W
Wirraway
Guest
argument from incredulity is not an argument.
God gave us an intellect and instilled in us an inherent curiosity. why would you think that attempts to understand the physical nature of His creation is bad?.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
God gave us an intellect and instilled in us an inherent curiosity. why would you think that attempts to understand the physical nature of His creation is bad?.
E
edwest2
Guest
The “argument from icredulity” mantra is not valid. Pope Benedict has studied the issue and concluded that we (human beings) are not haphazard mistakes.
The science worshippers believe the following: evolution is a fact, facts are not democratic. We, as Christians, have no choice but to believe them.
This is just the prelude to the Technocracy, a social order built around science and Marxism that spreads propaganda designed to remove all religious belief and superstitions from among the people. It didn’t work in the 1920s and it won’t work today.
God bless,
Ed
The science worshippers believe the following: evolution is a fact, facts are not democratic. We, as Christians, have no choice but to believe them.
This is just the prelude to the Technocracy, a social order built around science and Marxism that spreads propaganda designed to remove all religious belief and superstitions from among the people. It didn’t work in the 1920s and it won’t work today.
God bless,
Ed
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Amen to that. It’s like we have to accept evolution - hook, line and sinker without questioning it at all. It’s just a theory! I don’t know the history of when it became mandatory to be taught in public schools; it should be taught as a theory, not the absolute truth.The “argument from icredulity” mantra is not valid. Pope Benedict has studied the issue and concluded that we (human beings) are not haphazard mistakes.
The science worshippers believe the following: evolution is a fact, facts are not democratic. We, as Christians, have no choice but to believe them.
This is just the prelude to the Technocracy, a social order built around science and Marxism that spreads propaganda designed to remove all religious belief and superstitions from among the people. It didn’t work in the 1920s and it won’t work today.
God bless,
Ed
And you are right, atheists are the ones who really push evolution, (along with a lot of evil agenda). They really don’t want people to believe in God at all.
S
SFTor
Guest
Hi Christine:Evolution is not an article of faith, but a lot of people believe in it and toss God out of the equation. They think it explains everything.
However, as GK Chesterton said, “It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything.”
God created this world, but of course I don’t think he did it in 7 normal days. I think this world is incredibly ancient, and it changed over time, but don’t think the theory of evolution really makes sense that a species could change into another species. Just because there are similarities between living beings, doesn’t make evolution a reasonable theory. Just because evolution supposedly happened very slowly, doesn’t make it more credible.
I don’t know what to say. Mr. Chesterton is missing an important point: no one ever said that “nothing turned itself into everything.” The universe is filled with two things: matter and energy. Some of that matter and energy interacts to form what we call life. Take something as well known as photosynthesis for instance. Plants use the process to produce solid matter out of carbon dioxide and sunlight.
Best,
Tor
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Where did the matter and energy come from?Hi Christine:
I don’t know what to say. Mr. Chesterton is missing an important point: no one ever said that “nothing turned itself into everything.” The universe is filled with two things: matter and energy. Some of that matter and energy interacts to form what we call life. Take something as well known as photosynthesis for instance. Plants use the process to produce solid matter out of carbon dioxide and sunlight.
Best,
Tor
E
edwest2
Guest
Mr. Chesterton realizes the main point: a theoretical explosion (at the planck length) that released energy that somehow organized itself into planets and stars. Only a little over 4% of the visible universe consists of matter.Hi Christine:
I don’t know what to say. Mr. Chesterton is missing an important point: no one ever said that “nothing turned itself into everything.” The universe is filled with two things: matter and energy. Some of that matter and energy interacts to form what we call life. Take something as well known as photosynthesis for instance. Plants use the process to produce solid matter out of carbon dioxide and sunlight.
Best,
Tor
No, life does not create itself. DNA does not create itself. Something from nothing does not work.
God bless,
Ed
T
theistgal
Guest
Where exactly does evolutionary theory say that “something” comes from “nothing”?No, life does not create itself. DNA does not create itself. Something from nothing does not work.
God bless,
Ed
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
What do they say?Where exactly does evolutionary theory say that “something” comes from “nothing”?
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
Well, actually you did:
- I didn’t say nor attempt to imply that the creation STORY - and by the way, as you well know, there are two separate and contradictory creation stories in Genesis, as well as SCORES of others from different cultures - has no valid points. I was responding to this statement:I see no validity to either of the claims in the first sentence quoted. If you can provide some, please do so.
But if you want to qualify that statement - I’m OK with that.Originally Posted by beeliner
Well, it’s not all dreck, but some of it is, to wit:‘Creationism’ has NO valid points, and all one has to do is meander through the dozens of similar discussions, on these forums and elsewhere, to see that.
As I will do the same right now - I wasn’t speaking about all scientists, or all creationists - but, since you asked, here:
Creationists: Here
Here
and here
Evolutionists
Aimed at those I was referring to in my article
Here
Here
Here
As for your claims concerning Genesis - No - they are, if anything, complementary rather than contradictory. But if you’d like to read a little more about it:
The Toledoths of Genesis might help a little. Otherwise, approach the question with an open mind and read some commentaries on it:
Here
Either way you look at it - Genesis wasn’t meant to be a scientific treatise on the formation of the world. However - that doesn’t mean that there isn’t Truth in it. Truth which we must take on Faith, as everything else in Scripture is - We are saved by grace, through Faith.
Well, here is Mathematical Proof among others - I don’t see a religious agenda to it, despite the page title. In fact - I see it otherwise as in :*The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Evolution Of Man Scientifically Disproved so…take it as you will I guess.
- Can you provide any scientific support, with no underlying religious agenda, that humans did NOT evolve from lower primates? I’m not saying that there is none, I’m just asking. I don’t know of any. I don’t see the ‘both sides’ to which you refer, unless, of course, you are alluding to matters of religious faith, in which case we are back to square one.
Here also
Peace
John*
S
SFTor
Guest
I can’t answer that question. For all we know it has always been there, sometimes more as energy, sometimes more as matter, as they are mutually interchangeable.Where did the matter and energy come from?
T
S
SFTor
Guest
My dear Ed:Mr. Chesterton realizes the main point: a theoretical explosion (at the planck length) that released energy that somehow organized itself into planets and stars. Only a little over 4% of the visible universe consists of matter.
No, life does not create itself. DNA does not create itself. Something from nothing does not work.
God bless,
Ed
It is still not “something from nothing.” It is “something into something else.”
Best,
Tor
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Well, obviously you don’t know anything about it. Makes good sense to me that God created matter and energy out of nothing!I can’t answer that question. For all we know it has always been there, sometimes more as energy, sometimes more as matter, as they are mutually interchangeable.
T
S
SFTor
Guest
Well, actually you did:
But if you want to qualify that statement - I’m OK with that.
As I will do the same right now - I wasn’t speaking about all scientists, or all creationists - but, since you asked, here:
Creationists: Here
Here
and here
Evolutionists
Aimed at those I was referring to in my article
Here
Here
Here
As for your claims concerning Genesis - No - they are, if anything, complementary rather than contradictory. But if you’d like to read a little more about it:
The Toledoths of Genesis might help a little. Otherwise, approach the question with an open mind and read some commentaries on it:
Here
Either way you look at it - Genesis wasn’t meant to be a scientific treatise on the formation of the world. However - that doesn’t mean that there isn’t Truth in it. Truth which we must take on Faith, as everything else in Scripture is - We are saved by grace, through Faith.
Well, here is Mathematical Proof among others - I don’t see a religious agenda to it, despite the page title. In fact - I see it otherwise as in :*The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Evolution Of Man Scientifically Disproved so…take it as you will I guess.
Here also*
Peace
John
Hi John:
If Genesis is not a scientific treatise on the formation of the world, why are some people trying to shoehorn it into that role?
Best,
Tor
S
SFTor
Guest
And if God wanted to reveal his procedure to the people, why didn’t he do so accurately?
(Genesis contains several clear mistakes, such as light coming before the stars (the sun being one), birds and whales before reptiles and insects, to name only two.)
Best,
Tor
(Genesis contains several clear mistakes, such as light coming before the stars (the sun being one), birds and whales before reptiles and insects, to name only two.)
Best,
Tor
N
Namesake
Guest
To say nothing about comparison with fish DNA, etc.
- Comparison of DNA from various primates, including humans, hardly indicate a ‘separate’ creation.
N
Namesake
Guest
We don’t just share DNA, we share morphological development as seen in comparative anatomy and embryology. That’s what DNA (more precisely, genes do) accomplishes.Just because we share certain DNA - it doesn’t necessarily follow we came from them.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Could you speak in plain English please, for us non-DNAists? What do you mean by this statement?We don’t just share DNA, we share morphological development as seen in comparative anatomy and embryology. That’s what DNA (more precisely, genes do) accomplishes.
S
SFTor
Guest
That would be your belief. I was stating what I know for a fact. Your belief does not create a fact.Well, obviously you don’t know anything about it. Makes good sense to me that God created matter and energy out of nothing!
What do you mean exactly, when you say “obviously you don’t know anything about it?”
Sincerely,
Tor
N
Namesake
Guest
That’s just a not so cute little trick that creationists/IDers try to fool people with. No one worships science and it’s quite childish to continue that mantra.Science is not the answer, the worship of science is idolatry.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Where exactly does evolutionary theory say that “something” comes from “nothing”?
New species evolve from existing species, among other things.What do they say?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.