ElishaElijah
Return
False statement you’re making that my relationship with God is based on feelings. Like you said feelings are unreliable. No one would choose the life of a disciple of Christ on feelings. That would be very short lived
-
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!
Arkansas inflicts child abuse on its school children
- Thread starter Altfish
- Start date
You have physical evidence?
ElishaElijah
Return
Yeah, my life the last 30 years, which you personally wouldn’t know. If you don’t believe me, fine. Go to one of your local Bible Church fellowships and talk to people and see for yourself, go to some baptisms and talk to people whose lives have been changed by Jesus Christ. I personally have witnessed hundreds or more.
One can believe that some supernatural force changed
one's life. But I see individuals making their change.
Again, you offer me evidence based upon how people
feel....IMO, an inadequate basis to claim "The Truth".
Evolution has physical evidence. It's testable by objective
means. So it has the great advantage of being disprovable,
ie, useful...as opposed to being "nicht einmal fasch".
Last edited:
ElishaElijah
Return
I don’t and talking abiogenesis not evolution. These are feelings:
Attachments
Abiogenesis is also testable.
What are your tests for "God did it"?
(Objective tests, eh....not mere feelings.)
ElishaElijah
Return
Already explained what I thought about Abiogenesis today and if you don’t believe in God then get your own materials to experiment with. Answer is you don’t have any materials that God hasn’t provided (nothing)
That's rather circular...claiming that God provided
the materials for objective testing of science.
It still appears that all arguments for God, Allah,
& others are based upon feelings, but nothing
tangible. Tis no wonder that so many religions
disagree about the fundamentals & the details.
Individual feelings differ that way.
ElishaElijah
Return
If no God then no materials and you have to start with nothing and go from there. That has to be your starting point.
There's no reasonable basis to assume the origin
of "materials" is your particular god, ie, God.
It's just a presumption.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
"Common sense" is just the claim of the ignorant. It amounts to an admission that you are wrong.
And no, abiogenesis says that life can and will arise on its own. The materials involved were here. They were naturally part of the world.
But before I go on I am so glad that you now accept the fact of evolution.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
This error of yours has been explained to you.
ElishaElijah
Return
And explained how materials cannot appear on their own out of nothing.
ElishaElijah
Return
Lol, you lose, no common sense needed
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Okay, I see that you do not even understand the Big Bang. The universe was an area of highly concentrated energy when the expansion started. Energy, photons, will collide and form matter.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Only fools use "common sense" as an argument. Common sense is an admission that you lost.
The problem is that when people say "It's common sense" they are almost always wrong. Oherwise they would explain and support their position.
ElishaElijah
Return
Opposite of common sense is nonsense, lol
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Nope, "Common sense" is usually ignorance and prejudice. The opposite of common sense is rational thought and evidence.
ElishaElijah
Return
You need both and common sense is not the opposite of rational thinking.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It quite often is. It definitely is in your case.
Please try to make a rational argument.