Proof science is inspired

[HitchSlap]

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.[/COLOR]

... I'll take your point with a grain of salt.

Here you go. Use this to write whatever you'd like.

 

[Freodin]

You mean since none show up in your test tubes, telescopes or microscopes, they don't exist?

Until you can build a machine that can do this ...

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

... I'll take your point with a grain of salt.

Until you can bring about this effect by prayer... I take your point, salt it and swallow it whole.

Your view is religion, science is something completely different.

 

[Ubogion]

You mean since none show up in your test tubes, telescopes or microscopes, they don't exist?

Until you can build a machine that can do this ...

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

... I'll take your point with a grain of salt.

until you can do this,


And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say unto this mountain, Remove from here to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you


... I'll take your version of the bible with a grain of salt

 

[AV1611VET]

Since when has science dabbled in the supernatural?

Mainly through the '70s, when the New Age movement made a big splash.

Science tested many things, from ESP to clairvoyance.

Tested them, yes. The results were rather natural if I recall correctly.

Did that answer your question then? if not, what did you mean by 'dabbled'?

 

[AV1611VET]

until you can do this,


And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say unto this mountain, Remove from here to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you


... I'll take your version of the bible with a grain of salt

You may want to consider all verses, before you establish a Bible truth; that's one of the first things a new convert learns.

James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

 

[Elendur]

Did that answer your question then? if not, what did you mean by 'dabbled'?

I used a poor term, I admit that.
I meant that science studies the natural world and since supernatural beings (like satan) isn't part of it; science doesn't study them (largely because of untestable hypotheses regarding those).

The ESP etc. offered testable hypotheses and were tested accordingly.

 

[AV1611VET]

I used a poor term, I admit that.
I meant that science studies the natural world and since supernatural beings (like satan) isn't part of it; science doesn't study them (largely because of untestable hypotheses regarding those).

The ESP etc. offered testable hypotheses and were tested accordingly.

Well, in my opinion, science doesn't have a right to say there's no teapot circling the sun.

Science can say they don't have evidence to that effect, or it is unlikely that a teapot is circling the sun; but as far as saying NO for certain, I think science would be overstepping its authority.

 

[HitchSlap]

Well, in my opinion, science doesn't have a right to say there's no teapot circling the sun.

Science can say they don't have evidence to that effect, or it is unlikely that a teapot is circling the sun; but as far as saying NO for certain, I think science would be overstepping its authority.

Let's see here... if I move this, switch thataround, make a tiny change here.. ok, here you go:

Well, in my opinion, religion doesn't have a right to say there's a teapot circling the sun. Religion can say they don't have evidence to that effect, or it is unlikely that a teapot is circling the sun; but as far as saying YES for certain, I think religion would be overstepping it's purpose.



Yep, that should do it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yep, that should do it.

Fair enough ... just don't call what you don't believe 'science,' and what I don't believe 'religion,' and expect me to agree.

 

[HitchSlap]

Fair enough ... just don't call what you don't believe 'science,' and what I don't believe 'religion,' and expect me to agree.

Yes, it's fair to say I don't believe in the supernatural due to lack of evidence. I consider all religous supernatural claims to be supercilious at least, and knowingly deceptive at most.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

It is well known that science is not about the spiritual. It is about the physical only. It uses principles like 'the present is the key to the past'.

Correct.

Mr 8:33 -... Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.

That has nothing to say about science.

In trying to get man to look to himself and the present realities only, and laws, God is ignored and all things spiritual. This is the heart of science.

You're opening sentence stated that science is "not about the spiritual" so doesn't it make perfect sense that science ignores the spiritual? Why do you require science to take into account something that is not relevant?

1Co 3:19 -For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.


Present state science then is foolishness to God, who knows the big picture.

Fallacious argument. Science is not wisdom and wisdom is not science. If you think otherwise than perhaps you could share your definition of wisdom.

Science then is a tool to keep men and children from God. It is a focus only on this present world, and any 'looking' at the world to come or the world that was is solely based on this world!

Strawman. Science has nothing to say about what existed before the cosmos came into being or about the afterlife.

 

[dad]

correct

correct

correct

False. You have been shown so many times that your diffenrent state past is nonsense, that this statement can be qaulified as "deliberatly and knowingly spreading untruths."

So you claim that is uses laws more than what we now have? Explain!? You see if you admit all they use is present laws you are in deep doo doo.

If that is the case (but ist isn't) then all hail to Satan.

No thanks.

 

[dad]

Zero evidence.

False. Jesus was seen by many for 40 days after He rose from the dead. Thats what it's all about.

 

[dad]

Correct.


That has nothing to say about science.

Do you think science tries to savor the things of God. that this is what it is about??? No. It limits itself to physical and present state nature, and does not like to retain God in it's knowledge.

You're opening sentence stated that science is "not about the spiritual" so doesn't it make perfect sense that science ignores the spiritual? Why do you require science to take into account something that is not relevant?

Yes! To ignore the Great Spirit is why Satan inspired man's knowledge to be so selective!

Fallacious argument. Science is not wisdom and wisdom is not science. If you think otherwise than perhaps you could share your definition of wisdom.

If science is not about proof or knowing...and not even wisdom....what's left? Do tell

Strawman. Science has nothing to say about what existed before the cosmos came into being or about the afterlife.

False. It claims a singularity existed, and also claims that billions of years from now the sun will 'die' and etc etc etc.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Do you think science tries to savor the things of God. that this is what it is about??? No. It limits itself to physical and present state nature, and does not like to retain God in it's knowledge.

You're a slippery little eel, aren't you? You make claims ("It is well known that science is not about the spiritual.") then ignore them when it doesn't suit you. That's disingenuous and very poor form. Just to get this clear - you have stated multiple times that science has nothing to do with spiritual matters. So why do you keep insisting that it should?

Yes! To ignore the Great Spirit is why Satan inspired man's knowledge to be so selective!

So you think science should take into account the spritual even though you are happy that it has no relevance? That is a completely nonsensical thing to say.

If science is not about proof or knowing...and not even wisdom....what's left? Do tell

Either you don't understand what wisdom is or you are deliberately twisting things again. And I asked for your definition first.

False. It claims a singularity existed, and also claims that billions of years from now the sun will 'die' and etc etc etc.

I didn't mention the sun dying so why did you?

As to singularities etc you're being disingenuous again. Are you are deliberately confusing science with the philosophy of physics?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

False. Jesus was seen by many for 40 days after He rose from the dead. Thats what it's all about.

That's not evidence, it's an unsupported claim.

 

[dad]

You're a slippery little eel, aren't you? You make claims ("It is well known that science is not about the spiritual.") then ignore them when it doesn't suit you. That's disingenuous and very poor form. Just to get this clear - you have stated multiple times that science has nothing to do with spiritual matters. So why do you keep insisting that it should?

It should only if it wanted to elevate itself from a Satan inspired little godless joke, into something that can know, and deal in reality that is not lobotomized by self limiting present state physical only fishbowl criteria.

So you think science should take into account the spritual even though you are happy that it has no relevance? That is a completely nonsensical thing to say.

It is all relevant...just not to one sided brain so called science!

Either you don't understand what wisdom is or you are deliberately twisting things again. And I asked for your definition first.

Of wisdom? It comes down from the Father of lights.

I didn't mention the sun dying so why did you?

Because that present state based prophesy of science occurs long after this heaven and earth cease to exist.

As to singularities etc you're being disingenuous again. Are you are deliberately confusing science with the philosophy of physics?

No it is a fact that they claim such Satanic foolishness as a universe in a hot little soup.

 

[dad]

That's not evidence, it's an unsupported claim.

Nothing is more supported.

 

[Elendur]

Well, in my opinion, science doesn't have a right to say there's no teapot circling the sun.

Science can say they don't have evidence to that effect, or it is unlikely that a teapot is circling the sun; but as far as saying NO for certain, I think science would be overstepping its authority.

There's one important thing to keep in mind though:
If there's evidence to be expected, evidence left by claimed events etc., absence of such evidence means evidence of absence.

 

[Radagast]

It is well known that science is not about the spiritual. It is about the physical only...

Since you think the physical world created by God is evil, I'm guessing you're a Gnostic, not a Christian.