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.
You don't think it's a remarkable coincidence that you happened to be born into a time and place where the "correct" religion just happens to be one the dominant religions of our culture?
Isn't it logical that the correct religion would be the most influential and widespread?
Sorry, but qualified geologists who believe in a global flood say otherwise.
Surely you can recognise a hypothetical situation.
But you have a problem.
Geologists believe there used to e only one continent, there would not have been high mountains on this continent, so it is very likely that the amount of water in the sea would have submerged that continent.
Can you say where all this water car from?
There are not such critters.That is not what the qualified geologists who support a global flood say.
To even work at such sites one must swear not to follow the scientific method. That means that what is posted there is not science.Check out the geologists in creation.com and answersingenesis.
As for a global flood the final say all life died, and given the size and length of the flood it cannot be anything but a global flood.
There are no working geologists who use the flood model in their work. None. By "working geologists" I mean those who find oil and other minerals for a living. They all use conventional geological models because creationist models don't lead to the discoveries they need to make in order to earn their wages.That is not what the qualified geologists who support a global flood say.
This is the issue I have with the Deniars of the flood. There are hundreds of independent accounts, yet they are so smug and arrogant as to dismiss all of them.
Hey, leave the Tooth Fairy out of this!Great.
There are also hundreds of independent accounts of magical, fairy-like creatures. Such stories are MORE commonplace in folklore than flood accounts.
Do you deny that fairy-like creatures exist?
This is the issue I have with the Deniars of the flood. There are hundreds of independent accounts, yet they are so smug and arrogant as to dismiss all of them.
Not really. Modern science exerts enormous amounts of time, money, intelligence, technology and personnel in the futile attempt to disprove the reality of God. The false theory of evolution has done nothing for the benefit of mankind. For a time, it gave rise to some of the greatest evils we have ever witnessed. Most of the finest scientists prior to Darwin at least acknowledged the existence of God. Some were genuine Christians, others Deists. It did not hinder their scientific genius.To adjust the world to your particular faith, we'd need to reject large swaths of modern science and the technology built on it - you know, in order to reconcile it with the facts you claim to "know". Seem like a lot of effort to go through for no good reason.
That is a false statement and highly offensive at that, especially to the large number of God-fearing men and women who work in scientific fields.Not really. Modern science exerts enormous amounts of time, money, intelligence, technology and personnel in the futile attempt to disprove the reality of God.
I have no intention of changing the world. It is God's enemy. I may be able to help some doubters. That's all.To adjust the world to your particular faith, we'd need to reject large swaths of modern science and the technology built on it - you know, in order to reconcile it with the facts you claim to "know". Seem like a lot of effort to go through for no good reason.
Touchy, aren't we. I as talking about science in general, not the individual scientists.That is a false statement and highly offensive at that, especially to the large number of God-fearing men and women who work in scientific fields.
The perhaps you could tell us exactly how science (in general) is working to disprove the existence of God. Individual scientists know it can't be done, because they all take a philosophy of science course as undergraduates in which they learn that the existence of God is an unfalsifiable proposition and thus out of the reach of science. They know that nothing that scientists have discovered or could potentially discover in future can disprove the existence of God. I would be interested to hear your explanation as to how science (in general) is going about it.Touchy, aren't we. I as talking about science in general, not the individual scientists.
Not really. Modern science exerts enormous amounts of time, money, intelligence, technology and personnel in the futile attempt to disprove the reality of God. The false theory of evolution has done nothing for the benefit of mankind. For a time, it gave rise to some of the greatest evils we have ever witnessed. Most of the finest scientists prior to Darwin at least acknowledged the existence of God. Some were genuine Christians, others Deists. It did not hinder their scientific genius.
If the resources invested in evolutionary research was devoted to useful research, the world would be the better for it. But no, the scientific world pursues knowledge for the sake of it. How much money was spent on the Large Hadron Collider? And its updated versions? For what? To explain a bit of a mystery. And what benefit is there to humanity? Zero. None. Zip. Landing on Mars? Why? Much of India still lives in poverty, but they have a space program. Really?
First and foremost by shutting God out of the realm of science. Most of the pioneers of science believed in God at least to some degree. Some were Deists, some were Christians and others were of other religions. Evolutionary theory is used as an attempt to make God unnecessary. Science turns the argument around. It demands that Christians prove that God exists. Since that is not possible to the philosophy of science, it's an unwinnable proposition. All you have to do is check out the vitriolic responses to someone like James Tour, Stephen Meyer, and anyone else who disputes evolution. Professor Tour advises his students not to state that they reject evolution. It will be the end of their careers.The perhaps you could tell us exactly how science (in general) is working to disprove the existence of God. Individual scientists know it can't be done, because they all take a philosophy of science course as undergraduates in which they learn that the existence of God is an unfalsifiable proposition and thus out of the reach of science. They know that nothing that scientists have discovered or could potentially discover in future can disprove the existence of God. I would be interested to hear your explanation as to how science (in general) is going about it.
Many still are. For instance Georges Lemaitre, the originator of "Big Bang" cosmology, was a devout Christian.First and foremost by shutting God out of the realm of science. Most of the pioneers of science believed in God at least to some degree. Some were Deists, some were Christians and others were of other religions.
It doesn't do that. It only makes a literal interpretation of Genesis highly unlikely, which is by no means the same thing as making God unnecessary. Is that your beef with it?Evolutionary theory is used as an attempt to make God unnecessary.
And now we know that they are not. God is still author of our being but we now know that a literal reading of Genesis is not an adequate account of how He did it.When I was in high school, evolution and creation were taught as equally plausible and I was permitted to make up my own mind. That is no longer the case.
Who said that I am anti science? I am anti the worship of science as some kind of lofty, infallible, answer-to-every-human-problem endeavour. You know full well that most of the pioneers of science were believers. I was taught the "science as god" idea in the 1950's. Yes, some good has come out of it and that's fine. At the same time, Darwinism gave rise to extreme racism and was the basis for Hitler's attempt to exterminate all that was not Aryan. Let's not forget the shameful period of slavery, and later the Klu Klux Klan, that blighted US culture.I'll never stop being amazed at the irony of those disparaging scientific inquiry on a global super-network connecting millions of computers around the world.
If creationists *really* practiced what they preached when it came to their purported anti-science positions most of them wouldn't have technology beyond the 1800's. Yet, here they all are for some reason.
Isn't there some passage in the Bible about being a hypocrite?
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?