By it's very nature, Science is incomplete, and sometimes it's even wrong. However, when Science is wrong, it's other scientist, not the theologist that corrects it.
Perhaps, but consider that the "theologist" has been saying that the universe was made by the Creator. This has been and was disputed by "science" which is now coming to grips with it. The "theologist" writes about God, the scientist writes about the Creation.
I really enjoy the ongoing scientific research into genetics and if you please "evolution." I expect science to confirm the "theologist."
As I have said before, science is good, good science is great and bad or dishonest science is a deceitful travesty foisted on those with itching ears.
TF
Science does not study creation, it studies the origins of the Universe. Creation implies a Creator, and we have no scientific evidence to support the hypothesis of a theistic creator.
Over the last 500 years, Science has caused religion to seed vast domains to science. The number of gods has declined from hundreds is not thousands to a handful of interpretations of mostly the same God. They've been pushed of the mountains and out of the sky, and now even outside of time and space so they can attempt to reside in an area unreachable by science. Regardless if you like it or not, evolution is a fact. The body of evidence is overwhelming. How you choose to incorporate this overwhelming evidence into your personal belief system, is, well, personal....but it still doesn't change the facts.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
By it's very nature, Science is incomplete, and sometimes it's even wrong. However, when Science is wrong, it's other scientist, not the theologist that corrects it.
I could ask why should theologians prove scientists wrong. In my thinking The Bible proves science wrong.
The Bible proves nothing. It's just one big exercise in circular reasoning.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
The bones were found fifteen feet deep in loose sand, not in a rock matrix. Their postures were similar to known Indian burials. The bones were unfossilized and partly decayed, and dating them yielded an age of 210 +/- 70 years. In short, they were a fairly recent burial (Kuban 1998).
This is certainly different from the first reports. The photo I saw of the mine showed the fossil were found at least 100 feet below grade in solid undisturbed sediment. It reminds me of the 108% of the voters in one county voted 100% for Obama. There is no way for us laymen to get the original facts since it contradicts the evolutionary dogma.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
The bones were found fifteen feet deep in loose sand, not in a rock matrix. Their postures were similar to known Indian burials. The bones were unfossilized and partly decayed, and dating them yielded an age of 210 +/- 70 years. In short, they were a fairly recent burial (Kuban 1998).
This is certainly different from the first reports. The photo I saw of the mine showed the fossil were found at least 100 feet below grade in solid undisturbed sediment. It reminds me of the 108% of the voters in one county voted 100% for Obama. There is no way for us laymen to get the original facts since it contradicts the evolutionary dogma.
Rule #1 in Crisis Management.
The first reports are always wrong.
As for what happened in your above example, it's nothing unusual. A layman things he finds something interesting until the trained scientist show up.
Last edited by antelope_sniper; 07/26/14.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
"Science does not study creation, it studies the origins of the Universe. Creation implies a Creator, and we have no scientific evidence to support the hypothesis of a theistic creator.
Over the last 500 years, Science has caused religion to seed vast domains to science. The number of gods has declined from hundreds is not thousands to a handful of interpretations of mostly the same God. They've been pushed of the mountains and out of the sky, and now even outside of time and space so they can attempt to reside in an area unreachable by science. Regardless if you like it or not, evolution is a fact. The body of evidence is overwhelming. How you choose to incorporate this overwhelming evidence into your personal belief system, is, well, personal....but it still doesn't change the facts."
So science studies the origins of the universe and does not consider the possiblity of a Creator? Bad science.
So you think "science" has dethroned God? Nope, nothing could be further from the truth. Science is confirming God. Seems like "religionists" are not the only ones to be closed minded and refuse to see the facts.
btw, do you believe in man made global warming like so many other scientists?
TF
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
So science studies the origins of the universe and does not consider the possibility of a Creator? Bad science.
No, science presupposes nothing, and follows the evidence. The evidence has not lead to a Christian theistic creator. As a theist, you are the one presupposing an outcome and attempting to curvefit the data to support your forgone conclusion.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
btw, do you believe in man made global warming like so many other scientists?
On this subject I agree with Thomas Sowell who, 30+ years ago noted how the climate change proponents had their data backwards, since the earth warming started before increase in CO2 emissions that allegedly cause it. The effect cannot precede the cause.
P.S:
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Science does not study creation, it studies the origins of the Universe.
Science does not study anything. Scientists do. Scientists speculate on the origin of the universe. Some even speculate on the idea of multiverses.
Quote
Creation implies a Creator, and we have no scientific evidence to support the hypothesis of a theistic creator.
The fact there is stuff and us is scientific evidence to support the hypothesis of the Creator of the Bible.
Quote
Over the last 500 years, Science has caused religion to seed vast domains to science. The number of gods has declined from hundreds is not thousands to a handful of interpretations of mostly the same God. They've been pushed of the mountains and out of the sky, and now even outside of time and space so they can attempt to reside in an area unreachable by science.
This is blatantly false. I can document 2,200 years B.C. the acceptance of a Single God. The God of the Bible.
Regardless if you like it or not, evolution is NOT a fact. The body of evidence against it is overwhelming. The vast majority are brainwashed from preschool through graduate school and beyond to accept a crumbling concept. That�s why every year PhD scientists and professors become creationists.
How you choose to incorporate this Any evidence into your personal belief system, is, well, personal....but it still doesn't change the facts.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
[quote=eyeball]The Bible predicts events on earth that have subsequently occurred.
Give me your single, best, most convincing bible prediction. [/quote
The birth of Jesus Christ!
There is not evidence for the existance of Jesus beyond the Bible, so this is just an example of circular reasoning. If this is your best example, you just demonstrated how the Bible truly proves nothing.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
So science studies the origins of the universe and does not consider the possibility of a Creator? Bad science.
No, science presupposes nothing, and follows the evidence. The evidence has not lead to a Christian theistic creator. As a theist, you are the one presupposing an outcome and attempting to curvefit the data to support your forgone conclusion.
Nope, not true at all. What outcomes are being assumed that prevent "science" from occuring.
Laffin some more...
TF
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
There is not evidence for the existance of Jesus beyond the Bible, so this is just an example of circular reasoning. If this is your best example, you just demonstrated how the Bible truly proves nothing.
You really need to read something besides the anti-Christian info you�ve read up till now.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
This is blatantly false. I can document 2,200 years B.C. the acceptance of a Single God. The God of the Bible.
Sorry my friend, but this statement is just blatantly false. Rome was Polytheistic until well after 300 AD. The nearly 1 billion Hindu's living today remain polytheistic. Add in Buddhist, Shinto's, and the common Christian claim that Allah is not the same entity as God and we are far from a universal acceptance of a single God.
As for your one or two PHD's who convert to your side each year, let me once again bring up project Steve and the Steve-o-meter...
I agree with everything you've posted on this thread. I've found that trying to reason with a fundamentalist Christian is like trying to reason with a Democrat. My barber is a nice enough guy but he's always talking about his Christian beliefs and quoting Bible scripture. I usually just don't respond and try to ignore him. This past Thursday I got a haircut and I was the only one there. He's a real friendly guy and we talk about a lot of different things (but not about religion). I mentioned that I had watched some documentaries about the Neanderthals. I told him that scientists and had finally figured out the Neanderthals genetic makeup (gnome?) and when they compared it to a huge data base that has the genetics of over 10,000 people of all races they found that almost every modern day human has some Neanderthal DNA, some up to 5%. When I got through talking he informed me he was a creationist and that the Neanderthals never existed. He said that all the caveman and dinosaur bones were made by modern man and buried by non-believers to try to prove the theory of evolution. Another customer came in so I said let's talk about something else.
[quote=eyeball]The Bible predicts events on earth that have subsequently occurred.
Give me your single, best, most convincing bible prediction. [/quote
The birth of Jesus Christ!
There is not evidence for the existance of Jesus beyond the Bible, so this is just an example of circular reasoning. If this is your best example, you just demonstrated how the Bible truly proves nothing.
Laffin some more. What is the objection to the writings of the Bible? They are well documented and have existed for centuries. The "reality" of Jesus is well documented in history. Probably more written about Jesus than Ptolemy, Caesar and a host of other historical figures and no one questions their "reality."
Your blinders are on! The quest for atheistic affirmation has now gotten silly.
TF
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
I don't buy humans co-existed with dinosaurs and it'll take more than one mine to convince me. Humans could not possible have existed with dinosaurs. Nor do I believe that the Bible is pure history nor do I believe that the Bible especially the Book of Genesis is how the world started. Call me Doubting Derby.
Like I�ve posted. It�s not about evidence. There is plenty of evidence to support Biblical creation. There is no evidence to support something from nothing. Remember the First Law of Thermodynamics?
That's why every year Ph.D evolutionists and professors become creationist.
Who said "something from nothing"? I didn't.
Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous
"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude
Your assertions simply do not hold up. There are dozens of scholarly opinions about the historicity of Jesus.
Just look at the wiki, of all places, article below:
Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[7][9][10][30][31][32] We have no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[33][34] There is, however, widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings.[14] Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus,[14] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[11][12][13]
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
[quote=eyeball]The Bible predicts events on earth that have subsequently occurred.
Give me your single, best, most convincing bible prediction. [/quote
The birth of Jesus Christ!
There is not evidence for the existance of Jesus beyond the Bible, so this is just an example of circular reasoning. If this is your best example, you just demonstrated how the Bible truly proves nothing.
Do what????? Surely you jest? I guess Columbus didn't exist either, or Pharaoh, or Nebuchadnezzer? Now you are just showing total ignorance of known history!
