I don't understand...

[aiki]

You still fail to realize what a theory is. There has been nothing proven against evolution.

I've shown you one instance where the mechanisms of the ToE cannot actually bring about the changes that evolutionists claim they can. Show me why I'm in error. Don't just say I am; prove me wrong.

You can say all you want. But its wrong. If there were anything against evolution it would be discarded and joy a theory anymore.

This is not a refutation of my point. It is just a blind rejection of the facts.

There is no evidence. These are arguments that hold no value at all and have been debunked.

Your saying so doesn't make it so. I have offered you several arguments in favor of God's existence that suceed very well. Show me where they fail; demonstrate how it is that they "hold no value"; prove to me that they have all been debunked. If you cannot, then your assertions fall flat and intellectual honesty requires you to change your view.

Selah.

 

[LastSeven]

You don't need God at all. Just be a good person. Its that simple.

if that's what you believe then you are dead already.

 

[Snake75]

if that's what you believe then you are dead already.

Lol... All I can say about this..

 

[Snake75]

I've shown you one instance where the mechanisms of the ToE cannot actually bring about the changes that evolutionists claim they can. Show me why I'm in error. Don't just say I am; prove me wrong.



This is not a refutation of my point. It is just a blind rejection of the facts.



Your saying so doesn't make it so. I have offered you several arguments in favor of God's existence that suceed very well. Show me where they fail; demonstrate how it is that they "hold no value"; prove to me that they have all been debunked. If you cannot, then your assertions fall flat and intellectual honesty requires you to change your view.

Selah.

I'm not a scientist. I'm 16. But, I'm pretty sure scientist have explained your point because if they have and it turned out true then it wouldn't be a theory anymore now would it?

Its called using reasoning and logic. Scientists are constantly looking into evolution. They still have found nothing against it.

debunkingchristianity.blogspot(remove).com/2007/10/leibnizian-cosmological-argument-part-i.html?m=1
Don't feel like bringing tons more links and info.

 

[chrisstavrous]

It sounds to me like you believe that being a good person is all that matters, and since you don't need God for that, you don't need God at all. What you fail to grasp is that you need God, not to be a good person, but to be forgiven for your sin. That's what it's all about.

Jesus didn't come to earth to tell us to be nice to each other. He came to earth to tell us that we can receive forgiveness for our sins. That is the gospel, the good news.

If you do good on earth in your own name, then you only glorify yourself and you have already received your reward. If you do good in the name of God then you glorify God and your reward will be in heaven.

I encourage you to look at the bigger picture, beyond your life on earth.

I dont want to refine myself so I think I am good by myself, I want to refine myself because not doing so causes pain to myself and to others.

 

[chrisstavrous]

I've shown you one instance where the mechanisms of the ToE cannot actually bring about the changes that evolutionists claim they can. Show me why I'm in error. Don't just say I am; prove me wrong.



This is not a refutation of my point. It is just a blind rejection of the facts.



Your saying so doesn't make it so. I have offered you several arguments in favor of God's existence that suceed very well. Show me where they fail; demonstrate how it is that they "hold no value"; prove to me that they have all been debunked. If you cannot, then your assertions fall flat and intellectual honesty requires you to change your view.

Selah.

Yes you have, in fact science has plenty of blind spots and its these spots that many christians use to try and debunk the whole theory of evolution and any other theory that they feel that challange the bibles inerrancy. But while they do this science keeps refining and changing those blind spots and christains have to keep finding other spots to exploit.

 

[Lollerskates]

I don't understand why people believe in some supreme being. It makes absolutely no sense. There is no evidence at all of its existence. Science has found the answers to almost everything that was once thought of as Gods doing.What keeps you believing in this?

Science is great, but it is not the Truth. It is one aspect of philosophy that (with responsibility) should lead and unite people to come together - and to fully learn from each other and the world around us. But, the problem is that societies have diefied science (mostly as influence from the need for weapons, masonry, etc.) Usually, cooking, embroidery, smiths, some masons, sowers, etc. are dismissed as unimportant, and not as valuable as "science." But, this is, and has become a large disservice to humanity and their unity.

Can you imagine being told you cannot give a valuable input on a scientific conversation just because you are a carpenter? Or, even providing a philosophical view to atoms, molecules, electricity - how dismissimg someone's different view on a philosophy is ridiculously rude and insulting? I have met surfers who can explain quantum mechanics precisely using their experiences.

Now, will you further dismiss these people because they believe in something higher than flawed, corruptible imperfect humans? Hope itself is a philosophy, and hope in something beyond us, that loves and watches out for us as parents do is not stupid. It is meaningful to billions of people, and "science" cannot (and will not) quench that fire - ever.

Science is great, but to make it seem like all things are necessarily verifiable through science is to ignore the infinite ways the secrets of the universe could be unveiled.

Humans did not create the Universe. So, something else did. Whether you believe in/worship in science, or you believe in/worship some ethereal/deity created the Universe, that is your choice. On a common platform of the entire race of humans, I have no business judging anyone and vice-versa.

And, "evidence" is still highly subjective. Much of "science" is verified scores of times, sometimes to find out things were completely wrong. Do I get mad at the scientists, and dismiss their philosophy because they are wrong sometimes? No, and I wouldn't expect to be dismissed if I said something like "Love is Weakness." I would expect disagreement, not subtle insults on my mentality because of the disagreement.

 

[Snake75]

Science is great, but it is not the Truth. It is one aspect of philosophy that (with responsibility) should lead and unite people to come together - and to fully learn from each other and the world around us. But, the problem is that societies have diefied science (mostly as influence from the need for weapons, masonry, etc.) Usually, cooking, embroidery, smiths, some masons, sowers, etc. are dismissed as unimportant, and not as valuable as "science." But, this is, and has become a large disservice to humanity and their unity.

Can you imagine being told you cannot give a valuable input on a scientific conversation just because you are a carpenter? Or, even providing a philosophical view to atoms, molecules, electricity - how dismissimg someone's different view on a philosophy is ridiculously rude and insulting? I have met surfers who can explain quantum mechanics precisely using their experiences.

Now, will you further dismiss these people because they believe in something higher than flawed, corruptible imperfect humans? Hope itself is a philosophy, and hope in something beyond us, that loves and watches out for us as parents do is not stupid. It is meaningful to billions of people, and "science" cannot (and will not) quench that fire - ever.

Science is great, but to make it seem like all things are necessarily verifiable through science is to ignore the infinite ways the secrets of the universe could be unveiled.

Humans did not create the Universe. So, something else did. Whether you believe in/worship in science, or you believe in/worship some ethereal/deity created the Universe, that is your choice. On a common platform of the entire race of humans, I have no business judging anyone and vice-versa.

And, "evidence" is still highly subjective. Much of "science" is verified scores of times, sometimes to find out things were completely wrong. Do I get mad at the scientists, and dismiss their philosophy because they are wrong sometimes? No, and I wouldn't expect to be dismissed if I said something like "Love is Weakness." I would expect disagreement, not subtle insults on my mentality because of the disagreement.

You seem like a nice guy. I don't agree with you
But I'll just leave it at that

 

[Lollerskates]

You seem like a nice guy. I don't agree with you
But I'll just leave it at that

Good. And, no problem.

Want to debate me (with facts, science, lab study, etc.) then feel free. I am less concerned about agreement, and more concerned about Truth. I am a very stubborn/firm/fiery person, but if I am wrong, then I will most certainly admit it (and have.) This whole "debate" thing is life is supposed to be mutually beneficial: I can help you, and/or you help me get closer to the Truth.

By the way, that's a good academic attitude for someone, especially (but regardless) for your age (no sarcasm).

 

[stevenfrancis]

I don't understand why people believe in some supreme being. It makes absolutely no sense. There is no evidence at all of its existence. Science has found the answers to almost everything that was once thought of as Gods doing.What keeps you believing in this?

Hi Snake:

I'm not just trying to contrary here, but line for line, I am just as baffled by disbelief, as you are by belief. What is the saying? For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not believe, no explanation will suffice. I've been down many spiritual paths in my life. It too me over 40 years to end up taking a look at Catholicism, because it was the last thing "I" wanted to be the truth. But ALL my life was a spiritual journey. I've always, and still do, taken for granted that there is in fact A God. So atheism is the one path I looked into that didn't take root at all. It seems completely blind and devoid of metaphysics to me. It doesn't acknowledge the sciences of philosophy and theology. I don't have any problem with science. It can only support God in the long run, because it is within God's creation. I've never seen a single scientific fact which proved against God. Just pop pseudoscience, and popular modern atheism. Anyway, God loves you. I pray you will find this to be the case at some point.

 

[Lollerskates]

For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not believe, no explanation will suffice. I've been down many spiritual paths in my life....

I think this is the heart of the problem. For the non-believer, no evidence will suffice - and that doesn't satisfy most of the lot (which is why the continue to seek out Christian perspective.) For those who believe, it can superficially seem as though the belief is myopia. On the contrary, most believers have been horribly, truly and fire tested in their belief. I think there is a misconception (especially with current cultural dualism like creation vs evolutionism, religion vs atheism, etc.) that believers are idiots, short-sighted, and ignorant of "facts," and evidential science. No, that isn't true at all. Often, believers are shown things science cannot begin to explain. And, the loneliness of being shown something like that in a world that hates the idea of a deity that is supreme allows for hostility,defensiveness and isolation on either side. The prophets must have had a horribly martyred life: God with you, but the majority against you. Who to choose?

 

[chrisstavrous]

Hi Snake:

I'm not just trying to contrary here, but line for line, I am just as baffled by disbelief, as you are by belief. What is the saying? For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not believe, no explanation will suffice. I've been down many spiritual paths in my life. It too me over 40 years to end up taking a look at Catholicism, because it was the last thing "I" wanted to be the truth. But ALL my life was a spiritual journey. I've always, and still do, taken for granted that there is in fact A God. So atheism is the one path I looked into that didn't take root at all. It seems completely blind and devoid of metaphysics to me. It doesn't acknowledge the sciences of philosophy and theology. I don't have any problem with science. It can only support God in the long run, because it is within God's creation. I've never seen a single scientific fact which proved against God. Just pop pseudoscience, and popular modern atheism. Anyway, God loves you. I pray you will find this to be the case at some point.

Its interesting to claim science has not debunked anything in the bible, thats not because science hasn't its because when science does christians allways says "oh god can do anything"

 

[Snake75]

Good. And, no problem.

Want to debate me (with facts, science, lab study, etc.) then feel free. I am less concerned about agreement, and more concerned about Truth. I am a very stubborn/firm/fiery person, but if I am wrong, then I will most certainly admit it (and have.) This whole "debate" thing is life is supposed to be mutually beneficial: I can help you, and/or you help me get closer to the Truth.

By the way, that's a good academic attitude for someone, especially (but regardless) for your age (no sarcasm).

Nah.Don't feel like starting another debate. I'm already in a deep debate with everyone else as you can see .
But you can always reply to one of my post and try to debate with me.

 

[Lollerskates]

Nah.Don't feel like starting another debate. I'm already in a deep debate with everyone else as you can see .
But you can always reply to one of my post and try to debate with me.

As am I (already in enough debates.) Well, we disagree, but keep me in the back of your head for food of thought.

 

[aiki]

I'm not a scientist. I'm 16. But, I'm pretty sure scientist have explained your point because if they have and it turned out true then it wouldn't be a theory anymore now would it?

Not necessarily. THere is far more at stake than just the cold, hard truth for evolutionists who have championed and anchored their careers to the ToE. It is profoundly naive to think that all scientists are willing to go where the facts lead - especially if doing so will make them look utterly mistaken and foolish. Most evolutionists (if not all) adhere to some form of naturalism. THey assume a priori that the supernatural is impossible and God does not exist. And they interpret what science reveals to conform to their philosophical presuppositions. In other words, they manipulate scientific fact to support what they already assume is true rather than letting the facts speak for themselves.

THere has been no sound rebuttal by evolutionists to the observation that matter is not self-organizing and could not therefore have spontaneously organized into a living organism as the ToE asserts. There has been no reasonable response by evolutionists to the observation that the mechanisms upon which the ToE relies are far more likely to prevent molecules-to-man change than produce it. THere has been no explanation by evolutionists for the existence of genetic information, which is required before evolution can occur. Information does not exist in a vacuum; it is the product of an intelligent mind. Where did the vast and complex genetic information necessary for life come from? Evolutionists would rather posit aliens than a Creator, not because aliens are more likely, but because they are too philosophically-opposed to the idea of God.

You are far more sure of yourself as a 16 year old than you have demonstrated cause to be. In fact, the more you post the more you expose just how seriously ignorant you are of the matters to which you are trying to speak in this thread.

Its called using reasoning and logic. Scientists are constantly looking into evolution. They still have found nothing against it.

Well, as I said, you are simply wrong. You might want to check out the documentary "No Intelligence Allowed." It may help you to understand just how mistaken you are in your thinking about the neutrality of scientists.

debunkingchristianity.blogspot(remove).com/2007/10/leibnizian-cosmological-argument-part-i.html?m=1
Don't feel like bringing tons more links and info.

How much of this article do you even understand? Not much, I suspect. But if you don't grasp it sufficiently to argue it for yourself, how can you be sure it is correct?

Selah.

 

[aiki]

Yes you have

"Yes I have" what?

in fact science has plenty of blind spots and its these spots that many christians use to try and debunk the whole theory of evolution and any other theory that they feel that challange the bibles inerrancy.

Blind spots are not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about claims that evolutionists make that are plainly refuted by scientific fact. Matter is not spontaneously self-organizing. Genetic information cannot appear out of unorganized matter. The mechanisms of evolution are more likely to prevent evolution than produce it. These aren't mere "blind spots"; they are profound problems for the ToE. And there are more besides.

But while they do this science keeps refining and changing those blind spots and christains have to keep finding other spots to exploit.

Actually, the ToE has undergone several revisions of terms that have not answered the problems it has but merely made the ToE more slippery and thus better able to deflect criticism rather than answer it. The ToE is not progressing as a viable scientific theory but only in its capacity to avoid dealing with its deficits.

Regardless, the ToE does nothing to prove God does not exist. I could grant all that the theory proposes and still be perfectly reasonable in asserting that God exists.

Selah.

 

[chrisstavrous]

Not necessarily. THere is far more at stake than just the cold, hard truth for evolutionists who have championed and anchored their careers to the ToE. It is profoundly naive to think that all scientists are willing to go where the facts lead - especially if doing so will make them look utterly mistaken and foolish. Most evolutionists (if not all) adhere to some form of naturalism. THey assume a priori that the supernatural is impossible and God does not exist. And they interpret what science reveals to conform to their philosophical presuppositions. In other words, they manipulate scientific fact to support what they already assume is true rather than letting the facts speak for themselves.

THere has been no sound rebuttal by evolutionists to the observation that matter is not self-organizing and could not therefore have spontaneously organized into a living organism as the ToE asserts. There has been no reasonable response by evolutionists to the observation that the mechanisms upon which the ToE relies are far more likely to prevent molecules-to-man change than produce it. THere has been no explanation by evolutionists for the existence of genetic information, which is required before evolution can occur. Information does not exist in a vacuum; it is the product of an intelligent mind. Where did the vast and complex genetic information necessary for life come from? Evolutionists would rather posit aliens than a Creator, not because aliens are more likely, but because they are too philosophically-opposed to the idea of God.

You are far more sure of yourself as a 16 year old than you have demonstrated cause to be. In fact, the more you post the more you expose just how seriously ignorant you are of the matters to which you are trying to speak in this thread.

Well, as I said, you are simply wrong. You might want to check out the documentary "No Intelligence Allowed." It may help you to understand just how mistaken you are in your thinking about the neutrality of scientists.

How much of this article do you even understand? Not much, I suspect. But if you don't grasp it sufficiently to argue it for yourself, how can you be sure it is correct?

Selah.

You maybe more right than you think or you maybe more wrong. However I keep saying this, even if there is a god/creator of the universe how are you going to go about trying to prove it and prove it to be your god and your brand of truth. Because thats what you are trying to do right? You need more than faith to prove your beliefs because faith can be anything you want it to be.

 

[chrisstavrous]

"Yes I have" what?



Blind spots are not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about claims that evolutionists make that are plainly refuted by scientific fact. Matter is not spontaneously self-organizing. Genetic information cannot appear out of unorganized matter. The mechanisms of evolution are more likely to prevent evolution than produce it. These aren't mere "blind spots"; they are profound problems for the ToE. And there are more besides.



Actually, the ToE has undergone several revisions of terms that have not answered the problems it has but merely made the ToE more slippery and thus better able to deflect criticism rather than answer it. The ToE is not progressing as a viable scientific theory but only in its capacity to avoid dealing with its deficits.

Regardless, the ToE does nothing to prove God does not exist. I could grant all that the theory proposes and still be perfectly reasonable in asserting that God exists.

Selah.

If a freeway has a few pot holes in it should the freeway be torn up just so the pot holes can be filled in.

 

[chrisstavrous]

Call on your faith.

Next time something in your house breaks down

Dont call a repair person, just call on god

Next time your car stops dead

Dont call road assistance, just call on god

Next time you get trapped in an elevator

Dont use the emergency phone, just call on god

Next time someone gets seriously ill

Dont call a doctor, just call on god

Next time someone tells you faith is better than fact

Tell them ill call you on that.

 

[aiki]

You maybe more right than you think or you maybe more wrong.

However I keep saying this, even if there is a god/creator of the universe how are you going to go about trying to prove it and prove it to be your god and your brand of truth. Because thats what you are trying to do right?

Well, as I already pointed out, there are many sound arguments in favor of God's existence and in support of the assertion that He is the God revealed in the Bible. If you want to investigate these arguments, check out the following site:

ReasonableFaith.org – Defend Biblical Christianity, Apologetics, Bible Questions

You need more than faith to prove your beliefs because faith can be anything you want it to be.

See the website I noted above.

Selah.