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.
That works fine as well. Anything you like, as long as the Lord is not in red undies.
While statistics demonstrate that believers are less intelligent than non-believers, there is every reason to conclude that creationists are a still less intelligent subset of believers. However, we need not make that conclusion to recognize that, creationists being a subset of believers and not of non-believers, the original results will still apply to them.
So no, it's not simply my opinion.
Is still your opinion since you are yet to present evidence to quantify it.
If it is tightly woven, please tell us how does the supernatural interact with/affect engineering?
They leave Southampton, travel across the Atlantic and land at Plymouth.
What are the chances of that?
It reminds me of William the Bastard fighting King Harold at a place called, would you believe, Battle.
Not to mention the Duke of Wellington fighting Napolean at a village in the middle of nowhere, which just happened to be named after his favourite railway station.
My daughter just reminded me of another one. Tobias Furneaux sailed right round the world, only to land at the Furneaux Islands.
And they say there is no God.
I think my definition is exactly right on with regard to those areas that you dont apply any intellectual standards. Belief in the supernatural, and emotion as a basis for faith being good examples. How do you apply intellectual standards to the study of something that cant be cetected or in any way shown to exist? (not meaning faith, whatever that is exactly, it does seem to exist)
And again, its not 'immediate" or "automatic" rejection of the supernatural!!!!! It is a what, was it you said, judicial weighing of evidence? Zero evidence means I dont believe it till I see evidence!
I suppose you will only cite the effects of 'The Fall', but nature provides some pretty horrific examples of creation in the form of parasites, prey animals eaten alive by predators, natural poisons which cause the eater to die in agony, and so on.
I've always thought it far easier to consider the possibility of a benevolent God if you admit to evolution being the method of creation. Lets the deity off the hook for a lot of dismal realities.
and Lou Gehrig! Look what happened to him!
Who says there is no evidence? I see plenty of evidence for a creator in nature.
I disagree with this --- in fact --- I hold both views simultaneously.An intellectual would recognize that if two people have a different idea about the age of the Earth, one being ~10,000 years, and one being ~4.5 billion years, they cannot both be right.
Certainly. Any particular hypothesis regarding earthly abiogenesis would be utterly shaken by the discovery of extraterrestrial eukaryotes.
That would basically mean that you do not believe in any singular event that has ever happened. Curious.
I suppose you will only cite the effects of 'The Fall', but nature provides some pretty horrific examples of creation in the form of parasites, prey animals eaten alive by predators, natural poisons which cause the eater to die in agony, and so on.
I've always thought it far easier to consider the possibility of a benevolent God if you admit to evolution being the method of creation. Lets the deity off the hook for a lot of dismal realities.
Why would I cite the fall when discussing animal behavior? The fall technically only affected man not animals.
BTW- the discussion that I am having relates to the topic of this thread which is creation. Evolution does not address origins.
I guess I dont l\know what you mean by creation or creationism. There are so many schools of thought, so ..... can you explain what you mean?
And what would be an example of evidence for a creator?
There were lions in Eden?This is what is so confusing about trying to find out what Christians are talking about! I have been told, and read here any number of times that "the fall" is what kicked the 2nd law of thermodynamics, the lions started eating the lambs, etc. Now it didnt affect the animals at all? Sheesh.
Not beyond curious how you ever came to that conclusion.
This is what is so confusing about trying to find out what Christians are talking about! I have been told, and read here any number of times that "the fall" is what kicked the 2nd law of thermodynamics, the lions started eating the lambs, etc. Now it didnt affect the animals at all? Sheesh.
Well, I believe that the casualty argument does posit a cause and the cause must be uncaused. My "leap" of faith is to believe that the Christian God is that uncaused cause. I also believe that the intricate and complicated nature of organisms rule out a chance event as the original cause.
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?