You can't take a stand on an empty cause. [Then give it up] You have yet to prove that the Bible should even be taken seriously, let alone be stood up for against centuries of empirical science. [Forget the bible, if you aren't a believer for now. What the krux of the matter here is, is for those who say that the past (& future) is physical only, just because the present, of course is-to provide some evidence! Plain and simple, who cares about other beliefs at this juncture? Does it matter what the Hare Krista version of heaven is, or the muslim houris of heaven, or the bible, etc? If someone tells our children that Adam's world was just physical only, and there was no God in it, or garden, or fast growing plants, or angels, of eternal life, or even very long lifespans, and a flood, as a result of it only being physical, they darn well better be able to back it up! All they give us is words like 'Oh, it is now physical only, so it must have been then as well' or 'Gee, we assume it was, hec, why not, it's all we know about', or 'Take our word for it, after all didn't we come up with granny and the speck!?' ad nausea.]
By default, the natural laws are the same across the Universe, both in space AND time. [So what? Duh, got any news for us here? How do you know there was no spiritual element near creation time? Or later, when the new heaven and earth are revealed, and the holy city?] ]If you want to assert that they somehow change based on whether or not spirits are flying around, you need to prove that your part is accurate - until then, the simpler explanation flies, which is that the Universe is the Universe and is so across all dimensions.
[Spiritual things cannot be shown to carnal only men, who are so cavemanish in science, as to yet not even be able to so much as detect the universally known spiritual world! All that remains is for you to clearly demonstrate, and prove that a physical only universe was indeed, and will forever indeed be all that God made, or that magically popped out of a speck or whatever!]
I am sticking to real science. [Good] Let me build the conflict from the ground up. I say that the Universe is sensical across all time and space, so the Bible is false. [So what, the bible says time shall be no more, who cares if it is presently touchy feely? We know it is physical, that is elementary] You say the Bible is true, so the Universe was somehow "spiritual" at some point. [There is a spiritual, and a physical, of which both are well known, but modern science only has the wherewithal to detect the one] However, the basic assumption is that the Universal laws are constant, and if you want to assume otherwise, you need to prove it. [I don't assume otherwise, the physical only universe laws likely are pretty constant, in that they reach out into the distant universe. In no way, however do they, or can they reach into our glorious future or past!] By a mechanism OTHER than the Bible. [Name any mechanism you can detect here, as to why it always was a decaying, death filled physical only universe, and provide some real evidence. Not your personal belief here.] If you go back to using "Adam's day" as an argument for Biblescience, you will be using circular reasoning and your entire argument will fall flat. [Adam's day refers to early man. If you have any proof God didn't make Adam, by all means share it, otherwise it remains just a hostile, godless, baseless opinion and belief.]
Ockham's Razor does not eliminate all theories. In terms of basic facts we can both see for ourselves, both of our positions are on equal ground. But, the assumption I make is that the Universe is the same Universe in all dimensions, with exceptions for mathematical anomalies like black holes. [So you project your admitted assumptions beyond time itself, for no apparent reason! Sweet.] The assumption that you make is that the Bible is completely true, so there is some sort of spirit realm that makes physics stand on their heads whenever it suits your paradigm. [But I don't teach it in public schools (yet) as science! You try to piggyback your horrid little baseless beliefs on the back of real science, and sell the innocent the package deal! ] Hate to break it to you, dad: your assumption is the more outrageous one. [See above sentence] If you can offer real proof that all the events in the Bible were perceived exactly as described, we'll talk. But for me, a uniform Universe is the less testing assumption than a talking snake.
[And that is fine. -Your belief and assumptions. Just keep them well distinguished from real science. You find it odd that in a merged universe we can communicate with all God's creatures, and I find it odd for all life to have spawned from some magically appearing lifeform, and the billions of galaxies and stars all to have magically appeared inside a little speck of a hot soup, then expand out to their present size!]
Again: a physical-only Universe (as you put it) is the default assumption. [Also at fault assumption] It is what we believe [I like that, all you evoisticlly bent folks ought to fess up like this guy, that it is just your BELIEF] until you conclusively prove that this cannot possibly be the case, and that your spirit realm exists. [And we all have some particular beliefs, which, until you conclusively prove that this cannot possibly be the case, and that your physical only past and future did exist, we, like you, will keep, and cherish ] You have not done so except by your very own frustrating brand of circular logic, which comes out to squat on your side. [It is not circular to realize there is no proof whatsoever that we were forever bound by the box! ] You can keep saying that there is a spirit realm as many times as you like, in as many words as you like... but it's not proven, is it? [I'll say! And your physical only nightmare past and future never ever ever will be, we can bet our life on it! You don't even have a world of witnesses, miracles, and a hot proven, spiritual bible to weigh in on your side! You have nothing at all, smoke and mirrors, assumptions, belief, -all without so much as one iota of proof!!!!! I really don't know how you guys got away with it for so long!]
If by "old age beliefs" you mean the principles of science as they stand in textbooks today, yes, they do. [No, no principles of science here. They are everyone's friend. We are talking principles of piggybacking empty beliefs on the coattails of science, that are pure poison. ] Beliefs are not the problem: that science, which you call "so called," has been built from the ground up on, yes, the basic assumption that the Universe has a constant reality across time. [Thank you once again for your admitting it!!!] There's no evidence to suggest that it was not, is there? [Or that it was, is there??!!!!!!!!!] Except for the Bible, which you haven't proved except, as I seem to be having a hard time driving into your skull, by circular logic.
I didn't admit anything - you twisted my words in the same way you twisted science. It's your job to prove the spiritual realm's existence. Until then, the default of a natural Universe with certain uniform characteristics remains.
[Exists now, you mean. This says nothing at all to when time shall be no more, and a new heaven and earth is revealed that lasts forever, and this physical only one, and death passes forever away. All this says is 'Well, this is all we of the box can see. therefore there can be nothing else. There are no alps!' ]