- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,587
- 52,504
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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.
Nope.This forum should be renamed Creation & Evolution & Make Up Stories forum.
Then why would their expertise in one field mean that they must be correct in another field?I don't recall saying that?
a relationship with GOD isn't a field of Study, It's a relationship more intimate than the one a married couple might haveThen why would their expertise in one field mean that they must be correct in another field?
I know an electrician who is very skilled at being an electrician, but that doesn't mean he has any skill in non-electrical fields.
Then why did you give me the whole, "Scientists are believers, and they are smarter than you" argument?a relationship with GOD isn't a field of Study, It's a relationship more intimate than the one a married couple might have
That's simply to illustrate the fact that science will never be able to provide whatever facts you keep seeking for GOD, Kylie.Then why did you give me the whole, "Scientists are believers, and they are smarter than you" argument?
So God is unfalsifiable.That's simply to illustrate the fact that science will never be able to provide whatever facts you keep seeking for GOD, Kylie.
These are the Last days, Kylie.
Seek him before it's too late.
I'm not an atheist.What changes of the earth "directly" and "over time" are you talking of? It's interesting how people will dispute the bible because no one living now was "there", despite there being historical evidence, but they won't dispute a theory of an old earth even though they themselves "weren't there". As far as I see it, the bible was never meant to prove anything. It's simply a historical narrative of the relationship between God and man. All through it we see behavioural patterns and the consequences of sin (following our human will instead of Gods will).
But none-the-less, people reject it in favour of observational science and try to get Chris to prove that their God is real based on a criteria that could never prove God exists through a method such as theirs. Even without the concept of God to begin with, they couldn't figure out the origin of the universe anyway, so why not accept that they just don't know? Christians don't have to "prove" anything to atheists as they understand supernatural things and are not limited to thinking only of the physical realm of existence as absolute.
You'd rather take a risk on Hell, Kylie?So God is unfalsifiable.
There's no reason to accept anything if it is unfalsifiable.
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."I'm not an atheist.
In my geological experience here in the Pacific North West, it's very clear that the earth is very old. There are way too many examples to pull from. I kind of think that you would have to talk to the Earth and ask why she disputes the Bible narrative of a young earth.
Do you understand what that sounds like to me?You'd rather take a risk on Hell, Kylie?
That's a view of someone who DOESN'T believe in GODDo you understand what that sounds like to me?
It's like if I assured you that Hinduism was correct, and when you said you didn't believe me, I said, "Are you willing to take a risk on Naraka?"
Pascal's Wager is a very weak argument.
I consider something to be valid evidence if:
- It is not based on a logical fallacy
- It can be tested and has withstood that testing.
With regards to the Kalam cosmological argument, it is built on an assumption (that whatever begins to exist must have a cause) when this is just an argument from incredulity. "I can't comprehend how something could begin to exist without having a cause, therefore it doesn't happen." In any case, this claim really only can be said to apply in cases where our current laws of nature apply, and there's no evidence that this was the case at the Big Bang. In fact, what we understand of quantum level events indicates that our current laws of nature break down at that kind of scale. The argument also assumes that the universe began to exist, when the only thing we know is that it began to exist in its current form. The universe could have existed in some different state prior to the Big Bang (in whatever sense the word "prior" can be said to apply), and so the argument may not even need to apply. So, the Kalam cosmological argument fails on point one. It also fails on point two, since it is inherently untestable.
Ah, but I don't claim there is no God. There could well be. And I challenge you to find any point where I have said, "I claim that God does not exist."
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me.That's the view of someone who DOESN'T believe in BRAHMA.
Explain how.
I'm talking about the geology of the Earth. For instance, one of the geological features here in the Northwest are the basalt flows that in some places are 3 miles deep. And in others that basalt flowed for 300 miles. And in others areas there are over 300 layers. All of that basalt erupted during a million year span 16 million years ago."For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."
all of that's according to worldly knowledge,I'm talking about the geology of the Earth. For instance, one of the geological features here in the Northwest are the basalt flows that in some places are 3 miles deep. And in others that basalt flowed for 300 miles. And in others areas there are over 300 layers. All of that basalt erupted during a million year span 16 million years ago.
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?