• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. Brian2

    What Trinitarian churches teach about the Trinity

    The Father is the only true God. Intrinsically in the Father from eternity has been His Son and His Holy Spirit. IOW none have been created and all are of the same uncreated substance/essence. Both corporately and individually, it is all YHWH. The Arians had a problem with Jesus being of the...
  2. Brian2

    Not even Christians believe the *edit* of creation

    There is plenty of phenomenological language in the Bible which is similar to the language we still use today, example, we say that the sun rises. When science started to discover more about cosmology then it also informed us about the meaning of the Bible,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, unless of course you...
  3. Brian2

    What is Evidence?

    OK
  4. Brian2

    What is Evidence?

    Are you saying that my conclusions are less valid than your conclusions?
  5. Brian2

    Not even Christians believe the *edit* of creation

    There must be something in the story that says that God created everything from nothing. As far as I know, the Jews, who use the translation that you like and want to use, believe that God created everything from nothing. There is nothing in the story that says that the substance of the earth...
  6. Brian2

    What is Evidence?

    Of course, yes, for myself I get to decide that.
  7. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    I don't expect science to start talking about gods. I do however draw a line between science and my life. Science, by necessity, uses empiricism only (well in theory at least), and ignores evidence that cannot be tested or falsified. As a human however I see other evidence and can use that in...
  8. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    You are the one who likes to invent undetectable third parties that have no other point of contact with reality except your imagination. There is supporting evidence for God, so a claim for God is not meaningless, but it is evidence that you reject, and that is probably part of your incredulity...
  9. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    I don't doubt all types of evidence, I respect all types of evidence.
  10. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    Are you trying to say that a philosophical acceptance of empiricism only in your search for what is true, and rejecting the possibility that other forms of evidence could be true, is not an argument from incredulity,,,,,,,,,,,,,, or more accurately, a way of life based on incredulity?
  11. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    You are positing nothing and I am positing a being who has shown Himself in history according to many people. So now the cake thieves are magical? Hmmm Anyway your cake example is not really equivalent, it is just an argument set up to point in one direction. If you want to talk about belief...
  12. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    What does that even mean? Taken in isolation, mutations are random.
  13. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    That whole process of natural selection in known environments and working in a system that can produce limited outcomes, can be set up initially to work towards known and the best outcomes in those environments for the survival of the life forms. If you believe that it would need zero planning...
  14. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    Yes I used to argue that years ago,,,,,,,,,, that what atheists then were calling random was actually something that God could understand even if they could not. Surely you also believe that God can step in and do whatever He likes and that people would not know that it was God who did it.
  15. Brian2

    How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

    I don't need to understand "evidence" the same way you do or use the word "evidence" in the same way. Why do you think that your understanding of "evidence" is the only acceptable understanding? A common thing that people who use the argument from incredulity do, is to ignore evidence from the...
  16. Brian2

    What is Evidence?

    Most Christians probably don't believe that the Bible is the only truth, which is final,,,,,,,,,,,, but most of us would believe that the Bible is the truth.
  17. Brian2

    New species formed by merging two species.

    Well that cleared things up. From the bottom of the "Abstract" we have: From these results, we suggest that; 1) C. parkeae is the alternate life cycle stage of B. bigelowii sensu stricto or that of a sibling species of B. bigelowii, and 2) the spheroid body of B. bigelowii originated from...
  18. Brian2

    New species formed by merging two species.

    I said: The article says, "Scientists have caught a once-in-a-billion-years evolutionary event in progress, Then I say: and goes on to say, close to the end, "Altogether, the team says this indicates UCYN-A is a full organelle, which is given the name of nitroplast. It appears that this began...
  19. Brian2

    New species formed by merging two species.

    I don't in a matter of fact preemptively reject all the sciences of evolution with pejorative accusation of "no evidence,". You must have me mistaken for someone else. That sort of thing happens as we get older. I have noticed it in myself also.
  20. Brian2

    New species formed by merging two species.

    All you needed to say is that you agree that the article says that this process of merging has taken 100 million years so far. That is not hostility towards the science of evolution, it is clearing up what the article was saying.
View older results
Top