Questions about origins of life timeline

[AV1611VET]

Only problem is that the thinking isn't faulty -- it works.

If it works so well, why are you asking for proof of angels?

What competition? In order to compete, AV, you have to actually do something.

Wow ... there went the entire Old & New Testaments out [your] window in two sentences.

You spout an agnostic's icon, but talk like a [strong] atheist.

I submit you've got a severe case of cognitive dissonance.

And that's good -- there's hope for you!

 

[Sayre]

It would have to be evidence, as direct observation would require means beyond our limits.

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'm sorry - I don't quite follow you. What form of evidence are we not able to observe? Evidence is our observations relevant to some hypothesis of interest.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm sorry - I don't quite follow you. What form of evidence are we not able to observe? Evidence is our observations relevant to some hypothesis of interest.

You cannot observe angels directly.

So to say that {chemistry → life} and expect us to believe it, is expecting too much.

We know angels exist.

And we know angels exist apart from abiogenesis.

So no, chemistry did not give rise to first life.

 

[Sayre]

You cannot observe angels directly.

So to say that {chemistry → life} and expect us to believe it, is expecting too much.

We know angels exist.

And we know angels exist apart from abiogenesis.

So no, chemistry did not give rise to first life.

I'm really lost about how chemistry relates to angels. So God makes angels before He creates other life via abiogenesis?

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm really lost about how chemistry relates to angels. So God makes angels before He creates other life via abiogenesis?

 

[Sayre]

I totally missed your point - did you make one?

 

[AV1611VET]

I totally missed your point - did you make one?

No.

 

[DogmaHunter]

No, I sure don't.

But I'm sure if any existed somehow, it would back the Scriptures.

And if it does the opposite, you'll just declare the science wrong. Lol

 

[EternalDragon]

It would have to be evidence, as direct observation would require means beyond our limits.

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've known many different Christians that have seen angels just like this describes, in recent times. Not just one, but a group of Christians. You can't have a shared delusion.

There were also cases where unbelievers attacking Christians have seen this and stopped the attack. Again, not one but a group all saw the angels at the same time.

Just some FYI.

 

[AV1611VET]

And if it does the opposite, you'll just declare the science wrong. Lol

LOL

 

[AV1611VET]

I've known many different Christians that have seen angels just like this describes, in recent times. Not just one, but a group of Christians. You can't have a shared delusion.

There were also cases where unbelievers attacking Christians have seen this and stopped the attack. Again, not one but a group all saw the angels at the same time.

Just some FYI.

Interesting.

 

[Sayre]

I've known many different Christians that have seen angels just like this describes, in recent times. Not just one, but a group of Christians. You can't have a shared delusion.

There were also cases where unbelievers attacking Christians have seen this and stopped the attack. Again, not one but a group all saw the angels at the same time.

Just some FYI.

Do musliims have shared delusions? Do Catholics?

 

[Sayre]

No.

This is ... productive?

 

[bhsmte]

They aren't ment to convert people to christianity. They are aimed at christians. The tracts are ment to make christians to believe it is easy to convert a non believer, it is enough to buy a tract.
People who pay for the Chick tracts, these are the real targets of the tracts.

Agree. It is a psychological effort to keep convincing one's self what you already believe.

Sort of like an athlete who works out to stay in condition.

 

[bhsmte]

And what chemistry gave rise to the angels?

I believe the California Angels (now Anaheim Angels) have been around since the 1960's. The rise, was cold hard cash.

 

[bhsmte]

It doesn't take a Rhodes scholar to see this from the Scriptures.

No, I sure don't.

But I'm sure if any existed somehow, it would back the Scriptures.

Nope, doesn't require a Rhode scholar to see it from scripture, but it takes something completely different to actually believe it.

 

[bhsmte]

I've known many different Christians that have seen angels just like this describes, in recent times. Not just one, but a group of Christians. You can't have a shared delusion.

There were also cases where unbelievers attacking Christians have seen this and stopped the attack. Again, not one but a group all saw the angels at the same time.

Just some FYI.

There it is, we have the evidence.

 

[Seipai]

Do musliims have shared delusions? Do Catholics?

Yes. Near death experiences very often lead to shared delusions. Though comforting when first heard of as evidence for God further study show it is only a reaction of the brain to approaching oxygen death.

BBC News - Near-death experiences are 'electrical surge in dying brain'

 

[EternalDragon]

Do musliims have shared delusions? Do Catholics?

I don't know. I have not heard of any. Well....weeping blood statues and lights in the sky. I hardly think that qualifies as seeing an army of angels on horses.

There are also images in toast which wouldn't qualify either.

 

[Loudmouth]

The scientific method is not applicable to past events.

Since when? What stops us from proposing a hypothesis of what happened in the past, and testing that hypothesis with observations made in the present?

Are you yet another creationist who thinks that we have to observe the hypothesis?