Page 448 of 557 FirstFirst ... 348398438444445446447448449450451452458498548 ... LastLast
Results 6,706 to 6,720 of 8345
  1. #6706
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalak View Post
    Now I read this last night before the edit and decided to sleep on it and see if what my first impression was is wrong. If anything the edit has made things worse. What you are doing here by endlessly insisting what I said isn't what I said after I repeatedly pointed out to you that 1. It wasn't literally what was typed, 2. It wasn't what I meant, and 3. It wasn't the point I was trying to convey is this: You are telling me your interpretation of what I said is only what matters, and not what I typed at the time or explained to you afterwards. This is not only wrong, but shows that you cannot be trusted to debate with any honesty. You are twisting what I said in order to keep a false narrative going for whatever reasoning after I've explained how it's wrong and explained how you were breaking one of the 10 commandments in doing so, yet you persist in telling me that I'm wrong about how I interpret my own opinion and what I specifically said while throwing in self-righteous praising of your own holiness and condemning me for trying to talk seriously with you. Either this is deliberate trolling, or worse it's how you truly believe things work.

    Well, you have your preconceived notions and won't let reality get in the way of making everything else fit them rather than the other way around. However I'm not bashing my head on this brick wall any more, so feel free to twist this into me saying whatever you like but seek help for these issues - It's not healthy to live like this.





    Thanks for the backup dancj, but as you can see he'll say I'm lying because his interpretation of what I said is not the truth and he can't accept it for whatever reason when called on it. I'm no scientist but if he's actually interested in understanding the Big Bang Theory he'll look up stuff posted by people (not on Wiki) who can articulate/explain it far better than this nerd who is apparently expected to do better than the entire scientific community as well as travel far faster than light to verify the things we're not capable of verifying.
    If I interpreted wrongly fine I apologise but it doesn't change the fact that those theories you have been telling are incomplete and everything they say should not be taken so seriously until further research has proven them to be telling the facts I need to know in order to know everything I need to be certain that they are not half-truths or lies. You see given how seriously scientists are taken they should not simply say all kinds of things but only to reveal that they are incomplete and not successfully proven to be 100% true. And you are saying all kinds of things about me out of anger because I'm just reading what you are telling me. Not anyone else.
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

  2. #6707
    Mighty Member Iron_Legion87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,571

    Default

    I am sure I have share my thoughts on God and science in this thread before. I am a Christian that 110% believes there is a God, but I am not threatened by science in the slightest. In my opinion, science is just the method us humans use to figure out how God created the universe and everything in it. That's my quick and simple response to that debate. I don't think science disproves God, Jesus, events in the bible, or Heaven or Hell

  3. #6708
    Astonishing Member Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Soubhagya View Post
    God undoubtedly created life. There was no evolution. Are you satisfied?
    On that one, at the very least, you would need to explain why fossil evidence clearly shows that at the deeper levels, you have more primitive life and, as you go higher/ more recent, the pattern is always towards more complex forms of life showing up in the fossil record. You'd also need to explain away the clear patterns of evolution everywhere. And yes, I've read some of the Creationist stuff back when I was a Creationist by default simply in having grown up being told to not "believe in" evolution and actually reading some of the Creationist stuff and the early Bible, both of which were so ridiculous that they made me think there at least must be something to the Evolution thing enough to look further.

    I request you to understand the scientific method. There's a reason this is called 'Theory of Evolution'. Not 'Law of Evolution' like 'Law of Gravitation'. There's a reasonable doubt. And you say undoubtedly. Why are using terms like a priest? Undoubtedly chance created life.
    "Theory" in science doesn't mean what it means in every day conversation. In science, something is not called a "Theory" unless it explains all of the existing evidence and it is not called a Fact unless it is the only Theory that explains all the evidence. So we have the Fact of Evolution, that it did happen and the "Theory" which continues to explore the details.

    But, at this point, that it did happen is overwhelmingly supported by evidence.

    Which, by the way, in and of itself, has nothing to do with arguments over the existence of "God". There you get into philosophical arguments.

    Okay, here's a question. Why do giraffes have such long necks?
    Okay, here's the problem with all this. It's a game called "The Gaps argument".

    There was a time when we did not know what caused tides. That was used as an argument for God. "Well, you can't explain why the tides rise and fall. So there's a gap in what you know. Therefore that automatically proves the existence of God".

    Of course, science long ago explained what causes the tides, the gravitational pull of the Moon. So, of course, it then just became, "Well, yeah, but you can't explain why the Moon is there."

    Of course, that was answered but that just leads to another "But you can't explain..."

    So it becomes an endless string of moving the goalposts. Until you can explain every single thing, God will continue to hide in the gaps of knowledge but those gaps keep becoming fewer. But they will always exist.

    But we can never prove or disprove the existence of "God". But do I accept the god of any religion? No! Because we actually have claims all of those religions make of acts performed in history, like worldwide floods to name one, that evidence shows never happened and is ridiculous on multiple counts.

    As a friend of mine who is Catholic put it, "I believe in God but, when it comes to things like evolution, the human capacity to rationalize astounds me. I mean, you've got one thing over here, evolution, for which there is a mountain of evidence and another thing, separate creation, for which there is no valid evidence, and yet people in droves are willing to dismiss that mountain of evidence in favor of something that there is, at most, a thimble of evidence because it's more palatable to them or because that's what they were taught as children and so on".

    Also, you are conflating the origin of life with evolution. The study of the origin of life is called Abiogenesis. Evolution is about what happened once life exists and we have evidence to go by because that's how science works.

    Want to believe the origin was "God"? Fine. Want to believe it wasn't? Fine. But once we get to the existence of fossils let alone genetic evidence, it's a different situation.
    Last edited by Powerboy; 05-21-2018 at 10:45 AM.
    His name is CAPTAIN MARVEL.

  4. #6709
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    [QUOTE=ChadH;3677716][QUOTE=The Dying Detective;3677338]I'm not I'm asking him to fill in the gaps to prove these theories are the absolute truth because I don't take kindly to half-truths and lies.
    And yet you accept half truths and contradictions from the bible without question. I'm curious how you reconcile that with willfully ignoring theories based on actual physical evidence.



    So tell me, where exactly was the Garden of Eden?
    I simply see whether it matches up with Scripture and I put a lot of faith in God to never steer me wrong even if I do not obey Him all the time. It is currently impossible to find the Garden of Eden because the river Pishon and Gihon cannot be identified but Christian scholars guessed that it was located east of Palestine and north of the Persian Gulf due to Moses referencing the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. But I doubt anyone could get in anyway. But do you know the difference between the Big Bang Theory and Eden's location? You already have clues to find the Garden of Eden in the Bible. Unlike the Big Bang which does not have any clues whatsoever.
    Last edited by The Dying Detective; 05-21-2018 at 10:44 AM.
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

  5. #6710
    Astonishing Member Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,791

    Default

    [QUOTE=The Dying Detective;3677755][QUOTE=ChadH;3677716]
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dying Detective View Post
    I'm not I'm asking him to fill in the gaps to prove these theories are the absolute truth because I don't take kindly to half-truths and lies.


    I simply see whether it matches up with Scripture and I put a lot of faith in God to never steer me wrong even if I do not obey Him all the time. It is currently impossible to find the Garden of Eden because the river Pishon and Gihon cannot be identified but Christian scholars guessed that it was located east of Palestine and north of the Persian Gulf due to Moses referencing the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. But I doubt anyone could get in anyway. But do you know the difference between the Big Bang Theory and Eden's location? You already have clues to find the Garden of Eden in the Bible. Unlike the Big Bang which does not have any clues whatsoever.
    And this is EXACTLY why these sorts of arguments are utterly pointless: because they are arguments of faith versus evidence not evidence versus evidence.

    creationist-method.jpg
    His name is CAPTAIN MARVEL.

  6. #6711
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Powerboy View Post
    On that one, at the very least, you would need to explain why fossil evidence clearly shows that at the deeper levels, you have more primitive life and, as you go higher/ more recent, the pattern is always towards more complex forms of life showing up in the fossil record. You'd also need to explain away the clear patterns of evolution everywhere. And yes, I've read some of the Creationist stuff back when I was a Creationist by default simply in having grown up being told to not "believe in" evolution and actually reading some of the Creationist stuff and the early Bible, both of which were so ridiculous that they made me think there at least must be something to the Evolution thing enough to look further.



    "Theory" in science doesn't mean what it means in every day conversation. In science, something is not called a "Theory" unless it explains all of the existing evidence and it is not called a Fact unless it is the only Theory that explains all the evidence. So we have the Fact of Evolution, that it did happen and the "Theory" which continues to explore the details.

    But, at this point, that it did happen is overwhelmingly supported by evidence.

    Which, by the way, in and of itself, has nothing to do with arguments over the existence of "God". There you get into philosophical arguments.



    Okay, here's the problem with all this. It's a game called "The Gaps argument".

    There was a time when we did not know what caused tides. That was used as an argument for God. "Well, you can't explain why the tides rise and fall. So there's a gap in what you know. Therefore that automatically proves the existence of God".

    Of course, science long ago explained what causes the tides, the gravitational pull of the Moon. So, of course, it then just became, "Well, yeah, but you can't explain why the Moon is there."

    Of course, that was answered but that just leads to another "But you can't explain..."

    So it becomes an endless string of moving the goalposts. Until you can explain every single thing, God will continue to hide in the gaps of knowledge but those gaps keep becoming fewer. But they will always exist.

    But we can never prove or disprove the existence of "God". But do I accept the god of any religion? No! Because we actually have claims all of those religions make of acts performed in history, like worldwide floods to name one, that evidence shows never happened and is ridiculous on multiple counts.

    As a friend of mine who is Catholic put it, "I believe in God but, when it comes to things like evolution, the human capacity to rationalize astounds me. I mean, you've got one thing over here, evolution, for which there is a mountain of evidence and another thing, separate creation, for which there is no valid evidence, and yet people in droves are willing to dismiss that mountain of evidence in favor of something that there is, at most, a thimble of evidence because it's more palatable to them or because that's what they were taught as children and so on".

    Also, you are conflating the origin of life with evolution. The study of the origin of life is called Abiogenesis. Evolution is about what happened once life exists and we have evidence to go by because that's how science works.

    Want to believe the origin was "God"? Fine. Want to believe it wasn't? Fine. But once we get to the existence of fossils let alone genetic evidence, it's a different situation.
    The thing is there are gaps in the theory of evolution and the Big Bang Theory. And the most I hear here is just ignore the gaps and just accept that they were just put there by chance. I mean what happened to scientific verification anyway?
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

  7. #6712
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    [QUOTE=Powerboy;3677796][QUOTE=The Dying Detective;3677755]
    Quote Originally Posted by ChadH View Post

    And this is EXACTLY why these sorts of arguments are utterly pointless: because they are arguments of faith versus evidence not evidence versus evidence.

    creationist-method.jpg
    Here's the thing if Moses can identify two rivers that actually exist in real life there is indeed historical context for what he is saying and it makes the Bible a historical book. It's not made up as you so eloquently put it. It's not simply faith as you say it is there is evidence.
    Last edited by The Dying Detective; 05-21-2018 at 11:28 AM.
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

  8. #6713
    Astonishing Member Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dying Detective View Post
    The thing is there are gaps in the theory of evolution and the Big Bang Theory. And the most I hear here is just ignore the gaps and just accept that they were just put there by chance. I mean what happened to scientific verification anyway?
    But which direction is that going? Science fills in more and more of the gaps. With the fossil record, for example, what specifically do you mean by gaps? That every generation cannot be accounted for? What do you even mean by gaps being put there by chance?

    Also, where does science deny that there are gaps? But I'll use the fossil record as an example. Nobody set out to show that evolution was true. People generally accepted the biblical account more or less by default. But people began to notice there were discrepancies. There were things that should have been true if the biblical account were correct that simply were not true. The evidence that actually existed led to another conclusion and that conclusion has only become more solid as more and more evidence was unearthed literally and otherwise.

    Fossils take a specific set of circumstances to exist. The gaps there could only be that we're never going to have the fossils of every single generation. Is that what you're calling a gap? What does that have to do with the progress from simple to more complex forms that there is so much evidence for that it's logically undeniable?

    But for example what are the gaps you are specifically talking about?
    His name is CAPTAIN MARVEL.

  9. #6714
    Jesus Christ, redeemer! The Whovian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    In the Tardis reading The Expanse book series
    Posts
    14,887

    Default

    Today's devotion:

    SATAN'S MENAGERIE
    https://www.todayintheword.org/issue.../devotions/21/
    "The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of God stands forever"--Isaiah 40:8

    “A hero can be anyone, even a man doing something as simple and reassuring as putting a coat around a little boy’s shoulder to let him know that the world hadn't ended.”--Batman

    “You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: they don’t alter their views to fit the facts; they alter the facts to fit their views.”--The Doctor

  10. #6715
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Powerboy View Post
    But which direction is that going? Science fills in more and more of the gaps. With the fossil record, for example, what specifically do you mean by gaps? That every generation cannot be accounted for? What do you even mean by gaps being put there by chance?

    Also, where does science deny that there are gaps? But I'll use the fossil record as an example. Nobody set out to show that evolution was true. People generally accepted the biblical account more or less by default. But people began to notice there were discrepancies. There were things that should have been true if the biblical account were correct that simply were not true. The evidence that actually existed led to another conclusion and that conclusion has only become more solid as more and more evidence was unearthed literally and otherwise.

    Fossils take a specific set of circumstances to exist. The gaps there could only be that we're never going to have the fossils of every single generation. Is that what you're calling a gap? What does that have to do with the progress from simple to more complex forms that there is so much evidence for that it's logically undeniable?

    But for example what are the gaps you are specifically talking about?
    They don't explain what force exactly put gravity into this universe. How come our need for Vitamin C is ingrained into our DNA. If man was not made by God why are there traces of silica and common soil in our body? Also there are no clues as to the centre of the Big Bang so how did anyone come to this conclusion then? Because they'd have to be in there from the beginning.
    Last edited by The Dying Detective; 05-21-2018 at 11:49 AM.
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

  11. #6716
    Astonishing Member Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,791

    Default

    [QUOTE=The Dying Detective;3677808][QUOTE=Powerboy;3677796]
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dying Detective View Post

    Here's the thing if Moses can identify two rivers that actually exist in real life there is indeed historical context for what he is saying and it makes the Bible a historical book. It's not made up as you so eloquently put it. It's not simply faith as you say it is there is evidence.
    I think there's a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    In the Odyssey, it refers to the city of Troy which actually existed.

    The MCU refers to New York City.

    The Bible refers to Egypt.

    The fact that the stories take place largely on the planet Earth and reference real things does not make the events of the story real.

    First off, the story of Moses is likely derived from the earlier Babylonian story and the Flood myth is undoubtedly derived from the Babylonian Flood myth. Not even to get into the fact that, a few generations after the Flood, there are references to there being people all over the Earth as if it never happened but the story served it's purpose so on to another story. No continuity.

    My reference was specifically to science and evidence of evolution versus creationism, not to references to rivers.
    His name is CAPTAIN MARVEL.

  12. #6717
    Astonishing Member Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dying Detective View Post
    They don't explain what force exactly put gravity into this universe. How come our need for Vitamin C is ingrained into our DNA. If man was not made by God why are there traces of silica and common soil in our body? Also there are no clues as to the centre of the Big Bang so how did anyone come to this conclusion then? Because they'd have to be in there from the beginning.
    What about the fossil record? What about the stuff there is overwhelming evidence for? Are you ever going to actually address that or just fall back on another gap? Because, honestly, this feels like a "Gish Gallop". Instead of addressing one thing there is overwhelming evidence for (in this case, the fossil record), just sidestep into several other arguments. What about this? What about that? What about this other thing I got from a Creationist site? In this case, it sounds like you are just taking things that are proof of their own existence, gravity and silica, and somehow by some rationale equating that they need a god to exist so it's an argument neither for nor against God to begin with.

    What about the fossil record? Which, by the way, I never said was an argument for or against God and specifically said it wasn't either way. But the fossil record is an overwhelming argument for evolution.
    His name is CAPTAIN MARVEL.

  13. #6718
    Astonishing Member Powerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,791

    Default

    By the way, what happened to this thread? I had glanced at it several times in the past and it was pretty much believers discussing the Bible and I just went on my way. Now I come back and it's a Science vs. Religion argument, which is the only reason I said anything.
    His name is CAPTAIN MARVEL.

  14. #6719
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    [QUOTE=Powerboy;3677862][QUOTE=The Dying Detective;3677808]
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerboy View Post

    I think there's a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    In the Odyssey, it refers to the city of Troy which actually existed.

    The MCU refers to New York City.

    The Bible refers to Egypt.

    The fact that the stories take place largely on the planet Earth and reference real things does not make the events of the story real.

    First off, the story of Moses is likely derived from the earlier Babylonian story and the Flood myth is undoubtedly derived from the Babylonian Flood myth. Not even to get into the fact that, a few generations after the Flood, there are references to there being people all over the Earth as if it never happened but the story served it's purpose so on to another story. No continuity.

    My reference was specifically to science and evidence of evolution versus creationism, not to references to rivers.
    Unfortunately Moses was born in Egypt he could not have learned anything about the Babylonian myths and after fleeing Egypt he lived as a simple shepherd who was nowhere near Babylonian territory and I doubt the Babylon empire was even around that time as the Israelites made journeyed to Israel. So you say but the opposite has been proven to be true when scientist cannot find facts to support their evidence. When scientist cannot prove their precious theories are true they have made up new ones to do it. Rinse and repeat.
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

  15. #6720
    The Detective Man The Dying Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Look East
    Posts
    4,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Powerboy View Post
    What about the fossil record? What about the stuff there is overwhelming evidence for? Are you ever going to actually address that or just fall back on another gap? Because, honestly, this feels like a "Gish Gallop". Instead of addressing one thing there is overwhelming evidence for (in this case, the fossil record), just sidestep into several other arguments. What about this? What about that? What about this other thing I got from a Creationist site? In this case, it sounds like you are just taking things that are proof of their own existence, gravity and silica, and somehow by some rationale equating that they need a god to exist so it's an argument neither for nor against God to begin with.

    What about the fossil record? Which, by the way, I never said was an argument for or against God and specifically said it wasn't either way. But the fossil record is an overwhelming argument for evolution.
    It really depends on how effective their dating methods are because scientist keep stretching the years back further and further until there is quite a lot of questions as to how old the Earth really is thanks their methods.
    "Excellent!" I cried. "Elementary," said he

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •