Does Science Agree With the Bible?

[ScottA]

Then your claims are indistinguishable from something that is made up and doesn't exist.

But don't you see.....that we cannot even begin to have a fruitful discussion until you understand that you are doing the same thing?

Your position is also indistinguishable from something made up and doesn't exist - the world, your world was "created" out of "nothing." What do you think we have been trying to tell you?!

If...IF...you can offer a level playing field, where everything is not just on your terms...then, and only then can we have a fruitful discussion.

 

[HitchSlap]

And, that, is your hangup.

Are you seriously suggesting that when adults speak to each other, they should conduct themselves as children, or it's a "hang up?"

If so, your delusion is deeper than previous thought.

 

[AV1611VET]

The simple fact is that Tyre has always existed.

Suit yourself.

If you want to believe that, you can.

Just don't expect me to.

 

[ScottA]

Are you seriously suggesting that when adults speak to each other, they should conduct themselves as children, or it's a "hang up?"

If so, your delusion is deeper than previous thought.

I [seriously] mean, that you will have to get off your high horse.

 

[Loudmouth]

But don't you see.....that we cannot even begin to have a fruitful discussion until you understand that you are doing the same thing?

What positive claim have I made which wasn't backed by objective evidence?

Your position is also indistinguishable from something made up and doesn't exist

- the world, your world was "created" out of "nothing." What do you think we have been trying to tell you?!

That isn't my position. Want to try again?

If...IF...you can offer a level playing field, where everything is not just on your terms...then, and only then can we have a fruitful discussion.

The playing field is level. Everyone needs to present objective and verifiable evidence.

 

[HitchSlap]

I [seriously] mean, that you will have to get off your high horse.

Ok Don Quixote, have fun with those windmills.

 

[Michael]

I [seriously] mean, that you will have to get off your high horse.

That statement works both ways Scott. How high is your horse?

Your position is basically that your personal interpretation of the Bible is "infallible", your knowledge of science comes from from the presence of the Holy Spirit, and anyone that disagrees with you isn't of God. Furthermore you have no desire to look outside of yourself for any answers whatsoever.

That's a pretty high horse that you and your personal interpretation of one book are sitting on, especially since most "Christians" in the world disagree with your personal interpretation of that single book, they all have access to the Holy Spirit, and science also disagrees with your literal interpretation.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I am asking for the evidence that the claims made in the Bible are true. Simply repeating the claims is not evidence.

What do you want evidence for? It looks like you do not even understand the claim. So your refuting your own misconceptions. That is why the Bible says we need to: "rightly divid the word of truth."

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

 

[Loudmouth]

What do you want evidence for?

That the character named Noah in Genesis spread the technology of farming, as you claimed.

 

[ScottA]

What positive claim have I made which wasn't backed by objective evidence?



That isn't my position. Want to try again?



The playing field is level. Everyone needs to present objective and verifiable evidence.

Well, that answers my question...you obviously don't see it.

1. Every claim you have ever made has never been objective...meaning, including both sides: the empirical AND the spiritual.
2. Exactly. It is not your position. But in order to have a discussion, BOTH must be addressed. Otherwise you'r just preaching.
3. No, the playing field is not level, unless you open it up to our side, our [spiritual] evidence. But verifying the information comes later. First, you need to allow equal participation. However, the other problem here, is I/we are qualified to verify your evidence, but you are not qualified to verify ours, which places you at a disadvantage, that you don't even recognize in your partiality.

 

[Davian]

I [seriously] mean, that you will have to get off your high horse.

 

[Loudmouth]

Well, that answers my question...you obviously don't see it.

1. Every claim you have ever made has never been objective...meaning, including both sides: the empirical AND the spiritual.

Bare assertion.

1. Exactly. It is not your position. But in order to have a discussion, BOTH must be addressed. Otherwise you'r just preaching.

That makes zero sense. Why would we need to address a position I don't hold?

1. No, the playing field is not level, unless you open it up to our side, our [spiritual] evidence.

Show how your spiritual evidence can be distinguished from something that doesn't exist or is made up.

 

[ScottA]

That statement works both ways Scott. How high is your horse?

Your position is basically that your personal interpretation of the Bible is "infallible", your knowledge of science comes from from the presence of the Holy Spirit, and anyone that disagrees with you isn't of God. Furthermore you have no desire to look outside of yourself for any answers whatsoever.

That's a pretty high horse that you and your personal interpretation of one book are sitting on, especially since most "Christians" in the world disagree with your personal interpretation of that single book, they all have access to the Holy Spirit, and science also disagrees with your literal interpretation.

My position was abased, but now is risen. But I am not in the business of interpretation, nor am I speaking of my own position. It is not I who speaks, but the Holy Spirit. Mark 13:11 And on the contrary, I do not look to myself. You yourself may not do likewise, but if you were of Christ, you would not criticize me for what is written.

 

[ScottA]

Bare assertion.

That makes zero sense. Why would we need to address a position I don't hold?

Show how your spiritual evidence can be distinguished from something that doesn't exist or is made up.

1. Yes, my assertion is bare to your position, and yours is to mine. Those are the terms. Can you handle it?
2. If you mean to come to the table, you must allow the same of others. Otherwise you remain alone.
3. As I said, my evidence, AND your evidence, cannot be distinguished by the other. I have told you, just as it has been written for thousands of years, that your position is "made up", and you have told me that my position is the same. When will you be up to those terms?

 

[HitchSlap]

1. Yes, my assertion is bare to your position, and yours is to mine. Those are the terms. Can you handle it?
2. If you mean to come to the table, you must allow the same of others. Otherwise you remain alone.
3. As I said, my evidence, AND your evidence, cannot be distinguished by the other. I have told you, just as it has been written for thousands of years, that your position is "made up", and you have told me that my position is the same. When will you be up to those terms?

There is but one table, that of reasoned evidence. Not only do you not bring any, you even forgot the chair.

 

[ScottA]

There is but one table, that of reasoned evidence. Not only do you not bring any, you even forgot the chair.

I not only have come, I have even attempted to reason in your foreign tongue. But you have yet to come to the table at all. If you had, you would have left your own place, but you have not. You would also have cared about and been respectful of my way, but you have not. Nor did you even know.

 

[HitchSlap]

I not only have come, I have even attempted to reason in your foreign tongue. But you have yet to come to the table at all. If you had, you would have left your own place, but you have not. You would also have cared about and been respectful of my way, but you have not. Nor did you even know.

Jesus?? That you?

 

[Michael]

My position was abased, but now is risen. But I am not in the business of interpretation, nor am I speaking of my own position. It is not I who speaks, but the Holy Spirit. Mark 13:11 And on the contrary, I do not look to myself. You yourself may not do likewise, but if you were of Christ, you would not criticize me for what is written.

I criticize you for putting words in the mouth of the Holy Spirit which it never actually uttered!

28Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: 30Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.

Do you imagine that you're the only "Christian" with access to the Holy Spirit? Why are you in the minority as it relates to your literal interpretation of Genesis?

 

[ScottA]

Jesus?? That you?

‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’ Matthew 25:40

 

[ScottA]

I criticize you for putting words in the mouth of the Holy Spirit which it never actually uttered!



Do you imagine that you're the only "Christian" with access to the Holy Spirit? Why are you in the minority as it relates to your literal interpretation of Genesis?

1. You tread on dangerous ground.
2. For the same reason, Israel has been held in blindness. Will you also call them accursed?