How to choose between creation and evolution.

[Allandavid]

Yes. The E. Coli tail helps the bacteria kill people. Who would want to design such a thing?

No, that is not it’s primary function. It assists with the digestive process.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

More like: this designer of brick walls can't design atoms, space, and time.

You're mixing metaphors.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

On the contrary, every single 'thing' in science, has either already been tested or is being tested and changes over time. Atoms space and time are classic examples of 'things' that science has changed its meaning of .. because of new results derived from that testing. These are in fact, concepts, and not what we commonly think of as being 'things' (or physical, unchanging objects). If they were 'physical objects' existing completely independently from our concepts, then why would they change at all?

Everything, with no exceptions in science, becomes an operational definition, otherwise it is neutralised (and bypassed) as being yet another belief.

I like it. Science is up against 'the big wall' however as is evidenced by their dabbling in things like string theory.

 

[Allandavid]

You cannot believe God's word is true as written and also believe in evolution.

Try telling that to Francis Collins...

 

[Kylie]

You completely miss the point.

You can't talk about a supernatural event without any supernatural references.

The world is not just the physical that you can see, there is equal parts physical and spiritual. When you ignore the spiritual you are ignoring half of the facts. Creation was a miracle, a supernatural event, it wasn't a natural event.

There is no evidence for the spiritual. Thus, your claim has no basis.

 

[Kylie]

So does my light bulb run on intelligence? or is intelligence confined to the brain?

Logic doesn't work this way.

Just because there is electrical activity in the brain which manifests intelligence does not mean that all electrical activity is intelligence.

This is the kind of silly mistake which I'm surprised even you would make, AV.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

There is no evidence for the spiritual. Thus, your claim has no basis.

Good, and evil, are spiritual concepts that manifest themselves in behavior.

 

[Allandavid]

Good, and evil, are spiritual concepts that manifest themselves in behavior.

No, they aren’t.....

 

[Tayla]

No, that is not it’s primary function. It assists with the digestive process.

But surely the intelligent designer that designed and created that tail of the E. Coli bacteria would know that it would assist with its digesting *us* too? (metaphorically speaking). Seem an intelligent designer has a moral obligation to consider the impacts of his/her/its designs.

 

[Tayla]

You're mixing metaphors.

No. Brick walls are made of atoms residing within the universe as it is.

Please correct me if I am misunderstanding you, but I think you are claiming that there is a dividing line somewhere down in the details of things designed. For example, you can design a chair without considering the quantum mechanics involved.

But can an intelligent designer design features of an organism without needing to be concerned with the molecules and their interactions? I don't see how it's possible.

 

[coffee4u]

There is no evidence for the spiritual. Thus, your claim has no basis.

And you are back to physical evidence, which is like comparing potatoes to grass. Spiritual matters can only be detected by an alive spirit of which yours is unaware, asleep. Which is why as I said above it is foolishness to you. The verse is correct, you do think and feel it is foolishness, do you not?
You won't ever have physical evidence of the spiritual that can be measured in a lab. The closest thing to compare it to would be love. Which can't be tested and measured, it just is. I don't expect a man who is asleep to read a book and argue with him when for not reading it. I don't expect you to understand, in fact I know you won't and I know I can't prove anything to you. Only God can wake the spirit. Which is why arguing is pointless.

 

[Shemjaza]

And you are back to physical evidence, which is like comparing potatoes to grass. Spiritual matters can only be detected by an alive spirit of which yours is unaware, asleep. Which is why as I said above it is foolishness to you. The verse is correct, you do think and feel it is foolishness, do you not?
You won't ever have physical evidence of the spiritual that can be measured in a lab. The closest thing to compare it to would be love. Which can't be tested and measured, it just is. I don't expect a man who is asleep to read a book and argue with him when for not reading it. I don't expect you to understand, in fact I know you won't and I know I can't prove anything to you. Only God can wake the spirit. Which is why arguing is pointless.

The problem is that this leaves the spiritual unverifiable.

It doesn't produce consistent independent results and the people who make claims about it can be extremely inconsistent.

This gets even worse in some cases when spiritual arguments aren't just unverifiable, but in fact contradicted by physical evidence.

 

[SelfSim]

I like it. Science is up against 'the big wall' however as is evidenced by their dabbling in things like string theory.

Scientists in the future may see themselves as being privileged in being able to view the evidence of the cutting edge of Theoretical Physics thinking, when it comes to concepts such as String Theory (as are we).
Perhaps students in the future will see it as quaint but at least it will persist as being consistently logical (a stubbornly persistent trait humans have always sought .. throughout all of recorded history).

 

[SelfSim]

Good, and evil, are spiritual concepts that manifest themselves in behavior.

What's 'spiritual' about behaviors?

 

[SelfSim]

You won't ever have physical evidence of the spiritual that can be measured in a lab. The closest thing to compare it to would be love. Which can't be tested and measured, it just is.

Since when are emotions not testable? Emotions produce consistently observable evidence of their presence. We also know that what 'emotions' means, depends entirely on the presence of a meaning generating mind. Both cases require the presence of a mind.

The only way spirituality could produce evidence of its existence is if it is conceived as an objectively testable model (or hypothesis). The results of such a test would only ever produce results, again, that it was a conceptual model which turned out to be tesable .. and those results in no way ever produce evidence of something existing independently from the mind conceiving it.

.. Only God can wake the spirit. Which is why arguing is pointless.

No .. I say 'spirituality' can be awakened by the mind conceiving it.
That mind is all that is necessary .. and not something existing independently from the mind doing the conceiving.

 

[coffee4u]

The problem is that this leaves the spiritual unverifiable.

One thing we can agree on.

It doesn't produce consistent independent results and the people who make claims about it can be extremely inconsistent.

That is because the spirit world is not just God. It consists of God and his angels but also fallen angels. Many people these days are more interested in having a 'spiritual experience' and either knowingly or unknowingly look for the spiritual in the wrong places. fallen angels exist to deceive and mislead. God warns us many times about fallen angels and activities that will lead to them across the Bible from the Old to the New.

Deuteronomy 18
9 When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.

Matthew 24:24
For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

2 Corinthians 11:14
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

People are also driven and influenced by a number of forces.

The only 'evidence' of the spiritual is the fact that most people believe in it, in some form or the other.

This gets even worse in some cases when spiritual arguments aren't just unverifiable, but in fact contradicted by physical evidence.

You will need to explain further what you mean about that. No one is saying everything is spiritual, things can be physical and mental as well.

 

[coffee4u]

Since when are emotions not testable?

What test will you use to prove that you love another person?

 

[Shemjaza]

One thing we can agree on.

Good start for discussion.

That is because the spirit world is not just God. It consists of God and his angels but also fallen angels. Many people these days are more interested in having a 'spiritual experience' and either knowingly or unknowingly look for the spiritual in the wrong places. fallen angels exist to deceive and mislead. God warns us many times about fallen angels and activities that will lead to them across the Bible from the Old to the New.

Deuteronomy 18
9 When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.

Matthew 24:24
For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

2 Corinthians 11:14
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

People are also driven and influenced by a number of forces.

This is an issue for knowing anything at all about the spiritual.

It creates an internally consistent justification for any spiritual message being unreliable and inconsistent.

It means that a source of information that can't verify as actually existing might still be unreliable because it's the wrong kind of spiritual.

The only 'evidence' of the spiritual is the fact that most people believe in it, in some form or the other.

In and of itself this feels like an insufficient reason to accept something.

You will need to explain further what you mean about that. No one is saying everything is spiritual, things can be physical and mental as well.

When spiritual evidence is presented in contrast to physical evidence.

For more recent examples:
Wearing surgical masks is dangerous and evil
Viruses only effect those with weak faith
The climate isn't heating up

Also, the more common assertions about evidence from geology or biology.

 

[Kylie]

Good, and evil, are spiritual concepts that manifest themselves in behavior.

Can you provide evidence to support this claim that good and evil are spiritual in nature?

 

[Kylie]

And you are back to physical evidence, which is like comparing potatoes to grass. Spiritual matters can only be detected by an alive spirit of which yours is unaware, asleep. Which is why as I said above it is foolishness to you. The verse is correct, you do think and feel it is foolishness, do you not?
You won't ever have physical evidence of the spiritual that can be measured in a lab. The closest thing to compare it to would be love. Which can't be tested and measured, it just is. I don't expect a man who is asleep to read a book and argue with him when for not reading it. I don't expect you to understand, in fact I know you won't and I know I can't prove anything to you. Only God can wake the spirit. Which is why arguing is pointless.

If your argument is that one thing that has no verifiable evidence can only be detected by another thing for which there is no verifiable evidence, then your argument is on a very weak foundation.