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.
No, I think we have pretty conclusively determined that the word is not 6000 years old and was not entirely covered with with water ca. 2600 BC.So the creationists guess is as good as any, then.
Why are you still on this theism v. atheism kick? You need to move it to different forum. This one is about creationism v. evolution.So? Why is there order instead of chaos?
Who says 6000 years old?No, I think we have pretty conclusively determined that the word is not 6000 years old and was not entirely covered with with water ca. 2600 BC.
That is not how relativity works.Who says 6000 years old?
And creationists have multiple theories. I've read entire books on old Earth creationism. And then there's the theory that since time is relative, it's young from one perspective and old from another.
Ok, so no units of measurement for complexity.How about you create life from nothing and then get back to me on how complicated it was.
Oh give me a break. This is the real issue. Creationism, no matter the method is what is being opposed here.
Then why is ID opposed by so many scientists?Nope. Science in general is not opposing people who believe in a creator god who set up the dominoes 15 billion years ago to fall in such a way that would produce people via natural events, even if she has to intervene to wiggle an atom indetectibly every now and then to keep things on track.
A scientific inquiry could begin with a guess that is turned into a hypothesis that can be tested. If the test is negative the hypothesis is falsified. If the test is positive then the hypothesis is supported by evidence. Whether the hypothesis began with a guess from a creationist or an evolution doesn't matter. The main complaint to creationists guesses is that never make it to hypothesis stage.So the creationists guess is as good as any, then.
There is nothing wrong with assuming that there was a "law maker." The problem with creationism is that the law maker continues to fiddle with his laws instead of laying back and letting the laws do their job.Such processes just developed themselves, hum? Rules and laws of nature point to a law maker.
Nature runs smoothly most of the time but when natural forces buildup we get hurricanes, floods, volcanoes and many other nasty things. We also get sunny beach days and skiing days and many other nice things.So? Why is there order instead of chaos?
Then why is ID opposed by so many scientists?
By "fiddle with his laws," do you mean performing His miracles?There is nothing wrong with assuming that there was a "law maker." The problem with creationism is that the law maker continues to fiddle with his laws instead of laying back and letting the laws do their job.
What? I am a Christian and a theistic evolutionist and all the regulars here know it. No one has ever said so much as Boo! to me about it--except creationists, who are uniformly hostile to non-creationist ChristiansOh give me a break. This is the real issue. Creationism, no matter the method is what is being opposed here.
One-off miracles aren't a problem. I was thinking more about evolution processes where creationists claim constant fiddling.By "fiddle with his laws," do you mean performing His miracles?
Such as parting the Red Sea? protecting Daniel's friends in the fire? and walking on water?
I'm sorry. I don't quite understand.I was thinking more about evolution processes where creationists claim constant fiddling.
That some biological structures can and do evolve by variation and selection, just like the theory of evolution says. Others cannot, and require direct intervention at the genetic level to complete their evolution. That is ID.I'm sorry. I don't quite understand.
Are you talking about theistic evolutionists claiming God fiddles with evolution processes?
And would you give me an example please?
I know God "fiddles" with nature, such as my aforementioned miracles ... (and I like your term "one-off") ... but as for processes themselves, I'm not sure what you mean.
Take parting of the sea which does not happen every day. Firstly, an all powerful God would have no problem doing it and secondly there is no reasonable naturalistic alternative so it comes down to a matter of belief. Compare the appearance of a mutation or other evolutionary process which happen billions of times a minute. Here we have a scientifically supported theory of natural selection on how that works.I'm sorry. I don't quite understand.
Are you talking about theistic evolutionists claiming God fiddles with evolution processes?
And would you give me an example please?
I know God "fiddles" with nature, such as my aforementioned miracles ... (and I like your term "one-off") ... but as for processes themselves, I'm not sure what you mean.
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?