bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.  (Read 6959 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

phazel

  • Guest
Re: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.
« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2008, 10:05:43 AM »



Kweli,  just so it is not misunderstood,  I do not require scientific proof for the many things I contemplate and believe are possible.    My main point is and has always been to show that most of the creation / naturalism debates rests in scientists protecting themselves from the ridiculous notions of fundamentalist Christians.

Last I check around this place we are not against Christians but we understand that babylon has most of what it believes wrong. 

The eye all by itself is not scientific proof of a creator.  I do not personally believe that we evolved from a one celled organism,  the evidence that Abiogenesis is impossible is quite compelling.   Someone who does not believe in a Creator might want to hold onto a belief that one day science will uncover more evidence that abiogenesis happened.   And what if one day science says that is a fact as well?   So what?


That being said the scientific method is a good thing even if it allows theories and hypothesis that one day are found to be incorrect.   To bypass that method for our lives on earth is not smart.


   Babylon has perverted the scientific method by saying that claims of faith are as good as science for saying something to our lives is real and useful.  Shaping the data to fit into a 6 literal day belief is a big part of the problem.


Babylons fight against science is shrouded in the assertion that it is leading people into hell forever.

Think about it.
Logged

phazel

  • Guest
Re: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.
« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2008, 10:40:16 AM »


I have yet to find anyone nor any scientist to date, provide an answer for this other than "We don't know right now."


What does it mean to you if science does not have an adequate answer for you?   

What has it meant in the past when science did not have an answer, but then discovered one?

Logged

UncleBeau

  • Guest
Re: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.
« Reply #42 on: April 18, 2008, 01:11:27 PM »

The Scriptures tell of men living over 900 years old. Why do we only live around 100 or less these days? At this rate, the average human will die in the womb in no time at all! That's not quite evolution, is it? Unless you don't believe the scriptures; but I'll say this, If you can't believe just one point, you will be spinning your wheels to believe any of it.
Lazarus was raised from the dead. It can be scientifically proven that a living man IS in fact alive. It can be proven that a dead man IS in fact dead. It's not the Scriptures' fault that MODERN science wasn't around to see it happen. I could have a dream about anything AND YOU CAN'T PROVE OTHERWISE. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. The carnal man CAN NOT understand the things of the Spirit. The problem with most christianity and atheistic science is that they're both on the same playing field. NIETHER can understand things of the Spirit. How then will they ever be able to judge the little things? Now you could ask, "Why are you talking about things of the Spirit when we're discussing evolution and scientific evidence for scriptures and, and, and....?" Why indeed? The proof is there for those who care to see it, but you will never see it with your eyes. I speak as a fool.

-Beau
Logged

lilitalienboi16

  • Guest
Re: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.
« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2008, 01:37:25 PM »


I have yet to find anyone nor any scientist to date, provide an answer for this other than "We don't know right now."


What does it mean to you if science does not have an adequate answer for you?   

What has it meant in the past when science did not have an answer, but then discovered one?



What it means is that evolution cannot be taken as FACT or more than a THEORY. If they have huge holes in their theory that they are unable to solve than one should not and cannot teach it as fact.

Until i see an adequate resolution to these problems, i believe evolution should be taught as a theory, spoken of a as a theory, looked at as a theory and not emphaticaly shoved down our throats in the school systems as if it was the one and only truth.


God be with you,

Alex
Logged

phazel

  • Guest
Re: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.
« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2008, 01:51:11 PM »


What it means is that evolution cannot be taken as FACT or more than a THEORY. If they have huge holes in their theory that they are unable to solve than one should not and cannot teach it as fact.

Until i see an adequate resolution to these problems, i believe evolution should be taught as a theory, spoken of a as a theory, looked at as a theory and not emphaticaly shoved down our throats in the school systems as if it was the one and only truth.


God be with you,

Alex




I would be interested in seeing the information that shows school systems teaching evolution as fact in the light of undeniable truth.  Anything my kids brought home from scholl said  "theory".  Is there scholl systems that have material that says "fact of evolution"  or "truth of evolution"?


No offense to anyone, but most people misunderstand exactly what a "scientific fact" is.   

Theories for a flat earth were accepted scientific fact at one time, follow me?    What caused those theories to be rejected?

Logged

lilitalienboi16

  • Guest
Re: Worlds most prominant atheist stumped.
« Reply #45 on: April 18, 2008, 04:31:52 PM »


What it means is that evolution cannot be taken as FACT or more than a THEORY. If they have huge holes in their theory that they are unable to solve than one should not and cannot teach it as fact.

Until i see an adequate resolution to these problems, i believe evolution should be taught as a theory, spoken of a as a theory, looked at as a theory and not emphaticaly shoved down our throats in the school systems as if it was the one and only truth.


God be with you,

Alex




I would be interested in seeing the information that shows school systems teaching evolution as fact in the light of undeniable truth.  Anything my kids brought home from scholl said  "theory".  Is there scholl systems that have material that says "fact of evolution"  or "truth of evolution"?


No offense to anyone, but most people misunderstand exactly what a "scientific fact" is.   

Theories for a flat earth were accepted scientific fact at one time, follow me?    What caused those theories to be rejected?


That's the thing phazel. You have children and are a parent, i don't have children and am the student.

What grade are your children in?

I'm a college student currently studying to become a doctor in which my major requires i take a plethora of biology classes and chemistry courses. Sit in any college course of biology and you'll see what i mean.

Heck, sit in an english class and they throw the word around this "evolved," we "evolved," "your paper needs to evolve" etc... evolution has become the norm in just about any way of intellectual thinking in this society.

God be with you,

Alex

P.S. If you don't find it stated you will certainly find it implied that it is a scientific fact that we evolved.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2008, 04:33:14 PM by lilitalienboi16 »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.08 seconds with 24 queries.