God Made This

[I'm_Sorry]

Ok so "back on topic" and out of "Apologetics" as this is a science subforum.

This is my position for the Athiest and the Agnostic so the may better understand my irrationality_FAITH_


Ok, I'm a faithful Believer in the Bible being the true revelation of God by His work.

So I = Faith Position = God did this.

Agnostic Position = God may or may not do it.

Atheist = Null position = No God, No doing this.


Athiest------------------------Agnostic------------------------Theist

This is a science subforum of a Christian forum correct?

So, my position is that the method of science cannot prove God because God Himself is hidden but His work is visible (Faith is the requirement for His creation).

When you question my claims, I repeatedly state that to the atheist there are gaps in his position, namely "Origins" and that theories are in error and could be instead "xyz" based on "God did it".

I cut accepted theory down by Faith in the bible and its creation account (testimony) of the revelation of God's creation, to His creation, by Himself.

Then proceed to explain how I believe the position of Atheism is wrong to state the following in philosophy:

Nothing begot Something.
Non-Life begot Life.

I believe that the flat earth theory IF proven will rock the foundations of science.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Nnly if I had to.

Otherwise, I'd respond with:

Matthew 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

I most certainly wouldn't refer to Jesus as "Lucifer."

Then you lied when you said the 1611 KJV.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[I'm_Sorry]

Ok so "back on topic" and out of "Apologetics" as this is a science subforum.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Ok, I'm a faithful Believer in the Bible being the true revelation of God by His work.

So I = Faith Position = God did this.

Agnostic Position = God may or may not do it.

Atheist = Null position = No God, No doing this.


Athiest------------------------Agnostic------------------------Theist

This is a science subforum of a Christian forum correct?

So, my position is that the method of science cannot prove God because God Himself is hidden but His work is visible (Faith is the requirement for His creation).

When you question my claims, I repeatedly state that to the atheist there are gaps in his position, namely "Origins" and that theories are in error and could be instead "xyz" based on "God did it".

I cut accepted theory down by Faith in the bible and its creation account (testimony) of the revelation of God's creation, to His creation, by Himself.

Then proceed to explain how I believe the position of Atheism is wrong to state the following in philosophy:

Nothing begot Something.
Non-Life begot Life.

I believe that the flat earth theory IF proven will rock the foundations of science.

That has nothing to do with your claim that the earth cannot be billions of years old because it is flat. Every time I ask you to explain why this is so, you prevaricate.

Simple question for you: Why does the earth being flat mean it cannot be old?

 

[Gene2memE]

Ok so "back on topic" and out of "Apologetics" as this is a science subforum.

This is my position for the Athiest and the Agnostic so the may better understand my irrationality_FAITH_

Ok, I'm a faithful Believer in the Bible being the true revelation of God by His work.

So I = Faith Position = God did this.

Agnostic Position = God may or may not do it.

Atheist = Null position = No God, No doing this.


Athiest------------------------Agnostic------------------------Theist

 

[I'm_Sorry]

Science is the survival of Gnosis

 

[I'm_Sorry]

Science is the survival of Gnosis

Think in Three Dimensions

x2 Triangular pyramid

Using the law of compliant "Truth" and the law of perversion "Lie":

Truth = (Compliant) Upright Triangular pyramid

VR = Truth Jesus Christ (Salvation through Him alone, Life Eternal Love Eternal Power over evil)
Storytelling = Theism
Experiencing = Atheism
Playing = Agnostic

Lie (Perversion) Down-turned Triangular pyramid

VR = Lie Gnosis (satan, father of lies, murder, anti-Christ tells man he is salvation of self. Damned by the Power of LOVE WHO IS GOOD (Righteous) (GOD))
Storytelling = Theism
Experiencing = Atheism
Playing = Agnostic

This is Gnosis satan's evil eye

Gnosis

The eye of Gnosis - 2D representation of 3D Triangular pyramid.

Satan wants to exult himself above God.

So he turns his pyramid upright as a lie.

That's his nature.

Awaken from the slumber satan has put you under and Seek Christ Jesus NOW.

 

[Ophiolite]

Think in Three Dimensions

Except when considering the form of the Earth, which is flat.

 

[I'm_Sorry]

Except when considering the form of the Earth, which is flat.

Go out side funny man, play time

 

[ViaCrucis]

Science is the survival of Gnosis

You're confusing the generic usage of the word "gnosis" with the particular religious usage employed by the ancient Gnostics.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[I'm_Sorry]

Gnosis

The eye of Gnosis - 2D representation of 3D Triangular pyramid.

Satan wants to exult himself above God.

So he turns his pyramid upright as a lie.

That's his nature.

Awaken from the slumber satan has put you under and Seek Christ Jesus NOW.

 

[quatona]

Ok so "back on topic" and out of "Apologetics" as this is a science subforum.

Back? Now you almost make it sound as though the OP hadn´t been apologetics, and nothing else.

 

[Kylie]

God could have done it any way He wanted.

So why'd he choose the inefficient way?

 

[Kylie]

Until you can demonstrate that life comes from non-life evolution "made" nothing.

Until you can demonstrate God, then God made nothing.

 

[Kylie]

and if will show to you that they are right? for example: prof miller claim that if we will remove parts from the flagellum we will get a functional ttss. its actually false because the shared proteins between flagellum and ttss arent even the same. the ttss also have some unique proteins. so we cant get a functional ttss by removing parts from a flagellum.

Care to show me a source for that claim?

One from an actual scientist in a relevant field, please.

 

[Colter]

Then you lied when you said the 1611 KJV.

-CryptoLutheran

He does that a lot on these forums! He's a "drive -by" poster, makes claims, doesn't answer replies and runs off only to reappear the next day.

But as an aside, Izaiah's lament using poetic words can be seen as implying that the real king of Babylon was the devil, that he was doing the devils biding. Like when Peter suggested that Jesus part from the will of God and Jesus said "Get ye behind me Satan"! Jesus was implying that, while Peter wasn't intending it, he was suggesting the devils will over Gods will.

Either way, if Izaiah was only speaking of the King of Babylon, the same lament could apply to the Devil!

"How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! 13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far north; 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most High.’ 15 But you are brought down to Sheol, to the depths of the Pit. 16 Those who see you will stare at you, and ponder over you: ‘Is this the man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms, 17 who made the world like a desert and overthrew its cities, who did not let his prisoners go home?"

Also, Jerome used the lower case lucifer (morning star) in the vulgate, not the upper case Lucifer (proper name).

 

[Colter]

So why'd he choose the inefficient way?

Because he didn't do that at all, the flood in an invention of the Hebrew priesthood. The bigger question would be, why did God allow Lucifer & company to fool the whole world to begin with which leads to a bunch of other questions about the theory hat the church has been teaching for ever.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Good morning from Australia,

Look what was over my back fence this morning.

No, Natural Selection did not bring them into being.

God did, The Bible states this in Genesis.

Can you not see His wonderful loving work?

Discuss.

I don't remember the bible mentioning kangaroo's.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How natural selection is responsible for all life. It cannot be, there is no origin for life proven.

Scope, it matters.
Evolution = origins of species.

It ends up in wild speculation and theory that people hold on to until proven otherwise.

No. Just like all other scientific theories (germ theory of desease, atomic theory, etc), it provides the best testable explanation that accounts for all the data.

Rejecting the possibility of a Creator, because there is no evidence to support a creator.

Not really...
Rather: not accepting claims about creatores, because there is no evidence to support it.

You do not accept claims about leprechauns, the matrix, etc for the exact same reason

And I don't see how a fish became a kangaroo.

Not understanding a process, is not an argument against it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

However personally I only put my Faith in the Word of God.

So, you are a muslim?
Muslims tell me that the Quran is the direct word of God, after all.