28 Jun 10
Originally posted by josephwIt's a theory backed up by evidence, just as the Atomic Theory, and the theory of gravity are.
My face is getting blue again. 😉
Let me tell ya, if I ever find out that man evolved, I won't deny it.
But until then...I believe life and all that exists came about instantaneously though the act of creation by the almighty. If God chose to cause man to come into existence through the evolutionary process, I'll have no problem with that.
But evolution is still just a theory.
The Catholic Church and the Church of England both accept evolution, they believe it's compatible with scripture. Why can't you?
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by FabianFnas"Scientifically evolution is a fact."
Correction: You religiously belive that "evolution is still just a theory."
In your religion you can believe whatever you want.
Scientifically evolution is a fact.
Don't take this wrong. I'm not trying to insult you, but based on your ability to properly understand Biblical truth, I find it difficult to believe you when you say that "scientifically evolution is a fact."
Scientifically nothing is a fact. It's all just theory. That's what I've been told over and over again in this forum by those who call themselves scientists.
Why should I suddenly believe that evolution is a scientific fact?
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobNeither the Catholic Church or the Church of England hold any authority not given to them by God. Which is to say that I believe God and not man. God has revealed Himself and His purposes in His word which is contained in a book we call the Bible.
It's a theory backed up by evidence, just as the Atomic Theory, and the theory of gravity are.
The Catholic Church and the Church of England both accept evolution, they believe it's compatible with scripture. Why can't you?
"In the beginning God created..."
That is the bottom line. For me.
As I said before, if I ever discover that God used evolution as a means of creation I won't deny it.
28 Jun 10
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwSo you think that religious facts are truer than scientific facts?
[b]"Scientifically evolution is a fact."
Don't take this wrong. I'm not trying to insult you, but based on your ability to properly understand Biblical truth, I find it difficult to believe you when you say that "scientifically evolution is a fact."
Scientifically nothing is a fact. It's all just theory. That's what I've been told over and over aga ...[text shortened]... elves scientists.
Why should I suddenly believe that evolution is a scientific fact?[/b]
We can scientifically prove that evoution is true with various methods.
To prove that creation is true there is nothing else but to read an ancient book.
Therefore I differ religious beliefs (you can believe whatever you want as long you call it religion) from scientific 'beliefs' which can be verified by observations and experiments.
That's why I use the term 'religiously believe' to avoid the everlasting conflict between the two. Because religion and science cannot ever be mixed. When you try you fail.
I'm okay when you say that in your religion, the evolution has no place. If you want respect for that, then you have to give the same respect to people that holds science for facts. If you don't then, the everlasting conflict will remain.
Remember - if you don't understand evolution, you just cannot say anything about it. Learn about evolution, and we can have a meaningful discussion about the subject. But until then: You regiously believe in creation as an alternative to evolution.
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by Proper Knobthey also believe in worshipping bits of wood and bowing before plaster cast statues.
It's a theory backed up by evidence, just as the Atomic Theory, and the theory of gravity are.
The Catholic Church and the Church of England both accept evolution, they believe it's compatible with scripture. Why can't you?
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by FabianFnas"So you think that religious facts are truer than scientific facts?"
So you think that religious facts are truer than scientific facts?
We can scientifically prove that evoution is true with various methods.
To prove that creation is true there is nothing else but to read an ancient book.
Therefore I differ religious beliefs (you can believe whatever you want as long you call it religion) from scientific 'beliefs' w ...[text shortened]... bject. But until then: You regiously believe in creation as an alternative to evolution.
No. Facts are facts.
"We can scientifically prove that evoution is true with various methods.
To prove that creation is true there is nothing else but to read an ancient book."
This is debatable.
"Therefore I differ religious beliefs (you can believe whatever you want as long you call it religion) from scientific 'beliefs' which can be verified by observations and experiments."
God is real, and unless I'm insane or at least delusional, I am aware of God because He has revealed Himself to me and in me in ways beyond the comprehension of science. Science is the study of the natural world, and is limited in it's scope to the material universe.
"That's why I use the term 'religiously believe' to avoid the everlasting conflict between the two. Because religion and science cannot ever be mixed. When you try you fail."
If God is the creator of all that exists, any conflict between science and the knowledge of God is due to the imperfection of man's understanding of the facts.
"I'm okay when you say that in your religion, the evolution has no place. If you want respect for that, then you have to give the same respect to people that holds science for facts. If you don't then, the everlasting conflict will remain."
I respect you. I just don't respect anything that discredits God.
"Remember - if you don't understand evolution, you just cannot say anything about it. Learn about evolution, and we can have a meaningful discussion about the subject. But until then: You regiously believe in creation as an alternative to evolution."
I understand evolution. The science may be complicated and beyond my range of expertize, but I'm not stupid.
I don't "religiously" believe anything. I scorn religion as a system of beliefs and activities created by man for the purpose having a relationship with God.
Do you grasp what I'm saying? I have no religion. I have a relationship with God based on what He has done, not what I do.
I seriously doubt that if I were to learn "about evolution" that anything I would say that discredited the theory of evolution would settle any argument in this forum.
If I say you can know and have a relationship with God based on an act of faith in what God says you should believe, you would balk.
If you say to me I would believe in the theory of evolution if I were to learn all about it, I would balk.
This debate will never end until either God finishes what He says He will do, i.e. the return of Jesus Christ, or science becomes so pervasive in our lives that not another living soul will ever doubt we evolved from apes and God is just a myth.
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuSo because you mistakenly believe that the Theory of Evolution threatens your beliefs, you are willing to lie about it, insult its supporters, and make outrageous claims that you believe contradict it - regardless of their truth value.
But where getting off track here, because my main gripe is, that the evolutionist say everthing came from nothing, and i say it did not, but there was a spiritual catylist behind everything.
If you say to me that there is a spiritual creative power behind the evolution of the species, then i dont have a problem with that, but if you say there is no power there, then i am against it.
Why is this? Why are you so threatened by views that you believe are in opposition to yours? Why do you feel the need to attack them even to the extent of lying?
28 Jun 10
3 edits
Originally posted by josephwYou don't believe in the theory of evolution. You accept it.
[b]"So you think that religious facts are truer than scientific facts?"[/b]
No. Facts are facts.
"We can scientifically prove that evoution is true with various methods.
To prove that creation is true there is nothing else but to read an ancient book."
This is debatable.
"Therefore I differ religious beliefs (you can believe whateve soul will ever doubt we evolved from apes and God is just a myth.
Do you believe in photosynthesis? No, you accept it. Do you believe in the theory of electromagnetism? No, you accept it.
You believe in God, as that is based on faith, evolution by natural selection is not.
I'm still waiting on some evidence that evolution is flawed as you claimed earlier.
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by josephwYes, you are at a minimum delusional.
God is real, and unless I'm insane or at least delusional, I am aware of God because He has revealed Himself to me and in me in ways beyond the comprehension of science.
You are convinced that God has revealed Himself to you in ways beyond the comprehension of science. This surely means that those ways are beyond your own comprehension too. Further, you cannot have good reason to believe they are a valid method as it is beyond your comprehension.
If you are unable to explain scientifically how God revealed himself to you, then the best explanation is that it is a delusion.
Science is the study of the natural world, and is limited in it's scope to the material universe.
Science is not limited. Scientific methods can be applied to anything that can be 'observed' and that follows 'laws'. This includes absolutely everything that we interact with, including, if he exists, God.
If God has revealed himself to you, then those revelations can be studied scientifically. Science is a methodology, it doesn't have a 'comprehension' or lack thereof.
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by Proper Knob"You believe in God, as that is based on faith,.."
You don't believe in the theory of evolution. You accept it.
Do you believe in photosynthesis? No, you accept it. Do you believe in the theory of electromagnetism? No, you accept it.
You believe in God, as that is based on faith, evolution by natural selection is not.
No, I believe there is a God based on the fact of creation.
I think it was you that said in an earlier post that evolution does not address the issue of the origin of life, but only the process by which life advances or moves forward though time. (Maybe it wasn't you and maybe it wasn't said just that way)
You say that science has proven that life is evolving.
Cite a source you believe is infallible so I can see it for myself. Please.
28 Jun 10
Originally posted by twhitehead"If you are unable to explain scientifically how God revealed himself to you, then the best explanation is that it is a delusion."
Yes, you are at a minimum delusional.
You are convinced that God has revealed Himself to you in ways beyond the comprehension of science. This surely means that those ways are beyond your own comprehension too. Further, you cannot have good reason to believe they are a valid method as it is beyond your comprehension.
If you are unable to explain scienti ...[text shortened]... ntifically. Science is a methodology, it doesn't have a 'comprehension' or lack thereof.
That is an unreasonable conclusion.
Scientific revelation? Revelation is not "scientific". It's a "spiritual" matter. It is not by revelation that I know that God exists. I know that there is a creator because of the existence of creation.
I "know" God personally by "revelation". There is a difference.
"Science" is merely a tool we use to discover knowledge of material facts about the material universe.
Of course my definitions may be flawed.