Truth: either God exists or He don't.

[Pilgrim Soldier]

It has been proven to the strict conditions of scientific investigation. Far, far more than is required in any court of law.



I didn't address the 'something from nothing' problem because science doesn't claim that. If anything, it is *religion* that claims that.

For evidence supporting evolution, look at a biology book. if you want, I can suggest one.



Hardly a 'proper scientist'. maybe you should ask an evangelical Christian? How about the director of the Human Genome Project? Francis Collins is both a well-known Christian evangelical AND a top notch biologist. But he is very clear that evolution has happened AND that both genetics and the fossil record prove this.

Thank you for admitting that secular science doesn't have a clue how anything came into existence. I think it's sad to see so many clinging to a so called science which has no clue about the most fundamental scientific question. It also has no clue how to make it's theory of evolution float

 

[Willamena]

But! What if He does?

What of it?

 

[Polymath257]

The scientific method is a theory which was hashed up by some mad scientist. It has never been accepted as a fact, that's why secular science hinges on this thing called a "THEORY" which has never been proven.

Maybe you need to educate yourself a bit about how science actually operates and what the scientific method actually says and does.

One crucial thing about the method is that you have to actively try to show your idea is wrong or at least *when* it is wrong. This is incredibly important. And, not only should *you* try to show your idea is wrong, but others are encouraged to point out flaws in your logic and in your methods.

BUT, what neither you nor they get to do is ignore the evidence. You don't get to ignore the similarities between species. Nor do you get to ignore the similarities of the genetics between related species. You don't get to ignore the cosmic background radiation or the distribution of elements in the universe. You don't get to ignore the red shifts of distant galaxies.

Do people make mistakes? yes, of course. But those mistakes tend to get caught by others trying to show where things go wrong. Are ideas overturned occasionally? Absolutely, although I would suspect that what can actually cause a theory change is such a small difference that you would ignore it if it was a discrepancy in your religious book.

And, something that is very difficult, but also crucial: ruthless self-honesty and honesty with others. The quickest way to ruin a reputation in science is to falsify data. The quickest way to get honors is to show someone else's ideas are wrong and give a better alternative.

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

No, actually, he didn't say that. Paul claims he said that, but Paul never actually met Jesus. Those who actually saw Jesus didn't report Jesus made such a claim.

No it wasn't Paul, it was John who recorded Jesus saying He created the world in John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

 

[Polymath257]

Thank you for admitting that secular science doesn't have a clue how anything came into existence.

Oh, you misunderstand what I said, then. Science has a good deal to say about how things came about. But it *doesn't* claim 'something from nothing'. That is religion's position.

I think it's sad to see so many clinging to a so called science which has no clue about the most fundamental scientific question. It also has no clue how to make it's theory of evolution float

It's been sailing quite well for over 150 years. What is pathetic is those who are still arguing about it well after every bit of scientific debate was settled long ago. The *only* reason people reject evolution is because of their religious bias. They blind themselves to the facts and refuse to deal with the consequences of the truth.

 

[Polymath257]

No it wasn't Paul, it was John who recorded Jesus saying He created the world in John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

The author of John clearly wrote it well after the legend had grown.

His mix of neo-Platonic philosophy shows his writings are not to be trusted.

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

No, the scientific method is what makes it possible for you to communicate here. The scientific method is not a "fact" it is a method that one uses to solve problems. Once again you demonstrate that you have no clue what you are talking about. Here is a simplified flow chart of the scientific method:

Yep, ask a question then research the answer using the scientific method known as circular reasoning. This is secular science in a nut shell

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Oh, you misunderstand what I said, then. Science has a good deal to say about how things came about. But it *doesn't* claim 'something from nothing'. That is religion's position.



It's been sailing quite well for over 150 years. What is pathetic is those who are still arguing about it well after every bit of scientific debate was settled long ago. The *only* reason people reject evolution is because of their religious bias. They blind themselves to the facts and refuse to deal with the consequences of the truth.

we never blinded ourselves to the facts, the fact is secular science has done nothing but present a bunch of unsupported theories and pushed them as fact using the old circular reasoning method which is fool proof

 

[Willamena]

we never blinded ourselves to the facts, the fact is secular science has done nothing but present a bunch of unsupported theories and pushed them as fact using the old circular reasoning method which is fool proof

Facts? or alternative facts?

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

I would challenge you to actually look into it and see just how far the evidence goes.

it is far more 'substantiated' than anything in the Bible, especially the New Testament.

I wasted over a year studying geology, I left after an argument with the lecturer. He wasn't able substantiate the theory of sedimentary rock formations. I discovered fossil fragments of the same animal in different sections of sediment which were supposedly deposited millions of years apart.
I asserted that the fragments were deposited during one geological even known as Noah's flood but the lecturer wasn't allowed to accept the clear evidence as he was not at liberty to step outside of secular science's safety bubble known as circular reasoning

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Facts? or alternative facts?

There are only two opposing world views, one possesses the facts and the other has endless theories which change daily. The choice is a no brainier

 

[Willamena]

I wasted over a year studying geology, I left after an argument with the lecturer. He wasn't able substantiate the theory of sedimentary rock formations. I discovered fossil fragments of the same animal in different sections of sediment which were supposedly deposited millions of years apart.
I asserted that the fragments were deposited during one geological even known as Noah's flood but the lecturer wasn't allowed to accept the clear evidence as he was not at liberty to step outside of secular science's safety bubble known as circular reasoning

How does Noah's flood explain fossil fragments deposited over millions of years?

 

[Willamena]

There are only two opposing world views, one possesses the facts and the other has endless theories which change daily. The choice is a no brainier

Oh, honey, there are a whole lot more world views.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is my persuasion by being born over (John 3:3).

I guess you are referring to being born again of the water and the Spirit.

John 3:5-7 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

John 4:14 but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.

John 7:38-39 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’” But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Baha'u'llah also wrote about being born again from the water of life. The following passages refer to people who are fast asleep in their graves of ignorance of God because they rejected the Manifestation of God for this age. The Water of Life is the revelation from God that Baha'u'llah brought, and it bestows eternal life for those who are awakened and resurrected from their graves of ignorance.

Those who do not have eternal life are even as the dead because they are spiritually dead; so just as those who did not recognize Jesus in His day were spiritually dead, Baha’u’llah wrote that people who do not recognize Him in this day are spiritually dead.

“Incline your ears to the sweet melody of this Prisoner. Arise, and lift up your voices, that haply they that are fast asleep may be awakened. Say: O ye who are as dead! The Hand of Divine bounty proffereth unto you the Water of Life. Hasten and drink your fill. Whoso hath been re-born in this Day, shall never die; whoso remaineth dead, shall never live.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213

“He is indeed as one dead who, at the wondrous dawn of this Revelation, hath failed to be quickened by its soul-stirring breeze. He is indeed a captive who hath not recognized the Supreme Redeemer, but hath suffered his soul to be bound, distressed and helpless, in the fetters of his desires.

O My servants! Whoso hath tasted of this Fountain hath attained unto everlasting Life, and whoso hath refused to drink therefrom is even as the dead. Say: O ye workers of iniquity! Covetousness hath hindered you from giving a hearing ear unto the sweet voice of Him Who is the All-Sufficing. Wash it away from your hearts, that His Divine secret may be made known unto you. Behold Him manifest and resplendent as the sun in all its glory.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 169

By believing God's word, that God sent His son to die for our sins and that God raised His Son from the dead because His Son did indeed do this. So possessing the Spirit of His Son to have eternal life and so know God. ". . . if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Romans 8:9. ". . . He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. . . ." 1 John 5:12.

I agree that we need to have the Spirit of Christ for eternal life, but can you explain why you believe it was important for God to raise Jesus from the dead? I am not saying I believe God did that, I just want to understand why it would have been important or even necessary.

To me it makes no sense that anyone would care so much about a physical body, because we all die someday... Moreover, focusing so much on the physical body of Jesus is diametrically opposed to what Jesus taught.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

The way I see it, body = flesh = profits nothing = resurrection of a body from a grave profits nothing. Moreover, where did Jesus say it mattered that His body rose from the dead? Why did this belief take on so much significance for Christians?

Does not address the justice of God, "For the wages of sin is death; . . ." -- Romans 6:23. ". . . the soul that sinneth, it shall die." –

You must understand if that is not done, ". . . and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; . . ." -- Ezekiel 3:20.

“For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

“Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.”

To me Romans 6:23 and Ezekiel 3:20 mean that the soul of the sinner will experience spiritual death

 

[Samael_Khan]

This takes the cake, I read you saying "Here I am observing Gods creation while denying His existence" wow, I'm speechless.

Really? Where did I observe a god creating anything?

 

[Samael_Khan]

Rebellion and sin blind the person, God is under no obligation to save them from their stupidity.

You are contradicting yourself. You said that God deliberately withholds information from people and makes them blind. Now you are saying that Rebellion and Sin makes them blind.

I am being logical, you are not. That is why you are calling things facts that you have insufficient evidence for.

 

[Samael_Khan]

It would be a time waster.

They are blinded in part, until the times of the gentiles are finished.

Plus, I think they only recognize the Torah, the first five Books of Moses.

The Knesset Jews of 1969 are the only ones that can touch me.

But, this is the closest I can come to them right now.

Enjoy the empirical for another day.

The Jews recognize the whole Tanakh.

Saying that they are blinded is just a tactic used to dismiss arguments that you cannot deal with.

I like debates between Jews and Christians because the Jews care a lot about context in the OT whereas Christians don't.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yep, ask a question then research the answer using the scientific method known as circular reasoning. This is secular science in a nut shell

Nope, you don't even know what circular reasoning . You really need to learn the basics. It is no wonder that you have so many false beliefs.

Researching is the opposite of circular reasoning. Your problem may be that you limit your "research" to the Bible and lying groups. Relying only on the Bible is circular reasoning. The Bible is the claim, it is not the evidence. At the most the Bible can only refute itself, and it actually does that by self contradiction.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are only two opposing world views, one possesses the facts and the other has endless theories which change daily. The choice is a no brainier

Sorry, you have no facts. The science side almost has a monopoly on them. Again, it is time to learn the basics.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There's nothing to understand about secular science, it's just a bunch of theories which have never been substantiated.It's no more and no less than that

Oh so false. And our conversation is overwhelming evidence for that. You rely on "secular science" every day of your life. Computers run on "secular science" as does almost anything that you can think of. Odds are that you do not even understand what the word "secular" means.