew 3500 years ago.

Kabbalah tells us that there is a mathematical precision to the Bible. That is why the Bible can be so accurate and true. This is the standard we use to determine what true is. Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone. You should study Kabbalah and you would see how much people are missing out on their understanding of the Word of God.

People repeated try to falsify the Bible and they always fail. No one has ever been able to show that the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You can see to prove the Bible is true or you can seek to falsify the Bible. Either way everyone comes up with the same conclusion that the Bible is accurate and true.

Science books go through constant revision. The college professors demand that the students get up to date revisions. Usually a new revision comes out when a whole chapter needs to be updated and revised. The Bible never needs to be updated or revised. We only need to revise our interpretation and our understanding as new information becomes available.

 

[bhsmte]

I can not say for sure the Bible is 100% because some corruption could have found it's way in. After all the Bible was hand copied for thousands of years. Other than man made error the Bible is 100% accurate and true. The problem is with man's understanding and interpretation. After all the Bible was written 3500 years ago and never once have we need an update or a revision. The Bible is just as accurate and true today as the Bible was when Moses gave us the Pentateuch or Torah. Science still does not fully understand what Moses knew 3500 years ago.

Kabbalah tells us that there is a mathematical precision to the Bible. That is why the Bible can be so accurate and true. This is the standard we use to determine what true is. Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone. You should study Kabbalah and you would see how much people are missing out on their understanding of the Word of God.

People repeated try to falsify the Bible and they always fail. No one has ever been able to show that the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You can see to prove the Bible is true or you can seek to falsify the Bible. Either way everyone comes up with the same conclusion that the Bible is accurate and true.

Science books go through constant revision. The college professors demand that the students get up to date revisions. Usually a new revision comes out when a whole chapter needs to be updated and revised. The Bible never needs to be updated or revised. We only need to revise our interpretation and our understanding as new information becomes available.

Not what you have stated in the past.

 

[AV1611VET]

You do not trust myth busters on this one? They claim the Laser Light Reflectors on the moon are real.

I know the moon landings were real, I'm just saying it's easy to say otherwise -- just like it's easy to say the Flood was local.

 

[bhsmte]

I know the moon landings were real, I'm just saying it's easy to say otherwise -- just like it's easy to say the Flood was local.

How did you determine the moon landings were real?

 

[pitabread]

After all the Bible was written 3500 years ago and never once have we need an update or a revision.

What? You do know that a lot of the texts in the Bible were written a lot later than 3500 years ago right? And that the Bible itself as a collection of written works has been largely determined by various religious councils over the years, has been subject to change, and tends to vary depending on one's particular religious belief.

Not to mention all the translations the Bible has gone through.

The idea that the Bible is a static, unchanging document is quite contrary to its history.