- Aug 18, 2007
- 6,437
- 2,685
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
...then why should we believe it? Because the Bible said so? That begs the question, why should we believe the Bible?
That would be the honest course, now wouldn't it? If you expect people to believe you exist, as God does according to many Christians, the honest thing to do is provide evidence that you do exist.Are you really going to use this weak argument?
If the Lord showed himself, there'd be no need for his planned judgements...because everyone would believe in him.
Yup.Surely you would believe in Him if he showed himself to you?
Doesn't mean that reason has to be valid.Please take note that billions and billions, now, and past, have believed in God and the Christ. There must be some reason why we believe in it, no?
It does? I've seen quite a lot, I'd say in many history books he makes no appearance.You know, every history book that I've seen mentions the life of Jesus?
No, that's not evidence. Evidence would be a contemporary written source, which is missing. Doesn't mean Jesus has not existed, but it definitely is not such a set case as many Christians want us to believe.That's evidence. No, it's not proof, you're right. But there's no proof for your beliefs, either...such as evolution.
What about them?It's really easy to believe in something with scientific evidence lol. Just because science doesn't back it up doesn't mean it's not real. Ever heard of Polonium-218 Halos in primordial granite?
IC is, to put it lightly, nonsense. Behe has proposed it in a number of forms which either cannot be tested, or have been falsified already. His larger claim is that none of the parts of IC systems can work independently. Yet many independent uses of different IC systems (according to him) have indeed got a use. On the other end, he claims that to refute IC, we need to give a mutation by mutation pathway. This is clearly undoable, for many obvious reasons. Science advances through reasonably achievable evidence, not through untestability. Behe's proposal cannot be tested and hence, is not evidence.I have hereby come to this conclusion: Evolution and other scientific-based views on the origins of the world and life have MORE EVIDENCE supporting them, but also have MORE EVIDENCE refuting them. Such as irreducibly complexity in microbiology.
What do you mean when you say creationism. Do you mean young earth creationism with a global flood? If so, much of the evidence supporting evolution (ie, lots) is also directly a refution of creationism (ie, lots of refuting evidence).Creationism has LITTLE EVIDENCE supporting it, but EVEN LESS EVIDENCE that goes against it.
Without wanting to insult you, like you should start studying what you are talking about.How does that sound for you?
Okay, you're all ignorant.And, come on, billions and billions of people. Either we're all crazy or we're just seeing things. You're pick.
Uh, no it isn't. Ignorance is pretty rampant throughout human culture. And our knowledge in general is still not complete, if it will ever be. So the chances of us being wrong, and creationists being wrong in particular, approach 1. Given that abiogenesis would have occurred through chemical reactions, and chemical reactions occur whenever the correct conditions are present, I'd estimate that chance at even higher.The chance that all of us Christians are wrong is far less probable than the chance that life was formed by chance
Are you really going to use this weak argument?
If the Lord showed himself, there'd be no need for his planned judgements...because everyone would believe in him.
Surely you would believe in Him if he showed himself to you?
Please take note that billions and billions, now, and past, have believed in God and the Christ. There must be some reason why we believe in it, no?
You know, every history book that I've seen mentions the life of Jesus? That's evidence. No, it's not proof, you're right. But there's no proof for your beliefs, either...such as evolution.
It's really easy to believe in something with scientific evidence lol. Just because science doesn't back it up doesn't mean it's not real.
Ever heard of Polonium-218 Halos in primordial granite?
I have hereby come to this conclusion: Evolution and other scientific-based views on the origins of the world and life have MORE EVIDENCE supporting them, but also have MORE EVIDENCE refuting them. Such as irreducibly complexity in microbiology.
Creationism has LITTLE EVIDENCE supporting it, but EVEN LESS EVIDENCE that goes against it.
How does that sound for you?
And, come on, billions and billions of people. Either we're all crazy or we're just seeing things. You're pick.
The chance that all of us Christians are wrong is far less probable than the chance that life was formed by chance
Oh. I was under the impression that a lack of evidence is a good argument against something, not a weak argument.Are you really going to use this weak argument?
And we can't have that, can we? No, that'd be far to straightforward an honest. Instead, we have to be intellectually dishonest to ourselves and to others in order to believe.If the Lord showed himself, there'd be no need for his planned judgements...because everyone would believe in him.
Absolutely. Which is why, since he hasn't, I don't.Surely you would believe in Him if he showed himself to you?
Same reason they believed Jim Jones, Buddha, Mithra, Apollo, etc.Please take note that billions and billions, now, and past, have believed in God and the Christ. There must be some reason why we believe in it, no?
I've seen quite a few that don't. And even if they did, it would only indicate that there was a revolutionary named Jesus at one point. Books that mention him often also mention Buddha and Vishnu.You know, every history book that I've seen mentions the life of Jesus? That's evidence. No, it's not proof, you're right. But there's no proof for your beliefs, either...such as evolution.
Lack of scientific backing certainly doesn't help. Would you take a pill that people just claimed would cure sickness, but had no endorsement from the medical community?It's really easy to believe in something with scientific evidence lol. Just because science doesn't back it up doesn't mean it's not real. Ever heard of Polonium-218 Halos in primordial granite?
Why are you bringing evolution into this? Even if evolution is completely disproven (that'll be the day), creationism still won't gain any ground.I have hereby come to this conclusion: Evolution and other scientific-based views on the origins of the world and life have MORE EVIDENCE supporting them, but also have MORE EVIDENCE refuting them. Such as irreducibly complexity in microbiology.
Like Tom said, what kind of creationism would you be referring to? And what evidence would you be referring to? There is none.Creationism has LITTLE EVIDENCE supporting it, but EVEN LESS EVIDENCE that goes against it.
False dilemma. You forgot the lemmings dilemma.And, come on, billions and billions of people. Either we're all crazy or we're just seeing things. You're pick.
You're 18 and still believe this? Shame on you.The chance that all of us Christians are wrong is far less probable than the chance that life was formed by chance
If the Lord showed himself, there'd be no need for his planned judgements...because everyone would believe in him.
...then why should we believe it? Because the Bible said so? That begs the question, why should we believe the Bible?
And, come on, billions and billions of people. Either we're all crazy or we're just seeing things. You're pick.
Are you really going to use this weak argument?
If the Lord showed himself, there'd be no need for his planned judgements...because everyone would believe in him.
Surely you would believe in Him if he showed himself to you?
Please take note that billions and billions, now, and past, have believed in God and the Christ. There must be some reason why we believe in it, no?
You know, every history book that I've seen mentions the life of Jesus? That's evidence.
No, it's not proof, you're right. But there's no proof for your beliefs, either...such as evolution.
It's really easy to believe in something with scientific evidence lol. Just because science doesn't back it up doesn't mean it's not real. Ever heard of Polonium-218 Halos in primordial granite?
I have hereby come to this conclusion: Evolution and other scientific-based views on the origins of the world and life
have MORE EVIDENCE supporting them, but also have MORE EVIDENCE refuting them. Such as irreducibly complexity in microbiology.
Creationism has LITTLE EVIDENCE supporting it, but EVEN LESS EVIDENCE that goes against it.
How does that sound for you?
And, come on, billions and billions of people. Either we're all crazy or we're just seeing things. You're pick.
The chance that all of us Christians are wrong is far less probable than the chance that life was formed by chance
Are you really going to use this weak argument?
You know, every history book that I've seen mentions the life of Jesus? That's evidence.
It's really easy to believe in something with scientific evidence lol. Just because science doesn't back it up doesn't mean it's not real. Ever heard of Polonium-218 Halos in primordial granite?
I have hereby come to this conclusion: Evolution and other scientific-based views on the origins of the world and life have MORE EVIDENCE supporting them, but also have MORE EVIDENCE refuting them. Such as irreducibly complexity in microbiology.
Creationism has LITTLE EVIDENCE supporting it, but EVEN LESS EVIDENCE that goes against it.
And, come on, billions and billions of people. Either we're all crazy or we're just seeing things. You're pick.
The chance that all of us Christians are wrong is far less probable than the chance that life was formed by chance
Sorry. This statement wasn't meant to be a proof. It was meant to show that Christianity has been around a while, so please don't assume that billions of humans are retarded. I'd like a little more respect than that, even if you don't believe."Please take note that billions and billions, now, and past, have believed in God and the Christ. There must be some reason why we believe in it, no?"
You understand nothing about the role of science, do you...?
Evolution is a fact; people need to accept it and then reevaluate their faith....
It actually is not. The fact of evolution is very simply stated as "allele frequencies in a population change over time".OK, I actually think (maybe I'm wrong) that some of the athiests will disagree with this statement, because IT IS COMPLETELY WRONG.
You might call it such. Perhaps a better description would be that natural selection is an observed process, that provides one of the mechanisms for the fact of evolution. The theory of evolution is based on a number of mechanisms to explain the fact of evolution, one of which is natural selection.Natural Selection is more of a law.
Actual biologists disagree with you.Evolution is a weak theory.
OK, I actually think (maybe I'm wrong) that some of the athiests will disagree with this statement, because IT IS COMPLETELY WRONG.
Natural Selection is more of a law. Evolution is a weak theory.