What is the end goal for creationists these days?

[Shemjaza]

Remind you that I argued that rock is alive because I don't think YOUR criteria of life is good enough. And, that is the consequence of a bad definition.

According to the Biblical criteria, many things are NOT alive. Tree is one of them.

How does one apply Biblical criteria to discover if something is alive or not?

Trees seem to have far more internal processes and cyclic behaviours then rocks. I'm not currently able to Intuit how to define life and non life using your standards.

 

[juvenissun]

How does one apply Biblical criteria to discover if something is alive or not?

Trees seem to have far more internal processes and cyclic behaviours then rocks. I'm not currently able to Intuit how to define life and non life using your standards.

It is strange. But it is important and is becoming more important as we are exploring "life" outside the earth. The biological criteria of life, as we usually know it, should not be the only one.

The Bible is a Book of life. Of course, there is a special definition of life in the theology. The only thing is that I discovered the Christian definition of life is also quite scientific.

 

[Shemjaza]

It is strange. But it is important and is becoming more important as we are exploring "life" outside the earth. The biological criteria of life, as we usually know it, should not be the only one.

The Bible is a Book of life. Of course, there is a special definition of life in the theology. The only thing is that I discovered the Christian definition of life is also quite scientific.

If something isn't specified by the Bible or some kind of revelation, is there any way to detect the Christian version of life?

I'm curious what you mean by 'scientific', in this context.

 

[juvenissun]

If something isn't specified by the Bible or some kind of revelation, is there any way to detect the Christian version of life?

I'm curious what you mean by 'scientific', in this context.

The definition of life is clearly specified in the Bible, everyone can clearly read it literally. And in modern science, it makes a perfect sense.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The definition of life is clearly specified in the Bible, everyone can clearly read it literally. And in modern science, it makes a perfect sense.

Why don't you spell it out, then?

 

[juvenissun]

Why don't you spell it out, then?

Nobody is interested.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Nobody is interested.

Believe me, we're all interested. We think you're bluffing, and if you're not, you would be very interesting indeed...

 

[PsychoSarah]

The definition of life is clearly specified in the Bible, everyone can clearly read it literally. And in modern science, it makes a perfect sense.

-_- yeah, and the bible never says rocks are alive at all. Show some scripture that does if you can.

 

[Shemjaza]

The definition of life is clearly specified in the Bible, everyone can clearly read it literally. And in modern science, it makes a perfect sense.

I'm sorry, it is not that clear to me.

It mostly seems to be associated with "breath", but that seems to be spiritual rather then as reference to respiration of atmospheric gases.

I do honestly want to understand what you mean when you talk about life and how it is connected to modern science.

 

[juvenissun]

Believe me, we're all interested. We think you're bluffing, and if you're not, you would be very interesting indeed...

If you think I am bluffing, why should I tell you anything?

 

[juvenissun]

-_- yeah, and the bible never says rocks are alive at all. Show some scripture that does if you can.

The Bible does describe many times that rock or stone will sing.
Interpret it the way you like to.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm sorry, it is not that clear to me.

It mostly seems to be associated with "breath", but that seems to be spiritual rather then as reference to respiration of atmospheric gases.

I do honestly want to understand what you mean when you talk about life and how it is connected to modern science.

The key verse is in the Torah:
Lev. 17:14 For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof:
This is the easy part (a definition), even this idea is critical to Christianity. But that is theology.

The problem now is: what is blood? This is not an easy question, and here is where the science comes in.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The Bible does describe many times that rock or stone will sing.
Interpret it the way you like to.

-_- the radio also "sings". Doesn't make it alive.

 

[juvenissun]

-_- the radio also "sings". Doesn't make it alive.

It is only a necessary condition.

 

[Astrophile]

The problem now is: what is blood? This is not an easy question, and here is where the science comes in.

'Blood is a body fluid in humans and other animals that delivers necessary substances such as nutrients and oxygen to the cells and transports metabolic waste products away from those same cells.' Blood - Wikipedia .

 

[juvenissun]

'Blood is a body fluid in humans and other animals that delivers necessary substances such as nutrients and oxygen to the cells and transports metabolic waste products away from those same cells.' Blood - Wikipedia .

Does it need a pump?
In other words, without a pump, would the "blood" be true blood?

 

[juvenissun]

'Blood is a body fluid in humans and other animals that delivers necessary substances such as nutrients and oxygen to the cells and transports metabolic waste products away from those same cells.' Blood - Wikipedia .

So, does the blood "have to" circulate in cycles?

 

[Ophiolite]

If you think I am bluffing, why should I tell you anything?

Because constant dissembling is provocative and arguably constitutes goading under forum rules for which you could receive warning points. For repeated offenses you could be suspended and eventually banned. I suspect that had you been reported for all of the instances of which you have been guilty you would have been history a long time ago.

 

[Shemjaza]

The key verse is in the Torah:
Lev. 17:14 For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof:
This is the easy part (a definition), even this idea is critical to Christianity. But that is theology.

The problem now is: what is blood? This is not an easy question, and here is where the science comes in.

It's not really a definition if the terms used in the definition are themselves undefined.

That section of the Bible you quoted seems to only apply to animals. How do you define blood in the context of the Christian definition of life?

 

[DogmaHunter]

He asked the wrong question.

"wrong", in the sense that it is not a question you are willing to answer.