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.
What?God is unknown science.
Galatians 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?Frank Robert said:When you say you know God you are specking from your heart which is different from scientifically knowing.
I think he may have meant: "God is unknown to science."I dont understand what this sentence means.
But I can say with certainty that God is NOT unknown.
What is your interpretation of Galatians 4:9?What?
Galatians 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
How about we research it first? give it a scientific name? make sure it gets in the press? then blush five years later when someone else checks its dental record?So, you just make something up.
That seems to be the creo- way.
So dishonest.
The Periodic Table of the Elements has more appeal to scientists who know God, than God has.What is your interpretation of Galatians 4:9?
By milking that Nebraska man story you illustrate a good point. Creationists think of their interpretation of Genesis as absolute God-given truth and are mystified and annoyed when it is rejected for the uncertainties of science.How about we research it first? give it a scientific name? make sure it gets in the press? then blush five years later when someone else checks its dental record?
I would agree with this in the sense that Christian scientists are in awe of the laws of nature that they believe God set in motion.The Periodic Table of the Elements has more appeal to scientists who know God, than God has.
You mean by?By milking that Nebraska man story you illustrate a good point. Creationists think of their interpretation of Genesis as absolute God-given truth and are mystified and annoyed when it is rejected for the uncertainties of science.
That's fine.I would agree with this in the sense that Christian scientists are in awe of the laws of nature that they believe God set in motion.
What? You are saying that basic logic is beyond you now.That doesn't make sense.
Let's see if logic can finally prevail. As you know the Bible claims the Earth is flat if read literally. You admitted as much yourself. Science can tell us if that interpretation of the Bible is correct or not. You believe that the flood of Noah occurred. Once again the evidence of the world that your God supposedly created can tell us if there was a flood or not. If God made the world then God made the evidence. The evidence does not support your interpretation.That's fine.
But when science comes back and bites them in the rear ... forcing them to make a decision on whether or not the Flood occurred as documented ... then we find out how quickly which side of the bread has the butter, don't we?
Science is good. It's gifted to us from God.
But when science rules the roost and begins dictating what did or didn't happen in the Bible, it can take a hike.
It means gravity was created for a purpose, not as a random result of a random universe. It perhaps means earth was designed for human life not just accidentally but deliberately, by loving creator.If it makes a difference then let's run a hypothetical.
I'll assume that God exists and He is responsible for...let's say gravity. Now you assume He doesn't and gravity exists as an uncreated force.
How will that affect us in different ways? You go first.
Is that why I made this thread?As you know the Bible claims the Earth is flat if read literally. You admitted as much yourself.
On it's surface it seems to be a simple argument against God:
"If God exists, then his actions should leave evidence. There isn't evidence, therefore..."
No one on that thinks rationally is claiming that the existence of gravity is random. This is an error that creationists make far too frequently. They tend to assume that something is random if they do not understand it.It means gravity was created for a purpose, not as a random result of a random universe. It perhaps means earth was designed for human life not just accidentally but deliberately, by loving creator.
Okay, exactly what did he measure and how?Lol, there's evidence literally everywhere.
Frank Tipler
- “When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics” (2)
Was it created or did it just develop by natural processes that are the result of an accidental expanding of energy? Of course no one knows where the energy came from but let's just ignore that...No one on that thinks rationally is claiming that the existence of gravity is random. This is an error that creationists make far too frequently. They tend to assume that something is random if they do not understand it.
Frank Tipler is far from being a reliable source. If you check out his beliefs he seems to think that man will create God:Lol, there's evidence literally everywhere.
Frank Tipler
- “When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics” (2)
There you go using the word "accidental" again.Was it created or did it just develop by natural processes that are the result of an accidental expanding of energy? Of course no one knows where the energy came from but let's just ignore that...
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?