Creation vs. Evolution

[sheck33]

I guess he just hasn't gotten to you yet.

Guess not...

 

[coachpill]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Either something can pass experimental tests, or it cannot. There is no such thing as religious science. You don't have any way to test your hypotheses.

Passing experimental tests has nothing to do with being published in secular peer-reviewed journals. Secular science operates under a foundational philosophy of naturalism...that existence consists ONLY of physical things. However, they delve into the untestable/unfalsifiable when they (they refers to secular science) write about origins (abiogenesis) and the age of the universe and of the Earth...all of these are conclusions that are interpreted under the philosophy of naturalism. Does that make sense? Someone else doing the exact same science (observations and data collecting) could come up with a different conclusion when the evidence is interpreted under a different philosophy.

Hopefully that makes sense.

So, when secular peer reviewed journals get wind of the philosophy under which your interpretations of evidence are being drawn, and that philosophy is not naturalism, then the journal submission is dismissed out of hand without regard to content.

 

[MikeFerrara]

I've had a lot of those in my life, too. My best man's 4 year old son coming down with Leukemia, my (Catholic) wife with Multiple Sclerosis, etc. All have reinforced my belief that there is no one out there looking after us.

God doesn't promise us a life on earth that's free of hardship.

Do you think people (or you) would be more likely to be receptive to God or to learn if everything went perfectly for them all the time?

 

[AXL72]

OK, what about "who made God? Where did he come from?"

If there has to be an origin to life, and that origin is God, then I say that there must be an origin to God.

 

[sheck33]

Do you think people (or you) would be more likely to be receptive to God or to learn if everything went perfectly for them all the time?

Not really, tangible evidence would make me receptive.

 

[sheck33]

OK, what about "who made God? Where did he come from?"

If there has to be an origin to life, and that origin is God, then I say that there must be an origin to God.

The answer you will get is that either god always existed or god doesn't need a cause.
In which case of course logical reasoning breaks down.

 

[coachpill]

The answer you will get is that either god always existed or god doesn't need a cause.
In which case of course logical reasoning breaks down.

True, but only if your "logic" has as its foundation philosophical naturalism and materialism, and possibly a healthy dose of secular humanism.

Your underlying philosophy will always drive what you deem as "logical" in your mind.

So if we operate under the philosophy that scripture contains truth and was God-breathed, then God himself claimed to be alive and eternally existent in the past, the present, and the future. If that is true, then, "No, God would not need a cause," and, "Yes, God would be eternally existent."

Logically, there is nothing wrong with saying this. The reason you say it falls apart is because it flies in the face of your currently held philosophy that there is nothing beyond the natural.

 

[AXL72]

The answer you will get is that either god always existed or god doesn't need a cause.
In which case of course logical reasoning breaks down.

Man! You are psychic. You called it!

Do you have the lottery numbers for Wednesday, too

 

[coachpill]

Man! You are psychic. You called it!

Do you have the lottery numbers for Wednesday, too

That should not have been surprising. Clearly, when one takes his/her ultimate authority from the Bible, then the answer to the question posed is exactly the one that he gave, i.e. that God has always existed, and hence does not need a cause.

 

[AXL72]

That should not have been surprising. Clearly, when one takes his/her ultimate authority from the Bible, then the answer to the question posed is exactly the one that he gave, i.e. that God has always existed, and hence does not need a cause.

Like the Wiz (Wizard of Oz)?


We all know how that turned out with the same explanation


No...do not approach the curtain