Please inform Ken Ham, all of the young earthers and so-called "creation scientists" that they have a flawed interpretation of Genesis.
https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/site/faq.html....many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.
This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."
Produce your resurrection. If you can't show it, you don't know it.
https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/site/faq.html"Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection, and religious experience.
Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."
Produce your resurrection. If you can't show it, you don't know it.
Read all about it in the Bible. It won't bite you or hurt you to do your own research for a change.
Why haven't you studied it yourself?
When you can bust the Resurrection then you'll BEGIN to have some credibility with your fairy tale claims.
Read all about it in the Bible. It won't bite you or hurt you to do your own research for a change.
Can't show it, doesn't know it.When you can prove the Resurrection then we will take you seriously.
It's an interpretation, right?
I don't know how you can say creation scientists have a flawed interpretation when not only is creation not off the table at all, but in fact it's very much on the table for consideration!
Please review the post. I said that Logicman was disagreeing with the young earth creationists. You Christians get on the same page with each other about what the Bible means, then you can discuss THAT with everyone else.
Ignoring the NAS reference. You can't seem to understand what they wrote.
Why haven't you studied it yourself?
When you can bust the Resurrection then you'll BEGIN to have some credibility with your fairy tale claims.
You never see any heated discussions between YEC and Big Bang Christians here. God created the universe. Doesn't matter when.
First of all, just to be clear....here's an explanation what the National Academy of Sciences is all about:
Overview: Membership
I tried to do a search on Richard Dawkins - nothing came up.
I found his tweet, though:
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/635594201997135872
Well I know membership is not open to foreigners. But, are you an associate?
Winning a Nobel Prize - which you have not - couldn't have been a criteria to be an associate since out of 460 associates, only 200 had won them.
Is he an associate? If not.....why isn't Dawkins an associate of the most prestigious organization?
You still have this process backwards. The burden of proof is on the claimant. Resurrection? You don't even have written accounts from supposed actual witnesses. The accounts you have are all very different.
Lane Craig's excuse for that in the Strobel book was outright laughable.
That's absolute nonsense. All four Gospels and various epistles, including a number of eyewitnesses, confirm the resurrection. There's nothing different about that. The resurrection happened. You're probably referring to ancillary events of secondary importance.
What's more, you've never been able to refute any of that. If you think you can, hop out here with your best ONE (1 - JUST ONE) example, and cite the appropriate scripture(s) and make your argument. I'm calling you out to back up your claim.
YOu are again confusing the claim (the various gospels) with evidence for a claim. You are assuming that the New Testament is true and historically accurate. That can not be shown to be true.
Tell that drivel to your like-minded brethren.
Read all about it in the Bible. It won't bite you or hurt you to do your own research for a change.
That kind of response is not very convincing.
The bible is a book promoting a particular religion. That is why it was written. It was not written as an objective history of things that actually happened. Words in a book, without any genuine historical artifacts to back them up, mean absolutely nothing. Remember, it requires genuine artifacts, not hoax ones. And even then, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The bible is fictional metaphor at best, complete propaganda at worst.
That's your opinion, which is hereby summarily rejected.
Not just my opinion, but an actual fact. The bible was compiled by those promoting a particular religion. That is the exact reason it was written and compiled. By and for those who believed in certain religious dogma.
Nope, that's your opinion.
That's your opinion, which is hereby summarily rejected.
Nope, that's your opinion.
Likewise all your assertions made without evidence.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?