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.
but you were not able to answer the question, you just further obscured it by talking about gods taxonExcuse me?
You need to go back and re-read what I posted.
I gave the definition of kind after prayerfully considering it.
Then I was asked what God's taxon is, and I do not - (that means I don't) - have access to it.
Now if you want to consider that lying, go right ahead.
that is lying, you led people to think you could answer it, but you can't, is that not what lying is?
I meant you and your "higher standard of science", but if you want to agree with me, then great!
Fair enough --- then all that stuff you said in Post 169, IMO, is wrong - (where it contradicts the Bible, that is).
NOW you're talkin'! Let's see where the Bible contradicts statistics. It will be a fun diversion from Crevo.
A faulty analogy, and thus a shakey start. You are treating everything as discrete integers to be summed, rather than sets to be combined. Take a look at set theory, and see that:Sure ---
1 + 1 + 1 = 1 (Godhead)
[bible]Leviticus 26:8[/bible]
[bible]1 Kings 18:18-19[/bible]
[bible]Matthew 16:9-10[/bible]
How's that for starters?
A faulty analogy, and thus a shakey start. You are treating everything as discrete integers to be summed, rather than sets to be combined. Take a look at set theory, and see that:
{A}∪{B}∪{C}={A,B,C}
Each set of curley-brackets is one thing, but the latter contains all of the elements of the former.
That is better maths, and doesn't demonstrate the fallacious statement 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
What "higher standard of science"?
I said we hold science to a higher Standard - meaning "God" - (don't you see the capital ess)?
Agreed. However, given that God is seen as infinite, any 'box' that can contain one God can contain an unlimited number of God's, all infinite in size. This is because the box that contains an infinite God must itself be infinite (and then some).Thank you Wiccan!
I'll also remind AV that 1+1+1=1 is not statistics.
IF, however, he said he had "several gods" all crammed together in a box big enough for only ONE and it was necessary to figure the likelihood that there was only ONE in there, we might be talking statistics.
No, we believe evolutionists made up their own, and now want science to be run accordingly.If you hold science up to your god's standard, then I can only conclude that you believe he has NO standards.
Which standards do "evolutionists" follow that the rest of science does not?No, we believe evolutionists made up their own, and now want science to be run accordingly.
They do not presently claim to control all fields of science?Which standards do "evolutionists" follow that the rest of science does not?
Almost all scientific fields independantly, and basically incedentally, support the theory of Common Descent.They do not presently claim to control all fields of science?
Creationists are the only one to make that claim. Evolutionism is a term your side made up, not ours.They do not presently claim to control all fields of science?
did you read what i posted? i said you lied when you said you could define what kind is, well saying something that is in "god's taxon" is not defining it. that is just adding in something else to obscure the fact that you can't define itPlease show me where I led people to think I could answer what God's taxon is - (especially since all along, I have been claiming I don't know what it is).
Creationists are the only one to make that claim. Evolutionism is a term your side made up, not ours.
But nevertheless it is a term for the here and now and even has a place in the revered Wikipedia.
As I said, it was a term made up by Creationists. The Theory of Evolution covers just the diversity of life on earth. Creationists often conflate it with Abiogenesis, Geology, Astrophysics and Methodical Naturalism for some unknown reason.Wikipedia said:In the creation-evolution controversy, those who accept the scientific theory of biological evolution by natural selectiongenetic drift are often called "evolutionists", and the theory of evolution itself is referred to as "evolutionism" by creationists. This label is used by creationists to suggest that evolution is similar to other "isms", such as Creationism, Evangelism, Judaism, Socialism, Communism, Catholicism. In this way, creationists bolster their claim that the scientific theory of evolution is a belief, dogma, ideology or even a religion, rather than a scientific theory. The terms "evolutionism" and "evolutionist" are rarely used in the scientific community as self-descriptive terms.
or
As I said, it was a term made up by Creationists. The Theory of Evolution covers just the diversity of life on earth. Creationists often conflate it with Abiogenesis, Geology, Astrophysics and Methodical Naturalism for some unknown reason.
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?