Science IS religion

[ratiocinator]

In case you missed it, science CANNOT cover creation, the spirit world, God or etc.

So, unless you can provide some equally convincing evidence, then applying the standard you keep on applying (and then ignoring when it's met) to science, we have no reason to take any claims of any god seriously and they must all be delusional and based on blind faith.

There can be no objective evidence for or against from science!

However, there is plentiful evidence of an old Earth and universe and for evolution. Evidence you keep on ignoring.

 

[dad]

So, unless you can provide some equally convincing evidence, then applying the standard you keep on applying (and then ignoring when it's met) to science, we have no reason to take any claims of any god seriously and they must all be delusional and based on blind faith.

Here is the thing...Unless science has evidence either way for the nature it uses in models existing, then no one else needs anything! The only evidence I need for the win is that they do not know!

Then we get to all history and the records of scripture...how sweet it is! They are in my back pocket. Then there is the little science does know...all agrees with a different nature as per the bible every bit as much as a same nature in the past. In all ways, I win ans in all ways origin models are religion. Really.



However, there is plentiful evidence of an old Earth and universe and for evolution. Evidence you keep on ignoring.[/QUOTE]

 

[ratiocinator]

Here is the thing...Unless science has evidence either way for the nature it uses in models existing, then no one else needs anything! The only evidence I need for the win is that they do not know!

Err.... no. Is this even serious? If nobody knows, then nobody knows - there may or may not be a god or gods, or a spirit world or hordes of invisible, multidimensional pixies, all called Eric, in every cubic nanometre - anything at all you can dream up. Your little bible myth with its tiny, limited deity, is only one (rather silly and contradictory) story of a limitless number.

Except, of course, the god you believe in is actually impossible, because a god that created a young earth and universe in which evolution didn't happen does is falsified by the evidence - unless it is a dishonest deceptive god, that planted false evidence.

 

[dad]

Err.... no. Is this even serious? If nobody knows, then nobody knows - there may or may not be a god or gods, or a spirit world or hordes of invisible, multidimensional pixies, all called Eric, in every cubic nanometre - anything at all you can dream up. Your little bible myth with its tiny, limited deity, is only one (rather silly and contradictory) story of a limitless number.

Nobody in science/from science/by science knows! Billions of the rest of us do know. For many reasons science ALSO can't deal with!

Except, of course, the god you believe in is actually impossible, because a god that created a young earth and universe in which evolution didn't happen does is falsified by the evidence -

Plenty of evolving did happen actually, ALL of it after life first existed TO start adapting and evolving!

 

[Subduction Zone]

We get it, you are the authority on God and the bible though you don't so much as believe in either. You also are the authority on science though you cannot post any. Ha

No, I am far from an authority. I merely understand the Bible better than you do. But that is not saying much. And I knew more about science than you do in the ninth grade.

You might be able to learn, but it appears that we will never know. Why are you so afraid to learn? Do you fear that you will lose your faith?

 

[JChnsc19]

Nothing in vaccines has anything to do with sharing an ancestor with a flatworm.

 

[JChnsc19]

Thanks for expressing such a ridiculous claim for all to see here. Now, all you need to do is give us a few examples of this evidence for evo fable origins so called science claims! Good luck with that.
When little man starts off assuming there was no creation and looks for other possible reasons we are here, that is doig what you said of course. They seek only darkness and that is what they find.
Rather than alluding to greatness of knowledge, the thing you must do in this thread is actually post some so I can play whack a mole with it

They seek only darkness & that is what they find- what are you talking about?

 

[JChnsc19]

True. But science is responsible for WOMD, and etc. Nothing used in anything on earth is from origin sciences fables. Nor can science tell us that this natural world we live in now existed in Noah's day or will exist in the future kingdom of God coming to earth. Therefore, when origin science uses our current laws to extrapolate and model the past, this is...as the OP says...religion!

Whoa wow! You have evidence of a god AND he has a kingdom?!? Cool man

 

[JChnsc19]

Not sure 'anything' based on beliefs is a religion. But the discipline of science so called (origin sciences and their influence even in geology and etc etc) are very religious.

Not only belief based, but religiously biased to include only ideas from a preset methodology and criteria.

How are you defining religious & religions? Like what are they doing specifically that you can point to & day it’s a religious act? Who is giving this origin science “religious” group their tenets, dogma, doctrines etc? Do they have a pope or a prophet? A holy book?

 

[JChnsc19]

Not in any way is this remotely even related to a shadow of the truth.

Both are belief based anti Jesus fables.
NO! You cannot talk about the universe...only the fishbowl!
A god is anything ma puts before God. Such as science!



We also do not need evo fables to guide it anywhere! As for gods. well, you have no idea what is out there. The bible indicates that there are fallen beings out there that will all come falling down to this planet.
FALSE! The scientific method does not apply to the spiritual, or creation or even the past or future or far universe!

Nothing to do with the nature of the past or future or universe etc etc. In other words life in the fishbowl is greatly affected by the science OF the fishbowl! Ha.
The only way your religion can be used for determining what is correct is by using it as a cult and excluding what you don't like and can't deal with.






Looking at a definition online I see this.

"noun
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:a world council of religions.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:to enter religion.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:to make a religion of fighting prejudice.


Here is webster on belief

Definition of belief


1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing..


2: something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion ...


3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence belief in the validity of scientific statements



Origins scinces are a splattering of belief ONTO evidences. NOT evidence based!

Such as belief in the tried and proven and observed and tested and repeated bile and manifestations of the supernatural in real lives.
Using a religious/godless method to sully evidences in not proper or reasoned.

I believe God answers prayer and fulfills prophesy. All I have to do is look at history. I believe much of science prophesy is already shown false and changed. I believe that one day there will be no more cars in the wonderful clean world to come etc etc. So your car will NOT start then. Ha. or did your car start in creation week....or in the days of Noah.

Science was not there at creation. Naturally it has no clue what is what! That ignorance is clear I'll grant you that.
Those people would include God in their knowledge rather than omit Him from it religiously. The result, as we see is pollution, death, sickness from cancers, nuclear weapons and WOMD as well as false prophesies, and fables about creation that keep millions from the truth.




Evolution as taught in the theory of evolution is a myth. The mark of intellect and wisdom is NOT to recite fables!

Just because science is religiously clueless does not mean the truth does not go marching on and over it's rotting corpse!
Hey, maybe not much controversy over the pope in Catholicism..so!?

Religion, then. OK.

No it is not. We do not even have any genetic info from Noah or Adam's day that us usable. We do not even know what laws existed in nature at the time. So that means that the forces and laws affecting how DNA works (molecules and atoms) are not known. So when we hear man lived about 1000 years for example, science has nothing to say about it either way.

The ever changing fable may be worked out inside your believing head. The prophesy about the future is overruled by the bible though. Sorry. The whole earth will be filled with the knowledge of God!
Comical pontificate. Science doesn't so much as know what nature was like...forget how it changed.
All the paleo fraud so called sciences. Also geology. evolutionary biology, cosmology, theoretical astrophysics etc etc! Ha.

Just because you say it doesn’t make it so. Ha! Do you ever site any evidence? Ha!
Ha! Ha!

 

[JChnsc19]

Yeah yeah we all know the distance evos place in the embarrassing part of their fable. So rather than stat with the imaginary first life form, you can start with molecules or amoebas or worms or something! Ha. Tomato/tomatoe.


Is to.



Right, you take the Gd given ability for creatures to evolve (as observed in this present nature only) and you endow this feature of created life with the power of creating all life on earth! Religion.

No. We did not as strange as truth may be to your religion!
I understand the delusional, euphoric power of false religion. No problem.
Prove it.

[ Rather than me coming over to the deluded side, how about you come on over to the winning side? The water is fine here.

Is to-?!?!? Is there an age requirement to be on this forum? Ha! Do you have to be at least 12? 13? Ha!

 

[JChnsc19]

My belief set also accepts the wonderful adaptation and creatures God made. Nothing about them requires an evo religion. Really.

What’s an evo religion?

 

[JChnsc19]

? Creation is spoken about in the whole bible and Jesus is the creator of all things. How would denying creation be somehow more christian?
Other beliefs are nonsense. We get your religious perspective.

It does enable them to see.
Now we see some pretense you understand that the bible reaaaallly doesn't support creation. Seriously??

You have evidence that the bible is true & jesus is real? Wow...

 

[JChnsc19]

OK, that point is well spoken and clear.

I do not consider 'producing some same enzymes' a common biological trait though. Unless you think breathing is one too? If the same Guy created all life, how could it be that He would or could not use some same materials? Many creatures have teeth, legs, eyes...etc. We process oxygen a similar way in many instances...no?

Then there is something I would like to double check in your claim here also. Are we certain that the flatworm that lived way back at the dawn of creation produced the same enzymes? Not that I say it didn't but let;s see the evidence just to check your work here. Remember that enzymes catalyze reactions. All reactions depend on the laws of nature. So unless nature was the same in the far past, you cannot claim the same reactions happened unless we have evidence?



Perhaps the nature we live in does not reflect reactions or other things in the far past here. But why would we assume God is restricted from using atoms or molecules or gook, or reactions, or materials in more than one created creature? Let's look at other things He is recorded to have made. The earth, and a place called New Jerusalem. In both cases we have gems, and pearls and trees and gold ans people and water and etc etc. So He is known to use things again. Not sure how that is an issue.
Well we both live in the present nature so reactions would be similar for one thing.

You kidding? I tell you this fishbowl philosophy never ends!

Why not??

For the giraffe, maybe the original kind in the former nature had different needs and the animal adapted to a changed world and nature? Not sure how you dig out from this that man is pond slime or comet gook, or thermal vent sludge?
Would it not be silly NOT to??

That process is not known to have existed at the dawn of time is it? Proof? If all you are talking about is how things work now, well, that does not even address the issue!

We are prone to getting flattened by a falling mountain also! We are prone to breathe, have tongues, legs, walk, reproduce etc etc etc. Obviously the diseases Noah and earlier people faced did not bother them as much as today as they are recorded as having life spans of about 1000 years! Even the way some ERVs might be transferred today (via the reproduction channel) may not be the way viri or other things were able to transfer in the former nature!
Some people wish you would let up somewhat on that search...as far as making them mandatory.

 

[JChnsc19]

OK, that point is well spoken and clear.

I do not consider 'producing some same enzymes' a common biological trait though. Unless you think breathing is one too? If the same Guy created all life, how could it be that He would or could not use some same materials? Many creatures have teeth, legs, eyes...etc. We process oxygen a similar way in many instances...no?

Then there is something I would like to double check in your claim here also. Are we certain that the flatworm that lived way back at the dawn of creation produced the same enzymes? Not that I say it didn't but let;s see the evidence just to check your work here. Remember that enzymes catalyze reactions. All reactions depend on the laws of nature. So unless nature was the same in the far past, you cannot claim the same reactions happened unless we have evidence?



Perhaps the nature we live in does not reflect reactions or other things in the far past here. But why would we assume God is restricted from using atoms or molecules or gook, or reactions, or materials in more than one created creature? Let's look at other things He is recorded to have made. The earth, and a place called New Jerusalem. In both cases we have gems, and pearls and trees and gold ans people and water and etc etc. So He is known to use things again. Not sure how that is an issue.
Well we both live in the present nature so reactions would be similar for one thing.

You kidding? I tell you this fishbowl philosophy never ends!

Why not??

For the giraffe, maybe the original kind in the former nature had different needs and the animal adapted to a changed world and nature? Not sure how you dig out from this that man is pond slime or comet gook, or thermal vent sludge?
Would it not be silly NOT to??

That process is not known to have existed at the dawn of time is it? Proof? If all you are talking about is how things work now, well, that does not even address the issue!

We are prone to getting flattened by a falling mountain also! We are prone to breathe, have tongues, legs, walk, reproduce etc etc etc. Obviously the diseases Noah and earlier people faced did not bother them as much as today as they are recorded as having life spans of about 1000 years! Even the way some ERVs might be transferred today (via the reproduction channel) may not be the way viri or other things were able to transfer in the former nature!
Some people wish you would let up somewhat on that search...as far as making them mandatory.

 

[JChnsc19]

Having read the other forum he inhabits, he actually only uses the internet for one purpose: Demanding us to repent. That's really all this is. The debate and discussion are a facade. I think he's actually crazy.

I think he’s a troll

 

[JChnsc19]

No. I realize you have a fantasy you can't begin to support but believe real hard. Religion!
If a blob of chemicals popped out of mom rather than a wonderful, fully formed, unique personality and person, well you might have a weak point.

A blob of chemicals as in when she’s on her period? Or a spontaneous abortion at 6 weeks?

 

[dad]

How are you defining religious & religions? Like what are they doing specifically that you can point to & day it’s a religious act? Who is giving this origin science “religious” group their tenets, dogma, doctrines etc? Do they have a pope or a prophet? A holy book?

They have beliefs and follow and adhere to them, and base claims of how life and the world and stars got here based on them. They have teachings and prophets too!

 

[dad]

You have evidence that the bible is true & jesus is real? Wow...

Science is supposed to be more than just belief. What the bible says is believed not because of anything science says or can deal in.

 

[dad]

Evo religion or belief says that evolving caused man to exist. The bible says we are created and all abilities or changes came after the fact. So yes evolving went on and fast in the former nature but it only started with created kinds...rather than basically created life and man.