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.
Those are the only conclusions consistent with the evidence.
A young boy was given a box of Lego bricks and asked to form some imaginary animals. He created many animals of different characteristics. The boy was removed from the room and two scientists were brought in to examine the animals and give their conclusions. One said "Some are made from common bricks, so they evolved. There is clear evidence for this". The other said "All the animals were obviously created". Two viewpoints, both without evidence, but only one is the truth.
And yet conclusions have been made which are in opposition with others yet consistent with the evidence.
Just because a scientists says it, does not make it true.
I believe this ultimately goes back to God. We can't know anything for certain without God. It is historical evidence and conclusions, not scientific ones. That is why there is a conflict with creation and evolution. They are both faith concepts.
A young earth and a recent global flood are not consistent with the evidence, and this was discovered in the early 1800's. You have 200 years worth of science to catch up on.
The evidence does make it true.
So there is no evidence we could ever show you that would change your mind, correct?
A video of the actual events back in time. That is what is needed. Otherwise any hypothesis or theory of what happened in the past is historical science and a guess based on bits of evidence here and there. Not observable, not testable, not repeatable. Like the flood, the creation, etc.
That is what I have been trying to tell you.
Yet we do have a historical account from someone that was there.
A video of the actual events back in time. That is what is needed.
Sorry, but made up stories do not falsify scientific theories.
but you believe the made up story of evolution and feel it counts
Have you got a video of that alleged "historical account from someone that was there?"A video of the actual events back in time. That is what is needed. Otherwise any hypothesis or theory of what happened in the past is historical science and a guess based on bits of evidence here and there. Not observable, not testable, not repeatable. Like the flood, the creation, etc.
That is what I have been trying to tell you.
Yet we do have a historical account from someone that was there. You just refuse to believe it.
A video of the actual events back in time. That is what is needed.
Otherwise any hypothesis or theory of what happened in the past is historical science and a guess based on bits of evidence here and there.
Not observable, not testable, not repeatable.
Like the flood, the creation, etc.
That is what I have been trying to tell you.
Yet we do have a historical account from someone that was there. You just refuse to believe it.
but you believe the made up story of evolution and feel it counts
You're absolutely right piggy, but that argument is not going to resonate with them. What it boils down to is that everybody believes the evidence they like. You and I like eyewitness accounts and the word of God as recorded in scripture. They like "scientific evidence".
Either way you have to believe someone.
So as I said before, it really just boils down to faith.
You're absolutely right piggy, but that argument is not going to resonate with them. What it boils down to is that everybody believes the evidence they like. You and I like eyewitness accounts and the word of God as recorded in scripture. They like "scientific evidence".
Either way you have to believe someone. So as I said before, it really just boils down to faith. Which is what makes this entire discussion pointless. Without faith they will continue to lean on their own understanding, and with faith we will continue to trust in the Lord.
A young boy was given a box of Lego bricks and asked to form some imaginary animals. He created many animals of different characteristics. The boy was removed from the room and two scientists were brought in to examine the animals and give their conclusions. One said "Some are made from common bricks, so they evolved. There is clear evidence for this". The other said "All the animals were obviously created". Two viewpoints, both without evidence, but only one is the truth.
We like observable repeatable evidence.
To be a valid source of evidence the source must be tested. The problem with using the Bible as a source is that it has too many errors in it. Now you might want to believe a source that is not trustworthy since it makes you feel better. This is not a wise or sane thing to do. But then most people are neither wise nor sane. There is some good in the Bible. The whole thing does not need to be chucked out as some believe. But there is much evil in their too. I know of no Christian that believes or follows the whole Bible. If one did he would probably be thought to be a monster by his neighbors.
are you saying Jesus didn't exist?
Depends what you mean by the historical jesus. The miracle working version of god in human form as described in the gospels? - no, not a chance. But an ordinary human being who was a very minor teacher/preacher of some kind and got himself into hot water with the roman authorities and came to a sticky end? Quite possibly.
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?