subjective science

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Ask what you will.

You said

Evolutionist know, they don't have to live by the demands they place on other schools of thought, they just know.

That was a stupid claim. Would you like to revise or edit it? Please.

Originally posted by @apathist
You said

[b]Evolutionist know, they don't have to live by the demands they place on other schools of thought, they just know.

That was a stupid claim. Would you like to revise or edit it? Please.[/b]

Truth hurts ey. Why do you think its a stupid claim?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Truth hurts ey. Why do you think its a stupid claim?

It misrepresented science. Of course you are on board with that.

Originally posted by @apathist
It misrepresented science. Of course you are on board with that.

It represents certain scientists, not science per se.

Originally posted by @apathist
You said

[b]Evolutionist know, they don't have to live by the demands they place on other schools of thought, they just know.

That was a stupid claim. Would you like to revise or edit it? Please.[/b]

When evolutionist claim that some use God to fill in the blanks, making God the God
of the gaps, they do the same thing with time, when they say in time we will know, but
what we do know now, God didn't do it!

Originally posted by @apathist
It misrepresented science. Of course you are on board with that.

Not science, people.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
When evolutionist claim that some use God to fill in the blanks, making God the God
of the gaps, they do the same thing with time, when they say in time we will know, but
what we do know now, God didn't do it!

Given enough time anything can happen they say. Sounds more like wishful thinking than science to me.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Given enough time anything can happen they say. Sounds more like wishful thinking than science to me.

The trouble is that isn't always true, if we were to enter into a combination lock random
numbers over time we would hit upon the proper sequence to open the lock; however,
that is only because there is a combination of numbers that can open it. If there isn't
a way to do something, time will not cause it to happen anyway.

Originally posted by @apathist
There are over 650 trillion possible bridge hands, but play a game of bridge and you get one of them. Despite the astronomical odds against you ever getting that particular hand!

I'm sure my point went whoosh over your head. Our moon is as it is. That mere fact cannot be woo.

There are over 650 trillion possible bridge hands, but play a game of bridge and you get one of them. Despite the astronomical odds against you ever getting that particular hand!

I'm sure my point went whoosh over your head. Our moon is as it is. That mere fact cannot be woo.

So despite astronomical odds God could exist ?

Originally posted by @sonship

There are over 650 trillion possible bridge hands, but play a game of bridge and you get one of them. Despite the astronomical odds against you ever getting that particular hand!

I'm sure my point went whoosh over your head. Our moon is as it is. That mere fact cannot be woo.

So despite astronomical odds God could exist ?

No more than the tooth fairy. Are you content with that? Is that sufficient to maintain your faith?

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Not science, people.

I did think or wanted to think that you understood that. Scientists are people with all the baggage that brings. But science is a way of thinking and understanding that transcends our foibles. Or really tries to.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
No more than the tooth fairy. Are you content with that? Is that sufficient to maintain your faith?

No more than the tooth fairy. Are you content with that? Is that sufficient to maintain your faith?

I think you should drop the tooth fairy card.

What do you know about the tooth fairy ? All i know is that parents told kids that when a tooth fell out, if they placed it under their pillow, there would be a dime there in the morning.

That is all i know about your tooth fairy.
My parents told me that when I was very very young.
They did not expect me to take it seriously for the rest of my life.
And of course I did not.

Now, Jesus of Nazareth.

I know that israel is a real place, Jerusalem is a real place, the Torah was written and believed for centuries, the New Testament is the most copied and circulated ancient book in the history of mankind, scholars of all strips and all positions agree to a certain number of minimal facts, ie. Jesus was executed, buried, not found, and thousands suddenly proclaimed His having been raised.

I know Herod is history, Pilate is history, Agrippa, Bernice, Paul, Paul's epistles, Caiaphas, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Tiberius, Jericho, and the so-called "church father" whose writings we have testifying of the spread of the Christian gospel (with its accompanying good and bad), are real matters of history.

Seems so far the historicity of the tooth fairy is more than being left in the dust.

Then there is my personal experience. I am pretty certain that the changes that have occured in my life were not generated by myself alone. IF they COULD HAVE, I would have generated them long ago WITHOUT submitting my life to a LORD Jesus.

I didn't want a Lord other than ME anymore than anyone else.
So the positive transformations in my life I am pretty sure are NOT sourced in ME.
They do date back to the time I said "Jesus take me, I'm tired. Take me Lord Jesus"

Ghost,

Now you may find it very cute speak of God and Christ in the same breath as "Tooth Fairy". But it makes you look more the simply minded fool than the Christian, frankly,

Your reference to the Tooth Fairy comes across like this to me: [my paraphrase]

"I sure hope that the influence of anything Jesus Christ said will have no more serious consequences than do the childish fun tales of a Tooth Fairy."

Ghost, what you hope will be and what actually will be may not be the same.

Originally posted by @apathist
I did think or wanted to think that you understood that. Scientists are people with all the baggage that brings. But science is a way of thinking and understanding that transcends our foibles. Or really tries to.

Can science tell us this ?

WHY is there something rather than there being nothing ?

Originally posted by @apathist
I did think or wanted to think that you understood that. Scientists are people with all the baggage that brings. But science is a way of thinking and understanding that transcends our foibles. Or really tries to.

You seem to want to separate science from man. Anything shown good or bad using science is still man doing the work.