Explain? I just think that no side is convincing the other side. I wonder what’s the point after awhile. Though, I keep coming back. Because I find it interesting, I suppose. So maybe I’ve answered my own question.
We use much more than 10% of our brain. Psychics don’t find lost bodies or help solve murders. There may be things that science has yet to explain, but I can’t think of anything that science isn’t eventually capable of explaining-do you know of some sort of limit past which science cannot go?
I did research and you’re right about 10% and psychics. Goes to show how so many of us will accept what we’re told without looking into it ourselves. But back to the questions of science. I’m saynig right now, there are many mysteries that cannot be explained. That’s why there are so many conflicting theories out there attempting to do just that. Yes, eventually science will continue to explain these things. I have another question: What is your interpretation of the double slit experiments?
Well, obviously he’s the only True Christian.
It’s already been pointed out that both of these statements are false.
That wasn’t a theory - it was very speculative conjecture from someone whose views are far outside the mainstream of science. There’s nothing in quantum physics that requires the existence of consciousness.
That depends on the definition of “God.” Science has disproved older ideas about God/gods, like being responsible for the Garden of Eden, or for throwing lightning bolts. As science finds more and more about our world, people who believe in gods have had to continually reduce what these gods are supposed to do. I guess you can’t disprove gods absolutely, because there can always be someone who redefines his god to be outside whatever disproof is offered.
What is there to explain?
The math is accurate, but when we try to define a photon as being either a particle or a wave we fail, as it does not really have an exact analog in our macro-scopic sensorium.
Are you serious? I’m claiming that the Bible is historical fact and God is indeed real. These many “Christians” certainly didn’t chime in to defend the word of God.
I don’t see how anyone can claim to be a Christian yet disagree on these basic tenents.
I think it, and your contention that science has a set limit, would be a great topic…for another thread,
I said “majority”.
Cite?
Personally, I think it did happen randomly. I have no proof of that, but it makes a lot more sense than the theory of some old bearded guy in the sky getting bored one day and creating us for his entertainment.
Just some quick questions: Do you think that a ‘true’ Christian (IYO) has to hold to a global flood? That A&E are real? That evolution didn’t occur? That the earth is under a million years old?
Then don’t! Please?
The problem is that your literalist interpretation of the Bible tends to contradict geology, physics, archeology, and other sciences. So Christians who believe in the general teachings of Jesus but who are not literalists probably won’t defend your mistakes on topics that really have nothing to do with the ethical teachings of the religion. Many of them understand that things like Eden and the flood are stories or myths created by people with biases and limited scientific knowledge because that happens to be exactly what they are. Your problems with this discussion stem from the fact that in general you’re completely wrong - not from the fact that people are failing to help you.
That wasn’t a theory - it was very speculative conjecture from someone whose views are far outside the mainstream of science. There’s nothing in quantum physics that requires the existence of consciousness.
What an embarrassment to the University of Oregon who allowed this mad-scienctist to teach for over 30 years.
I guess its all syntax of the word theory: I was under the impression that it meant; a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
Now, I will agree that the people conducting the experiments are highly suspect. But that’s because mainstream science wants to dismiss the theory off-hand and haven’t conducted their own experiments. Do I need to bring up that most scientific breakthroughs were done by people far outside the mainstream of science? Capurnicus was scoffed for his views.
Surely the respected term mad scientist should be reserved for people who are doing some kind of science, not people who write New Agey stuff. The guy hasn’t even developed a freeze ray as far as I can tell. In any case- yes, he had a teaching position at their ‘Institute of Theoretical Physics.’ So? There are thousands of colleges in the U.S. and thousands upon thousands of teachers. By definition half of them are below average, and some of them are nuts. Remember Ward Churchill?
I’m sorry but if a person believes that the Bible is fiction, they are not a true believer. Jesus Christ said the events in the OT really did happen so you are basically saying Christ himself is lying.
And I still stand by my statement that archealogy has only proven that the Bible is true, not the other way around. You constantly change your position every day that it’s hard to know what you believe exactly. The reality is you desperately need it to be completely false.
All you can do is throw out criticisms without presenting any cites or clear counter-evidence. Your only counter evidence is the constant complaining that there is a lack of evidence. Very weak responses, IMO.
Or maybe the Bible was lying when it said that Christ said that?
I don’t think they care about your interpretation. As you said yourself, “Christianity is about forming a personal relationship with the creator of the universe.” It’s not about a relationship with GEEPERS and GEEPERS’ interpretation of the Bible.
Jesus didn’t write the Bible.
Again, your position doesn’t reflect reality.
I haven’t changed my position. I don’t think you are actually paying attention to what I am saying in the first place- certainly you still have not gotten around to addressing the questions I’ve asked you about interpreting history.
Absolutely. Otherwise, you are saying Christ is a liar or delusional when he talked about the Flood as a real event in Matthew 24:37-39
Not sure what A&E is.
Christians have no problem believing in small micro evolution, but believing that the human body just arrived by chance through billions of years of natural selection, no way.
Young earth/old earth, this can be debatable.
Or maybe Jesus Christ never existed at all? Are you going go that route too?
[nitpick] Median and mean are different.[/nitpick]