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.
And it was the science of the time that gave them that idea wasn’t it?Is it possible that the scientists are fallible, incorrect, and just flat out wrong?
The Christians who believed that the sun revolved around the earth had extremely shakey, if any, Scriptural ground upon which to stand.
Agreed.And it was the science of the time that gave them that idea wasn’t it?
100% I Respectfully disagree.Yes. The proper way to demonstrate that is with a competing theory that is better at explaining the evidence than the current one.
Detractors of evolution have been unable to propose such a thing.
(And honestly, with the amount of evidence and the explanatory power of evolution, whatever replacement theory comes along will have to look an awful lot like evolution. Just like any future cosmological theory will have to look a lot like the Big Bang Theory. Or atomic theory. Or germ theory.)
Can't answer the question huh?Is it possible that the scientists are fallible, incorrect, and just flat out wrong?
But they were wrong, correct? Is it possible for you to be wrong?The Christians who believed that the sun revolved around the earth had extremely shakey, if any, Scriptural ground upon which to stand.
Science was not even a thing then, so no. It was the philosophy of Plato where they got the idea.And it was the science of the time that gave them that idea wasn’t it?
Of course it is possible that I could be wrong.Can't answer the question huh?
But they were wrong, correct? Is it possible for you to be wrong?
For me?Of course it is possible that I could be wrong.
Is it possible that you are wrong about evolution and creation?
To call it science is, I think, a misnomer. It was the understanding of the day to be certain but this is on the same level as saying the universe being made up of earth, wind, water, and fire was science. It was not.The philosophy of Plato was the science of the day.
Obviously, I completely and totally disagree with that conclusion about macro evolution. I always shall unless God Himself tells me otherwise.For me?
Yes, I could be wrong.
For science?
No. At this point for the idea of evolution to be wrong our understanding of the world around us would have to be so fundamentally flawed that we would need to rethink everything we know. It is not like this is some new science. This is the single most well tested and evidenced theory we have. For it to be wrong and is so outrageously unlikely as the world actually being flat. To be clear that does not mean we know everything or that their are not aspects of biology that might not change. But life on this planet evolved. If God created life then he did so and had evolution doing the heavy lifting.
It was science in its infancy. A flat earth and geocentric theory had to be corrected, like many scientific theories, You could call it the evolution of scienceTo call it science is, I think, a misnomer. It was the understanding of the day to be certain but this is on the same level as saying the universe being made up of earth, wind, water, and fire was science. It was not.
With what part? Or are you saying you disagree with 100% of it?100% I Respectfully disagree.
The ancient Greeks (at least the proto-scientists) knew the earth wasn't flat.It was science in its infancy. A flat earth and geocentric theory had to be corrected, like many scientific theories,
See, they were already advancing. We also had to learn that that there weren’t four humours in the body.The ancient Greeks (at least the proto-scientists) knew the earth wasn't flat.
Yes. That is why many of us see faith as problematic. Like many things it can be a double edge sword. It has inspired great learning and it has inspired dogmatic adherence. It can often be hard to tell which is which. In any case best of luck.Obviously, I completely and totally disagree with that conclusion about macro evolution. I always shall unless God Himself tells me otherwise.
A fair statement.It was science in its infancy. A flat earth and geocentric theory had to be corrected, like many scientific theories, You could call it the evolution of science
Best of luck to you as well.Yes. That is why many of us see faith as problematic. Like many things it can be a double edge sword. It has inspired great learning and it has inspired dogmatic adherence. It can often be hard to tell which is which. In any case best of luck.
I have learned that many of the positions that I held and believed were correct were because that’s what I had always been taught and I rejected information that contradicted the way I had been taught and believed sources that didn’t contradict it.Yes. That is why many of us see faith as problematic. Like many things it can be a double edge sword. It has inspired great learning and it has inspired dogmatic adherence. It can often be hard to tell which is which. In any case best of luck.
No!that is cherry picking.
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?