Proof Of Creation

[BCRE8TVE]

Sorry for this long post (paste) >

The Truth about Evolution
There is more to discussing evolution than debating the age of the earth or the wing breadth of the archaeopteryx. There is value, for example, in examining how evolutionists make their defense. Looking beyond the argument to the arguer's techniques can expose fallacious reasoning which keep many from considering the God of Creation.

I completely agree with the first 2 & 1/2 sentences. People SHOULD examine science's claims critically. Science is not perfect, never was, and never will be. Mistakes will inevitably be made. Science however allows us to correct them.
However, there are no fallacious reasoning to keep people from considering God. God simply does not enter the scientific equation, being metaphysical.

If Christians plan to argue from the Genesis account of creation, they must first support biblical authenticity. Although the Bible can be supported, that may be the long way around. When Scripture is introduced, evolutionists launch into one of their "best" fallacies: false distinction — the banning of "religion" from scientific debate.

Even if the Bible were 100% authentic, it would still not change the fact it is not a sound scientific argument.
What science bans is not religion so much as religious claims that since we do not know how something happened, then an invisible, all-powerful, all-knowing entity must have created or designed it. That's a brain-stopper. Once you plug God in, there is no more room for scientific inquiry.

A shortcut is to point out how evolutionists engage in logical fallacies such as the "straw man," "bias ad hominem," "false distinction," and "non sequitur" fallacies. The first three are used in attempts to invalidate the creationists' stance; the fourth endeavors to validate macroevolution (the change from one species into another) as legitimate science.

A straw man is when you purposely misrepresent the opponent's position and knock it down. This seems to happen often enough with creationists who don't understand evolution.
Bias ad Hominem would be attacking the argumentator instead of the argument, ie: you're stupid, therefore you are wrong. I have never heard this one in public debates, coming from either sides.
A false distinction, or false dichotomy, is when you falsely present a problem with only two solutions. For example, either evolution is right, or intelligent design/creationism is. Now this is false, because if evolution is wrong, then we don't know. Disproving evolution is not the same as proving IDC.
A non sequitur is an argument that does not logically follow :ie, we don't know how the bacterial flagellum was made, therefore God created it.
As for endeavouring macroevolution from microevolution, it is akin to saying you can walk all you want in small steps, but it's impossible to cross the room. Scientists don't make a distinction between macro- and microevolution, because there is none.

The Truth about Evolution- The Argument You So Eloquently Refuted Was Not Mine! A strawman fallacy involves the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument to refute him or her easily. Stephen Jay Gould, in his article, "Evolution as Fact and Theory" in the May 1981 issue of Discover Magazine, attempted to refute creationism by saying, "We have abundant, direct, observational evidence of evolution in action, from both the field and the laboratory." His point: evolution is an irrefutable fact, and creationists ignore this certainty.

Which, technically, is half correct. It is incorrect because creationists support microevolution, but correct because they don't support macroevolution.

Yet, the evidence he cited supported microevolution, involving changes that take place within separate species. Creationists have no contention with the concept of microevolution.

In fact, A. E. Wilder-Smith, in his book The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution (T.W.F.T. Publishers), makes a case for both negative and positive mutations (microevolution) working against macroevolution. Negative mutations weaken the creature, a tendency that does not support survival of the fittest; positive mutations make it a stronger creature, helping to preserve its own class. In the latter case, the variations are the means that allow the species to survive distinct from other species.

This is entirely consistent with evolution, both macro and micro if you insist on separating them.

The fact that many evolutionists use microevolution to refute creationism shows the seriousness of this fallacy. Pointing this out can dispel the misconception that Christians do not accept scientific fact.

Creationists are also aware of many speciation events, where one species has diverged into two separate species, ie: new species of mosquito and bacteria, but then creationists move the goalpost by saying that mosquitoes and bacteria are still of the same kind. Kind is a very vague term, and creationists seem to be expecting a cat to evolve into a non-cat,when that's not at all what evolution actually postulates. Evolution does not say a bacteria will turn into a fish overnight, and yet this seems to be what creationists demand as proof of macroevolution, when that would in fact disprove evolution entirely.

The Truth about Evolution- Religious Bias Disqualifies. A bias ad hominem fallacy has to do with disqualifying someone's argument simply because the arguer has a special bias in the issue. For example, someone with a religious experience or belief is disqualified from having a valid opinion about his or her own religion. It is fitting to check the soundness of a biased person's argument, but it is wrong to reject the argument solely because of the arguer's bias.

I completely agree on this point. However, when people of all faith want to have a scientific debate about scientific theories, they need to realize that they cannot use scripture, nor that science need not conform to any scripture either.

In the 1982 trial of McLean vs. Arkansas, which centered around teaching both theories of origins in public schools, questions were raised concerning the religious beliefs of the creation experts. Objections by the defense (creationists) were consistently overruled. Yet, what the proponents believe is beside the point.

The only problem with the case you mention is that while it is perfectly acceptable to teach whatever they want in private, catholic school boards, teaching religion in public schools is not permitted, as guaranteed in the Constitution, under the seperation of church and state. And creationism is not science, it IS indeed religious. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just that no matter what, creationism and intelligent design are not scientific.

Of course, there are those who combat evolution who are not religious, but even that is beside the point. Religious belief is not necessarily based on fact, but neither is it necessarily founded in falsehood. A "religious" view might actually be true. If we don't allow it to be heard, how can we claim to uphold free inquiry?

I completely agree again. A religious view might very well be true. However, that still doesn't make it scientific, and thus unconstitutional to teach as science in public schools. Notice that word again, public.

The Truth about Evolution...Because Creationism Is Religion. The "false distinction" fallacy relegates creationism to a different category, thereby falsely nullifying it. To evolutionists, religion often disregards science (illustrated in the church-motivated condemnation of Galileo). Science is described as what is observable, repeatable, and falsifiable. With that definition, creationism is not science. Yet, neither is macroevolution.

Well, the big bang theory is not repeatable. The plate tectonics theory is not repeatable. The theory of gravity is not repeatable. What should be mentioned is that the results need to be repeatable, not the object of the theory itself. And this exactly what is the case with all of the scientific theories, evolution included. Genetic lineage can be traced back for individuals and for populations, and we find a gradual difference from human to ape to chimp to monkey to mammal to reptile to amphibian to fish to bacteria. The results of those genetic analyses are perfectly repeatable, and are perfectly consistent with evolution.
Random fact, 95% of your genes are practically identical to a rhesus monkey, 87% of your genes are practically identical to those of a mouse, 69% with a chicken, 54% with a frog, and 14% with a sea lamprey. This is testable, repeatable, and falsifiable, therefore it is scientific.

The false distinction is between evolution and creationism as "science versus religion" instead of evidence for evolution versus evidence for creationism. If the argument never gets to that level, again free inquiry is stifled.

If creationism were to present purely scientific evidence, there would be no problem. However, the proofs for creationism are not scientific, and most of them have been disproven. So if creationism is not science, what is it?

The Truth about Evolution- To Believe in the Miracle of Evolution. Suppose evolutionists abandoned the above three problem areas and debated creationists on equal terms. Would their position then prove reliable? Not really, because the fallacy known as non sequitur — Latin for "it does not follow" — becomes an immediate issue. Microevolution leading to macroevolution, discussed earlier, is one example.

The celebrated "missing links" as concrete evidence is another. The role of fossils as transitional forms is speculative at best in comparison with documented, trackable microevolution. Yet, evolutionists often use these "proofs" interchangeably as though the reliability of the one naturally follows the credibility of the other.

We have found missing links. When a lineage between species A and Z is oredicted, creationists say there is one missing link. When a fossil is presented as an intermediate between species A and Z, species K, then the evolutonist will say you now have TWO missing links. Even if fossil evidence of species A through Z were to be presented, then creationists would still say that there are 25 missing links.
Also, if you look on the 'List of transitional fossils' page on wiki, they have a comprehensive list (with pictures) of at least 200 transitional fossils. And that's a fraction of the whole.

Also problematic is concluding from molecular biology that there is a common ancestry for all organisms. It does not follow that because all life shares a common biochemical basis, that relationship was brought about through evolution. In engineering this type of creative diversity from the same basic building blocks is good design, the result of a designer.

You are right. However, that is not the entire argument. As I said, there is the gradual difference in genomes as you move 'down' the evolutionary tree. There is the genetic similarities where 50% of your genes are IDENTICAL with those of a frog. There are the homolguous structures between fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. There is the fact that genes which are turned off in the chicken,when activated, cause chicken to grow teeth, which clearly is a useless gene in a chicken. Vestigial genes anyone? And the list goes on.

Finally, it does not follow that because religion was wrong about Galileo, it is in error about creationism. The same evolutionists who insist that their own past mistakes should not be held against their position (e.g., promoting false "missing links" such as the Piltdown man) are often unwilling to allow their intellectual opponents to have human failings as well.

I completely agree. As for the Piltdown man, it was controversial and not widely accepted, but there was insufficient evidence to outright reject it. A testament to science's self-correcting methods, science did not claim to have found a missing link and dogmatically keeping it. Scientists actively rejected Piltdown man, no matter how much they could have gained by finding a missing link, and corrected their mistakes, which is more than can be said about the non-evidence for intelligent design as with the bacterial flagellum. Piltdown man was rejected and in its place came Homo Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo Erectus, with Neanderthal in there somewhere.

Because the above fallacies are common, many people cannot "hear" the scientific evidence for creation, they cannot accept the Genesis account, they cannot listen unbiased to what they consider a biased view. If we can expose these flaws, we may earn the privilege of leading them beyond God as Creator to God as Savior.

Fallacies are common on both sides I must say, but there are no fallacies in the scientific method, only in argumentation. Thus, no matter how flawed the argument may be, the scientific validity of its subject is unaffected, just as the Westboro's hateful message in no way affects what the Bible actually says.
Scientists are willing to hear the scientific evidence for IDC. Just because they are willing to hear it doesn't mean they are willing to accept it. So far, none of the 'evidence' has passed the scientific test.
Also, God as Savior is not at odds with evolution. For all we know, God could have operated through evolution. One does not exclude the other.

 

[jiggyfly]

BCRE8TVE, it doesn't seem that you are seeking Christ, so why are you here?

 

[BCRE8TVE]

Science does try to prove evolution and so do those who call themselves evolutionary scientists. How ever evolution is not a science but it is a philosife pardon my spelling,
since we can not observe evolution but only the earths processes that cant be called evolution. Nor can can they be called creative processes. evolutionists try to superimpose there model onto a specially created world and it will never fit. All scientific findings can be shown to fit creation ferfectly but they ignor it and hammer square pegs into round holes.

No, science tries to disprove evolution. In science, you can never prove something, only disprove it. Essentially, every new scientific theory is like a machine whose delicate workings depend on the solidity of the facts it is based on. Science is then taking this machine to the anvil and smashing it with a sledgehammer until it breaks apart. Then you rebuild a better machine.
Science is not, was not, will never be, and has never pretended to be, philosophy. There is a big difference in that philosophy working only with your brain, and science is taking what you see in the real world, trying to figure it out with your brain, and then apply it in the real world.
As for the square pegs into the round holes, not to mean that it's a pot calling a kettle black, but if you simply understand that nuclear fission is constant (and since the 1900's measurements indicated that yes it is constant) and the amount of original elements when the earth was formed (we see this in other solar systems with telescopes), then the earth is at minimum 2,060,000,000 years old (That's 2.06 billion years old), based on nothing else than the above two factors. The estimated age so far is 4.54 billion years (4,540,000,000) give or take 400 million years (1% error).

If you are interested to know how we can calculate the age of the earth using radiometric dating, this thread explain it. Warning: massive dose of math and physics ahead!

 

[BCRE8TVE]

Aren't there missing links in the theory of evolution though?

Yes there are! And that's a good thing! That is where the scientific research is done! If we knew everything, then what would scientists do, apart from twiddling their thumbs?

However, the missing links are in the specific details. The theory of evolution as a whole is very very robust, and is about as established as the theory of gravity.

 

[BCRE8TVE]

BCRE8TVE, it doesn't seem that you are seeking Christ, so why are you here?

I am correcting common misconceptions about science, which has nothing to do with religion, just as you would correct me if I were to make an incorrect statement about scripture.

I am not here to seek Jesus myself (I have subscribed to a Bible study group at my university just this week though), but to try to understand why others seek Jesus. This is not very apparent in this thread because it's simply not the subject at hand. I am thinking of starting a thread asking others to post why they believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost however, so I can better understand why people believe. To me, it's a mystery I simply don't understand.

If you wish, you can read my thread called 'Questions for Atheists', which was sadly closed, to see what I mean.

 

[jiggyfly]

I am correcting common misconceptions about science, which has nothing to do with religion, just as you would correct me if I were to make an incorrect statement about scripture.

I am not here to seek Jesus myself (I have subscribed to a Bible study group at my university just this week though), but to try to understand why others seek Jesus. This is not very apparent in this thread because it's simply not the subject at hand. I am thinking of starting a thread asking others to post why they believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost however, so I can better understand why people believe. To me, it's a mystery I simply don't understand.

If you wish, you can read my thread called 'Questions for Atheists', which was sadly closed, to see what I mean.

Thats what I thought, seems your here to argue and so I think you should go to another forum to propagate evolution, this is Talk Jesus not talk evolution.

 

[David777]

Hello JiggyFly.

I am also trying to correct misconceptions about Science.

The true definition of Science.

Every solution of a problem raises new unsolved problems; the more so the deeper the original problem and the bolder its solution. The more we learn about the world, and the deeper our learning, the more conscious, specific, and articulate will be our knowledge of what we do not know, our knowledge of our ignorance. For this, indeed, is the main source of our ignorance , the fact that our knowledge can only ever be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite.

So then it is true that the search for knowledge, is in fact a search for the magnitude of our ignorance. Systematic, progressive, Empiricism consequently is a systematic progressive slide into profound ignorance. Stop them before it is too late. Grab your pitchforks boys.

 

[Fraction]

Thats what I thought, seems your here to argue and so I think you should go to another forum to propagate evolution, this is Talk Jesus not talk evolution.

I have seen BCRE8TVE in three threads so far.

The Atheist Test

This thread has a hint of attack on science or scientific theories, mainly evolution and the big bang theory. I understand the point of trying to hold an argument or a debate with a challenging atheist who actually uses these theories as arguments against creation. To debate or argue using these topics as standing ground is illogical. Science and Christianity can co-exist. So far there has been no biblical or scientific evidence to disprove or condemn the other. In this thread, the theories challenged are challenged blindly and with little knowledge of them or even an open mind (no offense to Chad).

Ask a Atheist

The purpose of this thread creation to be is directly unknown, but I have seen threads like this before in atheists forums (Ask a Christian). Maybe we should ask him WHY he would start a thread like this on a Christian forum. He might not be doing it to argue or to try to disprove anything, but to gather information about us Christians to try to understand it better. I understand that the forum is called talkjesus, but in a thread like this we can ask the person about their personal views on Christianity and explain ours as well.

Proof of Creation

Another thread to challenge scientific theories and scientific methods. A lot of threads like this are obviously made because people feel threatened about science. Its not science in general, but it's how some people will use science in a debate against creationism. Which like I stated before is illogical. The thing about these types of threads is that the research is usually from a one sided source. If you seek to disprove something so badly, you will, even if it is based on false information or opinions.

To be honest, I only see BCRE8TVE correcting people and their sources about scientific theories, methods, and science in general. I don't see him as arguing. If you are wrong, wouldn't you like to know you are wrong instead of being allowed to run around and spread false information? The debate between science and religion is useless and gets us nowhere at all, because they never once attempt to disprove one another.

BCRE8TVE is seeking something we all seek, truth. Eventually he might find truth or what can be true to him. It could be atheism, it could be Christianity, it could be something else. It would gain no profit to force someone away or cast them away, when this person has an open mind. When he starts pushing atheism onto everyone and trying to prove that God isn't real on the forums, ban him. Until then, we should at least find out more about him and stop poking fun.

 

[jiggyfly]

I have seen BCRE8TVE in three threads so far.

The Atheist Test

This thread has a hint of attack on science or scientific theories, mainly evolution and the big bang theory. I understand the point of trying to hold an argument or a debate with a challenging atheist who actually uses these theories as arguments against creation. To debate or argue using these topics as standing ground is illogical. Science and Christianity can co-exist. So far there has been no biblical or scientific evidence to disprove or condemn the other. In this thread, the theories challenged are challenged blindly and with little knowledge of them or even an open mind (no offense to Chad).

Ask a Atheist

The purpose of this thread creation to be is directly unknown, but I have seen threads like this before in atheists forums (Ask a Christian). Maybe we should ask him WHY he would start a thread like this on a Christian forum. He might not be doing it to argue or to try to disprove anything, but to gather information about us Christians to try to understand it better. I understand that the forum is called talkjesus, but in a thread like this we can ask the person about their personal views on Christianity and explain ours as well.

Proof of Creation

Another thread to challenge scientific theories and scientific methods. A lot of threads like this are obviously made because people feel threatened about science. Its not science in general, but it's how some people will use science in a debate against creationism. Which like I stated before is illogical. The thing about these types of threads is that the research is usually from a one sided source. If you seek to disprove something so badly, you will, even if it is based on false information or opinions.

To be honest, I only see BCRE8TVE correcting people and their sources about scientific theories, methods, and science in general. I don't see him as arguing. If you are wrong, wouldn't you like to know you are wrong instead of being allowed to run around and spread false information? The debate between science and religion is useless and gets us nowhere at all, because they never once attempt to disprove one another.

BCRE8TVE is seeking something we all seek, truth. Eventually he might find truth or what can be true to him. It could be atheism, it could be Christianity, it could be something else. It would gain no profit to force someone away or cast them away, when this person has an open mind. When he starts pushing atheism onto everyone and trying to prove that God isn't real on the forums, ban him. Until then, we should at least find out more about him and stop poking fun.

I understand your position and your opinion is noted. But the responsibility of keeping order in this forum is not an easy job. BCRE8TVE has made 48 posts. How many of his posts indicate that he is seeking Christ or building up anyone in Christ? Again this this TalkJesus not talk evolution and if your not here to learn of Jesus Christ, share Jesus Christ and or explore Jesus Christ, then your obviously in the wrong forum. Do you go to the grocery store to buy auto parts, I think not and in this same manner this forum is not a forum in which people come to explore the ideas of evolution. I am sure that there are such forums out there for that purpose and if not maybe someone should go and start one.

I'm not sure who is poking fun at BCRE8TVE but we also have a tool in place for reporting such things to the admin and mods. I personally think 48 posts are enough to indicate agenda.

 

[Mr. Traverse]

Aren't there missing links in the theory of evolution though?

As creative said, yes there are. But not to the point of falsifying the theory. In fact, I find it difficult to think of a scientific theory that doesn't have gaps of some kind.

Respectfully,

Traverse

 

[BCRE8TVE]

Thats what I thought, seems your here to argue and so I think you should go to another forum to propagate evolution, this is Talk Jesus not talk evolution.

I completely agree. However, Chad was the one to specifically bring up evolution in this topic, which is why I reply to it. I have never been the one to introduce evolution under the guise that it somehow disproved religion (which it most certainly doesn't). I simply wished to correct what seems to be wide-spread misconceptions about science. After 48 posts, like you said, it seems I alone cannot replace years of education. I admit that when reading some posts on here, I thought 'In scientific terms, this is so many different kinds of wrong! where do I even start to correct?'
And I did try to correct. However, it seems my rather long-winded and exhaustive corrections fell on deaf ears, or no-one was interested in pursuing the discussion. I think I'll stop trying to educate people about science and turn away from this topic, because in 48 posts, I don't seem to have gone forward an iota.
I tried to do the same with the Questions for Atheists thread, to correct misconceptions about atheists which Christians seem to hold, but the thread has been locked, and only one or two participants seemed genuinely interested in replying with their own thoughts. I might as well abandon that approach also.

What I think I will do is post a thread asking what God and Jesus does in everyone's everyday life. It seems there's this huge thing I'm missing, and I have no idea why people think it's so great, or what they do with it. I am curious, and I wish to learn what makes a Christian a Christian.




David777, I don't know how you can fit empiricism, seeking answers and a slide into profound ignorance in one sentence. The 'profound ignorance' has given us practically every modern thing you see around you today. The slide into ignorance has generated more new knowledge than any religion seems to have done so far.
Please stop misrepresenting science. I would ask you to inform yourself more about what science is, question what science does in your everyday life, or at the very least stop spreading misinformation. Thank you.



Fraction
Thank you very much! Might I ask just out of curiosity what your faith is, if any?

Atheist test
I'd say you hit the nail on the head!

Ask an Atheist
The purpose of this thread was for me to clarify what an atheist is to Christians, while at the same time learning what Christians thought an atheist was. I didn't know how much I saw on youtube and read online was true, so I thought I'd see for myself.
Again, the last two sentences were spot on.

Proof of Creation
I might just add that creationists might genuinely be afraid of science, because when they pose as scientists and posit scientific claims, instead of being the authority on a subject, they become just another group whose claims can be critically examined and rejected just like everyone else's. The moment creationism/ID STOPS posing as scientists, they have nothing to fear of science.

Thank you! I am happy someone has noticed I do not wish to be the typical internet 'new atheist' flaunting science left and right to disprove religion and creating arguments everywhere.

Again, right in the bull's eye! Thanks!

 

[BCRE8TVE]

I understand your position and your opinion is noted. But the responsibility of keeping order in this forum is not an easy job. BCRE8TVE has made 48 posts. How many of his posts indicate that he is seeking Christ or building up anyone in Christ? Again this this TalkJesus not talk evolution and if your not here to learn of Jesus Christ, share Jesus Christ and or explore Jesus Christ, then your obviously in the wrong forum. Do you go to the grocery store to buy auto parts, I think not and in this same manner this forum is not a forum in which people come to explore the ideas of evolution. I am sure that there are such forums out there for that purpose and if not maybe someone should go and start one.

I'm not sure who is poking fun at BCRE8TVE but we also have a tool in place for reporting such things to the admin and mods. I personally think 48 posts are enough to indicate agenda.

Unfortunately, most of those 48 posts have been spent trying to correct misinformation about science and sharing my scientific education. Those posts do not seem to have had any great effect.

Chad brought up evolution, I responded about evolution. Had he not brought it up, I would not have either.

As for an agenda, if I had one, such as trolling, you would not be seeing the time and effort I put into my posts to make them as scientifically accurate nor as educating and inspiring as I possibly can. I do not make outrageous claims, I do not attack other people's positions, I do not enforce my opinions. You may believe I have an agenda if you wish, but my goal is to be as transparent and honest as possible.

 

[David777]

Hello Athiests.

Was there ever grounds for a debate in the first place?

There is a solution to this never ending debate.
It is a very simple solution.

Where do we have to look, Philosophy.

Within Philosophy is Epistemology.
Within Epistemology are two definitions.
Determinism and Causality.

These two groups have debated for thousands of years.
All that occurred was lots of hot air and a greater complexity,
as the debate progressed over time.

Science is Causality (based on the assumption of natural causes).

Christianity is Determinism (appeal to higher force, God).

This is the debate you have witnessed on this thread.

Is there ever a winner?

There was ever only one winner, He that determined all.
Jesus Christ is the predetermined, He that Determined all.

Science, since it stands on the initial assumption of natural
causes, must be asked to justify the assumption.

Which Science is not able to do, because absolute knowledge
is necessary to make the assumption in the first place. Otherwise,
Science will eventually end up only with theory, then finally at hypothesis.
It is going nowhere because it never started.

A snake chewing on its tail.
Now that was easy.

I might just add that knowledge of Jesus is a result of REVELATION.
No assumptions are necessary.
Which is Determinism, the Grand Winner.
With Jesus Christ access is granted.
What debate???

 

[ItinerantLurker]

Was there ever grounds for a debate in the first place?

As far as I can tell, no one is debating Christianity in this thread. Perhaps your posts would be better spent responding to what people are actually saying.




Lurker

 

[jiggyfly]

TalkJesus forum rule #4
No false teaching of Scripture. We preach what the Holy Bible says, nothing else.
- this site is not for preaching any religion at all. It is solely 100% about the Holy Bible and Jesus/GOD.
- any teaching outside Scripture including debates will result in account termination

 

[Kit Carson]

I completely agree. However, Chad was the one to specifically bring up evolution in this topic, which is why I reply to it. I have never been the one to introduce evolution under the guise that it somehow disproved religion (which it most certainly doesn't). I simply wished to correct what seems to be wide-spread misconceptions about science. After 48 posts, like you said, it seems I alone cannot replace years of education. I admit that when reading some posts on here, I thought 'In scientific terms, this is so many different kinds of wrong! where do I even start to correct?'
And I did try to correct. However, it seems my rather long-winded and exhaustive corrections fell on deaf ears, or no-one was interested in pursuing the discussion. I think I'll stop trying to educate people about science and turn away from this topic, because in 48 posts, I don't seem to have gone forward an iota.
I tried to do the same with the Questions for Atheists thread, to correct misconceptions about atheists which Christians seem to hold, but the thread has been locked, and only one or two participants seemed genuinely interested in replying with their own thoughts. I might as well abandon that approach also.

What I think I will do is post a thread asking what God and Jesus does in everyone's everyday life. It seems there's this huge thing I'm missing, and I have no idea why people think it's so great, or what they do with it. I am curious, and I wish to learn what makes a Christian a Christian.




David777, I don't know how you can fit empiricism, seeking answers and a slide into profound ignorance in one sentence. The 'profound ignorance' has given us practically every modern thing you see around you today. The slide into ignorance has generated more new knowledge than any religion seems to have done so far.
Please stop misrepresenting science. I would ask you to inform yourself more about what science is, question what science does in your everyday life, or at the very least stop spreading misinformation. Thank you.



Fraction
Thank you very much! Might I ask just out of curiosity what your faith is, if any?

Atheist test
I'd say you hit the nail on the head!

Ask an Atheist
The purpose of this thread was for me to clarify what an atheist is to Christians, while at the same time learning what Christians thought an atheist was. I didn't know how much I saw on youtube and read online was true, so I thought I'd see for myself.
Again, the last two sentences were spot on.

Proof of Creation
I might just add that creationists might genuinely be afraid of science, because when they pose as scientists and posit scientific claims, instead of being the authority on a subject, they become just another group whose claims can be critically examined and rejected just like everyone else's. The moment creationism/ID STOPS posing as scientists, they have nothing to fear of science.

Thank you! I am happy someone has noticed I do not wish to be the typical internet 'new atheist' flaunting science left and right to disprove religion and creating arguments everywhere.

Again, right in the bull's eye! Thanks!

Hey:

Let me give it a try. For entertainment, as I figure any belief in Atheist form is but entertainment to myself. I can no more entertain the mindset that we all evolved out of a scoop of goo than I can believe there is no God, no hope and the order and expansion of the universe is random.

I do believe things do evolve. But under the guidance and order of God. God created all life and all things and it is an ongoing process. We can see these things even in our short lifetimes. We see both the physical change in us and things, the development of new species , mans entrance into life with planned evolution of things such as the many breeds of dogs and so on. We watch society change and evolve and we watch people change some and also watch the many races mix and how people do change some.

I view God as the ultimate scientist. The one who holds all the known laws of science and physics, and does cause some things to evolve. If you look at science of man, it is hopeless, there are no explainations to anything, only ideas and theory. But even the most intelligent men cannot connect the dots or explain our existence in a way of science. The never will be able to, as our intelligence is limited.

Have you ever seen a sea dragon?? It is a neat fish kinda like a sea horse. Look it up and tell me that evolved. Look at the simple rainbow after each rain, what holds it in order, why does not some wind or something blow the rain droplets out of line, what holds this rainbow of promise by God in order?? Look at the complex design of the human eye, what are the odds of all things coming perfectly in order to have that just simply happen. And why was it created? I think so we can see the greatness of Gods creation.

The Atheist view says.......there is no God, there is no hope, we are men and that is that. There is no hope for anything other than that provided by men. That is a fairly pessimistic outlook on things if you look around and see how we as men are actually. We can not create anything, or explain anything. To me this takes more faith to believe in than to believe in our true living God. Our God is real, he is spirit and our very soul knows he is there. He is not a idol or statue or fake God, he is the God of creation, the living God, the one who through our own understanding of what we do understand does speak to us.

Another simple fact, over a 1500 year period or so, some 40 books of the basic bible were written down by men. All of them tie together in some way, and most of these men did not know each other , lived in different areas of the world and still the basic message is the same. Can man or any group of men write a book by themselves and have any order or agreement at all?? Not hardly. I challenge you to write a book on how to install a mailbox and see if any can agree on how to do this. There will be 109 ways to install that mailbox and a gigantic fuss over the right way . Lol!

So you ask what does being a Christian do for us? Why do we believe. Well the basics are simple. We have hope. We hope for a better life, we hope for no crime, no sickness or disease, we hope for honor, honesty, truth and facts. We do not find them in other men, we find them only in Gods word. Gods word to us is alive. It takes our basic knowledge and our inner soul and it speaks to us. It is the one truth that becomes revealed to us and we know it to be the truth and life of our soul .

It teaches us good morals, it teaches us to be honest, to care for others and it teaches us compassion and understanding. And above all it gives us hope.

So the belief in God gives us hope, it teaches us the good side of life.

We cannot believe as you do, simply because God has placed into us the simple knowledge that he is the Creator. We know we do not understand, but to us this is not really important. We know that other men cannot make us understand either, so Gods spirit speaks to us and with a bit of time, our faith becomes unshakable. The difference between myself and you is I have bowed my head and said I accept you God, you are God and that is so, and you have the right to enforce your will as you are God.

We only hope and pray that all will come to the simple way to bow their will and accept Gods simple way. He requires very little. He only has one request, simple believe in me. That is all.

Oh yea, men will take the word of God and become so smart, and dice it and hash it and fuss over it and by doing so create religion and atheists are born . Many are pushed away from God due to the antics of men. But in Gods word he tells us this will be so. God himself is so very simple, believe in me and I will acknowledge you. It is just a simple as that. You are man, I am God , you do not know what you think you know, and I require you but accept me. If I gave you great intelligence you man would but destroy yourself with it. These things we are taught. It comes from the spirit.

Do you not wish hope? Can you provide a means by mans way with hope? I think not.

So that is what Christianity does for us......it gives us hope.

Respectfully

Kit

 

[Brother Mike]

How do we prove.

BCRE8TVE

Unfortunately, most of those 48 posts have been spent trying to correct misinformation about science and sharing my scientific education. Those posts do not seem to have had any great effect.

If this was a science forum then great!!! but it's not. If someone found scripture pointing to evolution then we have something to discuss.

As Jiggyfly stated in the rules:

- any teaching outside Scripture including debates will result in account termination

Any teaching "Outside" of scripture.

So even though you might have some great scientific knowledge, if that knowledge does not support scripture, then Here on these forums that great scientific Knowledge has been proven as false already, since it does not support scriptures. Though that same great scientific knowledge may be proven true to "others" in other forums or discussions. Just not here on Talk Jesus.

So, the fault is not that your wrong, or that your right. The fault comes for bringing something against what has already been established as true here.

That is the Word of God.

Jesus Is Lord.

 

[Kit Carson]

To the neighborhood Atheist:

That made me grin, the neighborhood troublemaker. Lol! Come on smile, God will teach you to smile. And to laugh.

You asked what does God do for us. This past week in my life he has again shown me how to apply patience, faith and to hang in there.

I need work, desperately and for a whole week I sit and nothing. Not a peep, oh I have calls and they go like this.

One lady calls me about her tub stopped up so I run out 20 bucks in gas going to her home and she meets me at the door and says, I do not need you now. But......to avoid paying a service call and to lie to me she says......I have this tub valve I would like to have replaced, what will that cost and when can you do it, I called her bluff and told her a price and said I can do it right now. Uh oh......Lol, so now she comes up with this story that company is coming and she does not wish to tear up the bathroom during their stay. I told her it will take two hours at most, and be painless. But she is intent on fabrication of lies, so she says....she will call me back........that ole call ya back routine. So I kick the.. tire of the van as I put up my tool box and dismiss her completely. God gives us a discerning spirit and we know when we are being lied to. They stand there full of lies and the wish to feed you mushrooms. Lol! Many in the world like this.

So we learn patience and to treat them fairly and without thoughts of evil for them. To just forgive them and move on.

I have just returned from looking at several jobs and got them all. I have more than I can do this coming week, so all is well. All these have come from word of mouth, through good work and a smile.
This is what God does for me all the time.

As for prayer and is it answered, yes, but you have to look at your own life and what did you do. Maybe God did answer you but you did not want to accept it. It can be as simple as the request for work, work may come but I may not want that job. So I turn it down. God answered but I rejected. This is but a simple example.

Good morals, values, honesty, patience, compassion, all come from God. Even the Atheist that does not think so is fooling themselves as God has put into you also good values, and all these things. You have been granted these things by his grace. He does this without request and shows you that creation and his word is real. He allows you the environment to realize these things. Not all men are allowed this environment to build good values. So if you have good values, a good life, and so on, it came from God as he is intent upon your salvation. And he knows even though we do have free will who will and who will not eventually accept him. I know this is kinda deep and hard to understand, but it comes from the Holy Spirits teaching to me. When God asked Adam and Eve when they sinned, where are you, hey he knew exactly, it is a way of speech to man. Just as a Lawyer asks a question to answer a question. It is a way of explanation.

All you have to do is realize where it comes from. It certainly does not come from the mainstream of man. Man is fully intent upon lies, dishonesty, crime, and self gratification. One learns that mans way is not so good.

Just a few thoughts, I know you will not understand them. It is only when you do accept God that these things become revealed and the answers that were so fleeting, you now begin to understand.

I do not accept all the evil in the world , I most likely gripe to God more than he wants to hear. I will ask him about that and last week I asked him, can you just put a destruction gene in those who do such evil, if the thought crossed their mind they just self destruct. Lol!
No Kit, you know the why, it will be different in the end, yea but I still do not like it...........with respect Sir.

Again it is hope and we are granted understanding if we seek it. These things you may not comprehend at all. They are from one who has great faith in God. From one who knows that all things come from God and even when it looks a bit dark on the horizon he is still there. It is up to us to bend our will to accept his. We are like a bunch of misbehaved kids all the time. And he is the Father of us all. So he does as a Father does. He teaches us. But first we have to seek him and then he answers.


Respectfully

Kit

 

[ItinerantLurker]

TalkJesus forum rule #4
No false teaching of Scripture. We preach what the Holy Bible says, nothing else.

As far as I can tell know one is teaching anything other than what the bible says in this thread. In point of fact, what's been asked is how Christians reconcile what the bible says with what we actually see.

- any teaching outside Scripture including debates will result in account termination

What constitutes "teaching"?




Lurker

 

[ItinerantLurker]

But under the guidance and order of God. God created all life and all things and it is an ongoing process.

Why would God need to guide this process? We seem to see it happening without any intelligent guidance at all in nature.

So the belief in God gives us hope, it teaches us the good side of life.

So. . .how is that different from any other religious belief? For that matter, if my agnosticism gives me hope of some kind and teaches me the "good side of life" then would it not accomplish those same ends?

We cannot believe as you do, simply because God has placed into us the simple knowledge that he is the Creator.

By "we" do you mean all christians? Does that mean that because I no longer believe I was never a believer?

Do you not wish hope?

Very much so. So much, in fact, that I often look back with longing upon the days when I could rest my heart upon a simple faith. It certainly would give me more hope, more peace, to believe in a personal God who concerned himself with my salvation; in a life beyond this in which all our bitter tears were washed away. To say nothing of the peace in my life now between myself and most of my wife and family who believe quite differently than I do.

Still, to roughly paraphrase Sagan, I cannot without reservation accept the comforting fable over the hard truth simply because it is so comforting and reality so hard. And I would think that if God did exist, He would value honest doubt over an insincere faith.



Lurker