My theory on creation.

[Root of Jesse]

Yes, really. I don't understand molecular biophysics, therefore God, doesn't quite do it as an exercise in logic.

Nope. There's a big difference between learning what is known and knowable to a good degree (biophysics) and understanding the origin of the universe (therefore God).

 

[Root of Jesse]

That is not all that he said. But now you know your error. I assume that you were not trying to lie.

I didn't state anything, I asked a question.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Really. That is a classic example of an argument from ignorance.

It's an argument from the unknowable, which is not ignorance. Back to you Chet.

 

[Tinker Grey]

It's an argument from the unknowable, which is not ignorance.

I wonder how you know this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's an argument from the unknowable, which is not ignorance. Back to you Chet.

Wrong again, you don't know what is and what is not "unknowable". You are failing left and right recently.

Your previous post only shows that you cannot respond properly.

Try again.

 

[lesliedellow]

Nope. There's a big difference between learning what is known and knowable to a good degree (biophysics) and understanding the origin of the universe (therefore God).

If the origin of the universe is unknown, that only means that the origin of the universe is unknown.

 

[Root of Jesse]

If the origin of the universe is unknown, that only means that the origin of the universe is unknown.

Right, but there's a logical progression from that. A being greater than what we can understand did it. God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right, but there's a logical progression from that. A being greater than what we can understand did it. God.

Or perhaps not.

 

[AV1611VET]

Right, but there's a logical progression from that. A being greater than what we can understand did it. God.

Or perhaps not.

We'll let the Bible break the tie.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We'll let the Bible break the tie.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Why use a book that is obviously wrong?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why use a book that is obviously wrong?

Yesterday's science:

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yesterday's science:

And yet they all probably beat the Bible.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I happen to be one of those people that take Scripture just as it is written when it makes perfectly good sense and there is no compelling reason to believe it to be a metaphor, idiom, symbolism, etc.

Are you saying "Man was created first" like before heavens and earth? If so, if Scripture does not read that way, I do not accept it, do you?

Genesis 1 has plants and animals created before man.
Genesis 2 has man created before plants and animals.

Either there's a flagrant contradiction, or else perhaps the point isn't to read the stories literally. That the ancient writers/redactors of Genesis thought to place the two stories right next to each other suggests to me that a literal reading wasn't the intended purpose.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[lesliedellow]

Right, but there's a logical progression from that. A being greater than what we can understand did it. God.

There is no logical linkage between us not knowing something and God existing (or not existing).

 

[pitabread]

Yesterday's science:

Point? Science is about learning what we can about our universe and ever-improving the collective human knowledge of it in the process. Do you have something against continuous improvement?

 

[AV1611VET]

Science is about learning what we can about our universe ...

Ya ... I see you agnostics & atheists have learned a lot.

 

[pitabread]

Ya ... I see you agnostics & atheists have learned a lot.

This isn't about atheism or agnostism. It's about knowledge and the best ways to learn about the world and universe in which we live. Science yields technologies and improving the general standing of living and well-being of our society.

Do you not enjoy the fruits of technological and scientific progress?

 

[AV1611VET]

Science yields technologies and improving the general standing of living and well-being of our society.

But they attempt it on their own.

Instead of acknowledging a rich Source of knowledge ...

Ephesians 3:20 Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,

... they set out on their own.

It's like wanting to push a kid on a swing, but he'd rather do it himself.

 

[pitabread]

But they attempt it on their own.

Instead of acknowledging a rich Source of knowledge ...

So which technological advances are directly attributable to an application of religious beliefs? Particularly in, say, the last 100 years or so? Are there any?

 

[AV1611VET]

So which technological advances are directly attributable to an application of religious beliefs? Particularly in, say, the last 100 years or so? Are there any?

That's not how it works.

God gifts us scientists to make our lives better.

But they actually turn on Him and bring us down morally.

They use His own gifts against Him.

Darwin is a good example.

God may have given us Charles Darwin to find a cure for cancer.

Instead, he left his medical profession, wife & family, and used his brain to advance the cause of evolution.

Study Nimrod.

A "mighty hunter before the LORD."

But he used his talents to build an empire so wicked, the Antichrist is going to revive it in the end times.