What God has said that He has done remains intact. People have claimed the hand of God for things where the mechanism was not know, and they had no right to do that. Then the mechanism is discovered and skeptics claim that God is being shown to be untrue,,,,,,,,,,, but really it is just the...
I am talking about people who claim that unverifiable evidence is not evidence.
These people want verifiable evidence all the time to assess reality and test it, so reality for them is usually limited to this universe, but they also speculate about other possibilities but ignore the evidence...
Science is a tool we use to discover how and cannot find things that are not part of the universe. It does not show that God is non existent.
Brahma is the Hindu God and elves are part of the creation if they exist, not the creator. The creator is not part of or governed by the creation. Agency...
That just pushes the question of the creator further back.
It is just a furphy to think that there is no God just because no God can be found in this universe. The creator is not part of His creation.
So many in the West are deceived by a furphy because they believe the lie.
You have also...
We can't believe all the conclusions people come to about their experiences and what they are told they are caused by. That doe not mean that they do not have those experiences.
Yes science is good like that, it just works for all of us thanks to God.
Of course it is evidence. Evidence is...
That's humanity, always wanting to reach higher and to know why and how. You cannot go higher than the why answer being a how answer and that would be just speculation/hypothesis.
I have evidence for the undetectable but no evidence for the non existent. The evidence is not verifiable in any...
Yes it is.
Because there is a God who has told us the purpose.
So a designer/creator is not postulated in science and the evidence for a designer/creator is not verifiable anyway. It is not a science question when the designer/creator is not a part of the universe, His creation, and cannot...
Something moving does not indicate life imo but the workings of cells and bodies, as discovered by science, is evidence of design imo.
Design is evidence of life, the life of a designer.
If you accept the curse tablet found on Mt Ebal, what you say about "before 600BC" is not true.
If you accept the Bible for what it says, the answer for why there is a lack of Hebrew records before 600BC is obvious.
Israel in Egypt and the early exodus and the conquest around 1400 BC is based on...
If science comes up with naturalistic answers for the origins of life and the universe how would it be anything other than speculation of what happened.
The answers should be "If a creator/ God did not do it, then we think it might have happened this way".
Yes the anointing by the Holy Spirit made Jesus ready for His ministry, but did not make Jesus the Christ, because He was the Christ when He was born. (Luke 2:11)
I have been stupid and arrogant to think that you would be able to see and understand what I have written to you.
Yes God used Isaiah to blind and deafen Israel (Isa 6:9,10) and this literary technique would have helped do that. I don't think that even in Isaiah it would have ever gotten to the stage of speaking about stuff that had already happened (such as the creation) and putting it in the past tense...
I believe that both the created and the creator exist.
There is just one true God.
The more science finds out, the more evidence there is for a creator/designer...
Science is about the how and religion is about the why. Science tells us nothing about the why question. Those answers come from religion, or should I say, from the revelation from the true God.
All science is, is a tool of humans that we can use to find out about the physical world. It has it's...