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.
Absolutely the most idiotic argument ever. We don't need to know the origin of anything to observe what we observe.
Intelligent people doe not use fetal development to prove evolution. They know that the fetus, the baby and the subsequent adult have the same DNA, so they know that argument is a vacuous lie.
It refutes the claim, "Countless people have faith, yet so few apparently experience miracles."
God always answers prayer. He doesn't always say Yes.
How could it? Such a tree no longer exists, and such knowledge was not contained in the fruit. The knowledge was a consequence of disobediance, and the consequence of that knowledge was that man inherited a death sentance as well as a judgment on his choices of good or evil.
"A bit childish, really' - Ford Prefect in Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide.So Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil prior to consuming the fruit (their act of disobedience)? If they had no knowledge of good and evil prior to that moment, how could they have ever known that their disobedience was an act of evil? It sounds like God set them up to fail, placing the forbidden fruit within their reach and never imparting them with the knowledge they needed to tell right from wrong. In fact, the very act of acquiring that knowledge was forbidden to them, for reasons that remain obscure.
A single miracle disproves a purely natural world. If any miracle ever happened, then the naturalist is proven to be living in a dream world, not reality.No, it supports that point. 35% claim to have experienced a miracle, yet the remainder haven't. I'm being generous here in assuming that the 35% all shared the same concept of 'miracle' and that they all did genuinely experience a miracle. That still leaves the majority of the faithful unrewarded.
They were specifically told that by God. If God told the the difference between good and evil, they didn't have to know it themselves.So Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil prior to consuming the fruit (their act of disobedience)? If they had no knowledge of good and evil prior to that moment, how could they have ever known that their disobedience was an act of evil?
Yes. I would.Question: If you worked in a bookstore and was told to place the Bible in any section other than non-fiction, would you?
Over the 99% of the Saudis believe in Islam. Does that prove that islam is correect? No. Neither your figure.Actually, 80% of Americans believe in miracles,
Which just show that they want miracles to be true. A person who believes in New age will claim to be healeds by his gem stones or chakras. A christian will say it's a miracle from god, etc. It's easy to claim. It's harder to substantiate.and 35% claim to have experienced them. 25% say that they've been cured from an illness by prayer, and that number goes up with people who are more religious.
source
Well put, and something with which I agree.
The physicists/engineers I know are not concerned with biological evolution; cosmic evolution is, of course, a different story. But, most physicists tend to treat cosmic evolution as something fundamentally different - usually stopping right before "primordial soup." I am in a minority of scientists that do not favor cosmic or biological evolution.
For me, there are entropic problems with biological evolution. Actually, I have the same problems with cosmic evolution, and cosmic evolution gets complicated when you get into chromodynamics (my area of study.) This is one reason why Fermilab, and the LHC are conducting tests.
But, with all of that said, you will still get looks of horrific disdain if you EVER profess your doubt about [cosmic or biological] evolution in the scientific community, much like confessing doubt about the deity of Christ in a church.
Neither do I. I accept evolution as a scientific theory based on evidence.
A single miracle disproves a purely natural world. If any miracle ever happened, then the naturalist is proven to be living in a dream world, not reality.
They were specifically told that by God. If God told the the difference between good and evil, they didn't have to know it themselves.
I am not really sure, as the book is a critical part of it, but it is not all (Darwin didn't know anything about genetics). So I think in this case your "in spite of" versus "with respect to" is a false dichotomy.
A single miracle disproves a purely natural world. If any miracle ever happened, then the naturalist is proven to be living in a dream world, not reality.
They were specifically told that by God. If God told the the difference between good and evil, they didn't have to know it themselves.
Oh it goes right up there with Martin Luther's , "On the Jews and their lies"With respect to Darwin's Preservation of Favoured Races, or in spite of it?
Surely you realize that scientist do not have all the answers.Nature either operates as Darwin specified, or she doesn't.
Which is it?
There are a number of competing theories all based on evidence that point to
different theories on why and how things change. Science does not do biological
experiments using time machines to recreate past conditions.
So just saying you accept all theories of change is....well...another religion.
As is accepting all science as Holy ground.
Confusion between assertion and reality.Words of wisdon.
Leaning towards one's own understanding to know right from wrong, and good from evil leads to Wisdom from Below. James 3:15
Confusion between assertion and reality.
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?