THE ATHIEST AGENDA
- Thread starter calibob
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I for one seriously doubt that the first seven days of Genesis were 24 hour days rather than dispensation's of time. I neither deny that adaptation over time seems to exist. It's the general disbelief among science and Evolution believers that Intelligent Creation was the start of everything. That the creation of modern man was in Genesis two not one. More purposeful, superior and intelligent than the primates of before. Unique.
Some say everything God us perfect but Gen 6:6
New International Version
"The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled."
I believe that creation may be still ongoing. The resurrection of the Saints or asleep in Christ. The rapture. New incorruptible bodies and the new Jerusalem and a new heaven and earth are examples. When Jesus said it is done it he acknowledged that he had completed what he was sent to do... at that time. It's not over by a long shot!
Some say everything God us perfect but Gen 6:6
New International Version
"The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled."
I believe that creation may be still ongoing. The resurrection of the Saints or asleep in Christ. The rapture. New incorruptible bodies and the new Jerusalem and a new heaven and earth are examples. When Jesus said it is done it he acknowledged that he had completed what he was sent to do... at that time. It's not over by a long shot!
-
1
-
1
- Show all
a thought, because you mentioned simple vs. complex -- natural order of closed thermodynamic systems - which the universe as an whole would count as a closed system - as we observe it natural order is non-increasing complexity
so assume the Biblical origin account.
ask, was the creation, pre-sin, subject to decay?
that's the tie-in to Genesis 3. our observational capacity is severely limited. we have to assume homogeneity in order to do a lot of science, in particular theoretical, but homogeneity isn't guaranteed, especially over timescales that are huge compared to the amount of time we've been observing.
so assume the Biblical origin account.
ask, was the creation, pre-sin, subject to decay?
that's the tie-in to Genesis 3. our observational capacity is severely limited. we have to assume homogeneity in order to do a lot of science, in particular theoretical, but homogeneity isn't guaranteed, especially over timescales that are huge compared to the amount of time we've been observing.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
This is correct. And we observe a trend of general progression towards less complexity, and more "chaos", but within the entirety, complexity can sometimes, in certain circumstances, increase. We actually don't entirely know if entropy will cause the universe to end in the way we would imagine, because we also don't know what would cause entropy to "begin" in the first place. There seems to be a different set of rules when the material of the universe exists in an unfamiliar state.
Agreed. The evidence would actually suggest that the homogeneity we observe currently is, like most things in the universe, a transient phenomenon.
Agreed. The evidence would actually suggest that the homogeneity we observe currently is, like most things in the universe, a transient phenomenon.
-
1
- Show all
But if you believe Science answers everything you need to know, then what I asked is a perfectly valid question. How could studying the earth and how it works ever answer anything outside of it? So to hold this kind of self defeating worldview that is reduced to foolishness from the jump, you have to completely reject anything outside of the natural order, or what is actually is, the creation.
Or you can do like most and become this mushy blob of uncertainty and "i don't know" (which is usually stated "we" don't know, but you they don't know what others know, and I DO know the truth). Just like a double minded man unstable in all his ways. There is nothing to stand on out there in Godless land. Anything goes there, I also find it interesting that after all I wrote, all you had to say was "I never claimed that it could.", really? we can think deeper that can't we?
I have an interesting challenge for you, seeing as how our worldview is right out there for anyone to read and learn about and pick apart, can you tell me exactly what you believe so I can start looking for "contradictions" and mock you for the dumb parts? Do you even have anything you could present, or are you starting to realize just how empty any argument outside Jesus is? So let me frame the challenge. Please give us the reason we are here, tell me what really matters and how you believe reality actually is, then we can go from there to see if how you live lines up with what you say you believe reality to be. Can you do that? I also truly hope I'm not coming across overly aggressive or anything. I'm just trying to think with you, I actually like that you're here and LOVE these conversations, so please don't think I'm trying to just "beat you", or anything like that. I want to know your belief system accurately. So like peace man.
Or you can do like most and become this mushy blob of uncertainty and "i don't know" (which is usually stated "we" don't know, but you they don't know what others know, and I DO know the truth). Just like a double minded man unstable in all his ways. There is nothing to stand on out there in Godless land. Anything goes there, I also find it interesting that after all I wrote, all you had to say was "I never claimed that it could.", really? we can think deeper that can't we?
I have an interesting challenge for you, seeing as how our worldview is right out there for anyone to read and learn about and pick apart, can you tell me exactly what you believe so I can start looking for "contradictions" and mock you for the dumb parts? Do you even have anything you could present, or are you starting to realize just how empty any argument outside Jesus is? So let me frame the challenge. Please give us the reason we are here, tell me what really matters and how you believe reality actually is, then we can go from there to see if how you live lines up with what you say you believe reality to be. Can you do that? I also truly hope I'm not coming across overly aggressive or anything. I'm just trying to think with you, I actually like that you're here and LOVE these conversations, so please don't think I'm trying to just "beat you", or anything like that. I want to know your belief system accurately. So like peace man.
There are many plausible theories why love is an evolved reaction which has helped us as a species to survive and thrive, it doesn't make it any less beautiful. What you're doing here is known as a 'God of the gaps' fallacy; just because it is currently unprovable doesn't automatically mean 'god did it'. If god of the gaps were more prevalent there wouldn't be any scientists at all, since the answer is always god so there's no point looking into anything any further. We would have no medicine, no sanitation, and no phones or laptops to argue about love on.
The original temptation was the forbidden fruit would make Eve and Adam like God. I was the knowledge of good and of evil soon followed by the first cover up and then blaming others. Now some think through education and science they have found a replacement for God. In the Bible the same stories with different people in different place get repeated over and over. We should wake up and smell the coffee. God sent prophet after prophet and they were all killed then he sent is son and they killed him too. Now science tells the lie that there is no God and everything we know see and believe in, was an accident. Before anything ever existed God said "Let there be light and there was light." So dosn't anyone think a super cosmic explosion at the first dawn of time that created the known universe would make a really big bang? Or do they really object to the fact that God is the ultimate authority and they really hate being told what to do?
-
1
- Show all
I never said this.
Science is about asking questions we don't know the answers to, and trying to answer them. Science doesn't answer everything a person "needs" to know (how you define "need" is another issue).
We don't just study the Earth. We study the nature of reality.
I wouldn't call affirming evidence in the natural universe "foolish". It is exactly what gives us the advancements we are privileged to be beneficiaries of.
It's okay to not know the answer to everything.
There is plenty to stand on. But like I said, nobody has an answer for everything. That doesn't mean that "Anything goes there".
Your point was based on something I never said. Everything that follows was, as well.
That would take a lot longer than either of us have time for.
D This depends on the person. I can't tell you the reason we are here, in a cosmic, purposeful sense any more than you can tell me. I don't really ask the question, "why" we are here. I am more concerned with what is here and how it is here.
How I live is entirely my own choice. It isn't fixed or static, either. People grow. People learn. People progress. People can at one point in life hold one view and later in life hold entirely another. Experience and learning change people.
Science is about asking questions we don't know the answers to, and trying to answer them. Science doesn't answer everything a person "needs" to know (how you define "need" is another issue).
We don't just study the Earth. We study the nature of reality.
I wouldn't call affirming evidence in the natural universe "foolish". It is exactly what gives us the advancements we are privileged to be beneficiaries of.
It's okay to not know the answer to everything.
There is plenty to stand on. But like I said, nobody has an answer for everything. That doesn't mean that "Anything goes there".
Your point was based on something I never said. Everything that follows was, as well.
That would take a lot longer than either of us have time for.
D This depends on the person. I can't tell you the reason we are here, in a cosmic, purposeful sense any more than you can tell me. I don't really ask the question, "why" we are here. I am more concerned with what is here and how it is here.
How I live is entirely my own choice. It isn't fixed or static, either. People grow. People learn. People progress. People can at one point in life hold one view and later in life hold entirely another. Experience and learning change people.
I never said this.
Nit picking, it's inferred within the framework of what you claim to believe, or um..., not believe. See how rejection of God reduces you to foolishness? You can even clear state any kind of solid framework for the "study the nature of reality". I would also like to add for the record, that the nature of reality is mt biggest interest as well, but we have got to shed this paper thin, surface level, washy wash, won't take a solid stand, thoughtless, Micky Mouse, schoolyard mentality. You can only attack our worldview, all while using it for yourself and having nothing of your own to put forth as superior, like the kid making fun of someones bike, and doesn't even have a bike. Come on man you didn't understand what I meant.
Science is about asking questions we don't know the answers to, and trying to answer them. Science doesn't answer everything a person "needs" to know (how you define "need" is another issue). Don't see any argument here, and am not going to just get into semantics.
We don't just study the Earth. We study the nature of reality.
That's just about the craziest thing I've ever heard. So what are we looking at to study "nature of reality"? I believe the creation. I think this is a self defeating statement. Are you really saying we don't study the earth? Really?
I wouldn't call affirming evidence in the natural universe "foolish". It is exactly what gives us the advancements we are privileged to be beneficiaries of.
And all by His grace. and I agree man. I think these things are awesome and are a blessing to us when use within His will. I thank God every day for these things so there's no disconnect here.
It's okay to not know the answer to everything.
Not to mention impossible right? But you don't seem to be against seeing the knowledge that we can right? Well I'm proclaiming that you can come to a true knowledge of the King of everything Jesus our Christ. I am not saying I know everything and I truly hope it was silly for me to even say that, but it doesn't logically follow that "It's okay to not know the answer to everything", therefore "I don't want to know some things that are possible to know"
I couldn't agree more that "It's okay to not know the answer to everything", but I'm telling you that
There is plenty to stand on. But like I said, nobody has an answer for everything. That doesn't mean that "Anything goes there".
Your point was based on something I never said. Everything that follows was, as well.
That would take a lot longer than either of us have time for.
D
This depends on the person. I can't tell you the reason we are here, in a cosmic, purposeful sense any more than you can tell me. I don't really ask the question, "why" we are here. I am more concerned with what is here and how it is here.
How I live is entirely my own choice. It isn't fixed or static, either. People grow. People learn. People progress. People can at one point in life hold one view and later in life hold entirely another. Experience and learning change people.
Nit picking, it's inferred within the framework of what you claim to believe, or um..., not believe. See how rejection of God reduces you to foolishness? You can even clear state any kind of solid framework for the "study the nature of reality". I would also like to add for the record, that the nature of reality is mt biggest interest as well, but we have got to shed this paper thin, surface level, washy wash, won't take a solid stand, thoughtless, Micky Mouse, schoolyard mentality. You can only attack our worldview, all while using it for yourself and having nothing of your own to put forth as superior, like the kid making fun of someones bike, and doesn't even have a bike. Come on man you didn't understand what I meant.
Science is about asking questions we don't know the answers to, and trying to answer them. Science doesn't answer everything a person "needs" to know (how you define "need" is another issue). Don't see any argument here, and am not going to just get into semantics.
We don't just study the Earth. We study the nature of reality.
That's just about the craziest thing I've ever heard. So what are we looking at to study "nature of reality"? I believe the creation. I think this is a self defeating statement. Are you really saying we don't study the earth? Really?
I wouldn't call affirming evidence in the natural universe "foolish". It is exactly what gives us the advancements we are privileged to be beneficiaries of.
And all by His grace. and I agree man. I think these things are awesome and are a blessing to us when use within His will. I thank God every day for these things so there's no disconnect here.
It's okay to not know the answer to everything.
Not to mention impossible right? But you don't seem to be against seeing the knowledge that we can right? Well I'm proclaiming that you can come to a true knowledge of the King of everything Jesus our Christ. I am not saying I know everything and I truly hope it was silly for me to even say that, but it doesn't logically follow that "It's okay to not know the answer to everything", therefore "I don't want to know some things that are possible to know"
I couldn't agree more that "It's okay to not know the answer to everything", but I'm telling you that
There is plenty to stand on. But like I said, nobody has an answer for everything. That doesn't mean that "Anything goes there".
Your point was based on something I never said. Everything that follows was, as well.
That would take a lot longer than either of us have time for.
D
This depends on the person. I can't tell you the reason we are here, in a cosmic, purposeful sense any more than you can tell me. I don't really ask the question, "why" we are here. I am more concerned with what is here and how it is here.
How I live is entirely my own choice. It isn't fixed or static, either. People grow. People learn. People progress. People can at one point in life hold one view and later in life hold entirely another. Experience and learning change people.
-
1
- Show all
