God is disproven by science? Really?

[John53]

Yep.

I must be getting tired from the heavy conversation.

The tiring part is trying to have a sensible discussion with certain people.

 

[ElishaElijah]

The Bible proving the Bible is not a valid argument. You have no actual evidence.

It was the scripture you asked for

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I think that you did not even submit one article in science journals.

Correct. I'm not a scientist and don't pretend to be one by dressing up in a lab coat and talking word salad.

I had been submitting for almost 10 years ago.

So link your publications from relevant journals concerning the topic of this thread.
I won't be holding my breath.

Remember that peer-reviewers and journals are not like Spell-Check for Microsoft Word, that if you got a mistake in grammar or spelling, Spell-check will automatically do it for you - with no emotion, no envy, no religious or atheistic perspective.

Que?

No. My articles talked/discussed about the discovery of intelligence, that will falsify and replace Evolution. From this topic, I will change science forever (from your dictionaries, first) and become very famous and rich.

I wish you good luck dude. Who knows, perhaps there ARE pots of golds to find at the end of the rainbow.

Thus, for professional envy, they did not allow me to be published! They will let you die without knowing what is intelligence and will let you die without answering this question:

is biological cell intelligently designed or not?

You see how cruel they are to you? What if your children ask you that question?

And here come the conspiracies.

It couldn't perhaps possibly be because those reviewers just have the same reaction to your nonsense as the rest of us on this forum do? Being that we recognize it as the pseudo-scientific word salad that it is.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Anybody can invent definition of intelligence. We have 71 invented definitions of intelligence now, but, they cannot answer this question:

is biological cell intelligently designed or not?

The answer to that question doesn't even really matter to what your definition is.
The question is actually asking: cells... artificially made or natural development?

It doesn't really matter how you define intelligence.
Regardless if you consider a spider "intelligent" or not - webs are still artificially made and not the result of a natural process.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I guess it's just a personal thing. God / Creator has been described as a personal God

I'm sorry, I'm not sure how that answers my question, which was about rationally justified belief.

Are you saying you are not rationally justified in believing in a personal god but you believe anyway?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Call it what you want but many people have similar beliefs. Not that that actually matters to me

The number of people who believe in a thing has no bearing on whether that thing is actually true or not.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Why do you want to argue?

We're on a debate forum.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Jesus is my leader and I obey Him.

That's what sheep do.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The theory of gravity? Haven’t heard of that theory yet.

Then perhaps discussions about science aren't for you.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The evidence is so obvious and you still don’t see it.
“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence. But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the Lord.””
‭‭I Corinthians‬ ‭1:18-31‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

Yeah ... that's not evidence.

 

[F1fan]

It was the scripture you asked for

I asked for a Bible quote that gives you the command to have contempt for science and you gave a quote. You didn't deny you have contempt for science, you offer a text that justifies your contempt.

On top of that you quoted Paul, not Jesus. You claimed your leader is Jesus, you didn't mention Paul, but you quote him. So who are you following, Jesus or Paul?

I ask for evidence, and that means facts. You offer no justification for rejecting science.

What is weak about your position is that you assume the Bible is true as you interpret it, and that means you have a set of assumptions you make to make this interpretation. We reject these assumptions, like assuming a God exists, assuming the Bible is true, assuming science is wrong if it does fit a creationist set of assumptions, etc. You make way too many assumptions, and these assumptions you make distort how you make sense of science and religion. It's absurd and arrogant for theists to reject science only because it does not fit their preferred religious beliefs.

 

[Jose Fly]

So I would need to know the origin of the Big Bang to see that it’s bogus?

Please pay attention to what you're responding to. I specifically said, "if you haven't thoroughly examined the science behind the big bang".

I have examined and are you the actual person who did the study, research and testing?

So you have thoroughly studied the science behind the big bang? Okay, how about you describe some of the key evidences that support it and explain how they actually don't?

And no, I'm not a cosmologist so I've not done any research into it.

Sickness, death, disease are all a result of Adam and Eve rebellion against God. Satan also is the prince and power of the air, has some temporary power to kill, steal and destroy for now. So malaria is temporary until the end of this age when Satan and all those who have rebelled against God will be judged and thrown into the Lake of Fire. Everyone else who has repented, believed the Gospel and been born again will live with God forever in Heaven where there is no more death or disease. So God warned us and we rebelled, paid the price for that, but God redeemed us.

You missed the point. You said that the malaria parasite only sustains itself because of God. So presumably, if God stopped sustaining the parasite, malaria wouldn't exist. IOW, it only exists today because God sustains it.

And you're okay with that?

No because it doesn’t happen as you said here:
If you're asking whether we've seen living organisms emerge from non-living components (in the sense of abiogenesis), then the answer is no, we haven't. As I said earlier, the origin of life on earth remains a mystery. That's why scientists continue to research it.

So if at some point scientists do see living organisms emerge from non-living components, you'll be fine with it and will see it as consistent with your religious beliefs?

I didn’t say that Genesis says that but what it does say is how God created by speaking things into existence so that’s what I’m going with on land and water.

Ah, so you're assuming, correct?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Please pay attention to what you're responding to. I specifically said, "if you haven't thoroughly examined the science behind the big bang".


So you have thoroughly studied the science behind the big bang? Okay, how about you describe some of the key evidences that support it and explain how they actually don't?

And no, I'm not a cosmologist so I've not done any research into it.


You missed the point. You said that the malaria parasite only sustains itself because of God. So presumably, if God stopped sustaining the parasite, malaria wouldn't exist. IOW, it only exists today because God sustains it.

And you're okay with that?


So if at some point scientists do see living organisms emerge from non-living components, you'll be fine with it and will see it as consistent with your religious beliefs?


Ah, so you're assuming, correct?

Please don’t take me not answering your specific questions as I have already, I think you already understand where I’m coming from.
I didn’t need to know all about the counterfeits, the ins and outs to see the fakes. I just need to know the Truth, which I do. All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are in Jesus Christ.
I’m good with everything God does because He had to come down and die for me so I could be redeemed, since there was no other way to accomplish this, the lengths God went. He has proved Himself over and over. In my view only the devil and the deceived would question Him.

 

[Jose Fly]

Please don’t take me not answering your specific questions as I have already, I think you already understand where I’m coming from.
I didn’t need to know all about the counterfeits, the ins and outs to see the fakes. I just need to know the Truth, which I do. All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are in Jesus Christ.
I’m good with everything God does because He had to come down and die for me so I could be redeemed, since there was no other way to accomplish this, the lengths God went. He has proved Himself over and over. In my view only the devil and the deceived would question Him.

Okay, I'll be honest with you.

I do think I know where you're coming from. You believe the Bible to be the word of God, and as a result you believe it's entirely accurate in what it says about everything, and you believe anything that conflicts with it must be wrong.

So if the Bible says X and scientists conclude Not X, then you will always go with the Bible and reject the scientific conclusion.

While that's not an approach I would ever take, I do understand it. If you're truly convinced that the Bible is literally the word of God, your approach makes sense.

What I don't understand however is why you don't just make that clear and leave it at that. Why do you feel compelled to come to a debate forum like this and try and argue against science? Why do you try and present yourself as someone who's studied science? Why do you try and make it seem as if the reason you reject things like the big bang and evolution is because you've studied the science behind them and found it lacking, when that's not the case? The reality is that you will always reject those things for one reason and one reason only....they conflict your reading of the Bible.

Why not just say that and be done with it?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Okay, I'll be honest with you.

I do think I know where you're coming from. You believe the Bible to be the word of God, and as a result you believe it's entirely accurate in what it says about everything, and you believe anything that conflicts with it must be wrong.

So if the Bible says X and scientists conclude Not X, then you will always go with the Bible and reject the scientific conclusion.

While that's not an approach I would ever take, I do understand it. If you're truly convinced that the Bible is literally the word of God, your approach makes sense.

What I don't understand however is why you don't just make that clear and leave it at that. Why do you feel compelled to come to a debate forum like this and try and argue against science? Why do you try and present yourself as someone who's studied science? Why do you try and make it seem as if the reason you reject things like the big bang and evolution is because you've studied the science behind them and found it lacking, when that's not the case? The reality is that you will always reject those things for one reason and one reason only....they conflict your reading of the Bible.

Why not just say that and be done with it?

I came to this forum expecting something different than meeting atheists, but was glad unbelievers were on RF, when I shared my testimony on what God had done in my life people like yourself had their own diagnosis of my experience and relationship with God that is over the last 30 years.
Not one person on the street or in any setting ever brought up evolution or abiogenesis.People on here brought those up and that’s when I started looking into those things and my reference was from the 70’s in High School.
People on here started talking how they are fact based and sure there are facts but I don’t see those facts supporting the theories of human origin or support the world we live in came about by natural processes. Not at all and the theories don’t line up with reality.

 

[Jose Fly]

I came to this forum expecting something different than meeting atheists, but was glad unbelievers were on RF, when I shared my testimony on what God had done in my life people like yourself had their own diagnosis of my experience and relationship with God that is over the last 30 years.

I understand. You came here with the intent of sharing your testimony. Fair enough.

Not one person on the street or in any setting ever brought up evolution or abiogenesis.People on here brought those up

Well yeah, that's not surprising given that this is specifically an "Evolution vs. Creationism" forum, right? I mean, surely you didn't come to a forum with that title and not expect to see people bring up evolution.

and that’s when I started looking into those things and my reference was from the 70’s in High School.

That brings me back to my question....why did you do that? When others brought up evolution and abiogenesis, why didn't you just say something like "I believe what the Bible says, so the science doesn't matter to me" and leave it at that?

People on here started talking how they are fact based and sure there are facts but I don’t see those facts supporting the theories of human origin or support the world we live in came about by natural processes. Not at all and the theories don’t line up with reality.

But again the question is....why do you care about the science at all? If your position is along the lines of "Whenever science conflicts with the Bible, science is always wrong", doesn't that make science irrelevant to you?

 

[ElishaElijah]

I understand. You came here with the intent of sharing your testimony. Fair enough.


Well yeah, that's not surprising given that this is specifically an "Evolution vs. Creationism" forum, right? I mean, surely you didn't come to a forum with that title and not expect to see people bring up evolution.


That brings me back to my question....why did you do that? When others brought up evolution and abiogenesis, why didn't you just say something like "I believe what the Bible says, so the science doesn't matter to me" and leave it at that?


But again the question is....why do you care about the science at all? If your position is along the lines of "Whenever science conflicts with the Bible, science is always wrong", doesn't that make science irrelevant to you?

When I started reading posts that said God isn’t real and you can’t know Him, that there is no evidence I had to speak up. I confront the lies with Truth. I’m a witness to the Truth and when people believe lies I am compelled to speak the Truth. So science is secondary, I see science being used as a deception and not for righteous reasons, used to manipulate, scare and control people.

 

[Jose Fly]

When I started reading posts that said God isn’t real and you can’t know Him, that there is no evidence I had to speak up.

I understand.

I confront the lies with Truth. I’m a witness to the Truth and when people believe lies I am compelled to speak the Truth. So science is secondary, I see science being used as a deception and not for righteous reasons, used to manipulate, scare and control people.

Do you think it would be helpful if you made that clear up front to the people you're interacting with? Why not start off by saying that?

And if you truly believe that, why bother going back to your 70's high school science at all? Isn't that just part of the deception?

 

[Jose Fly]

I know this post was intended for another member, but I wanted to express my understanding of the sentiment expressed by the other person because I was a Christian for 30 years. But, a little more than a year and a half ago, I realized I could no longer ignore the nagging feeling that my belief in a loving, merciful God didn't match my reality or the reality of the world. It was difficult for me to see reality for what it really was because I read the Bible through rose-colored glasses, and I was convinced what I believed was true because that's what I had been indoctrinated to believe. It was really hard for me to break free from this mindset that had been infused into my psyche. So, I know that leaving a religion that you were indoctrinated into and have been a part of for a long time can be quite challenging and very difficult.

Oh I get that for sure. That's why I don't try to convince people to abandon their religious beliefs. Sure, I'll debate specific claims and arguments, but my intent is never to get a person to walk away from their religion. For a lot of people, their religious beliefs are a vital component of who they are as a person.

But I will say that I'm often fascinated by how some religious folks so adamantly deny the role their beliefs play in influencing how they view things like science. It's like they want to have it both ways....believe anything that conflicts with their religion is automatically wrong, while also denying that their religion influences their views.

However, I don't see that as intentionally dishonest as much as it is self-delusion.

 

[ElishaElijah]

I know this post was intended for another member, but I wanted to say that I understand the sentiment expressed by the other person because I was a Christian for 30 years. But, a little more than a year and a half ago, I realized I could no longer ignore the nagging feeling that my belief in a loving, merciful God didn't match my reality or the reality of the world. It simply didn't add up.

It was difficult for me to see reality for what it really was because I read the Bible through rose-colored glasses, and I was convinced what I believed was true because that's what I had been indoctrinated to believe. To be honest, it was really hard for me to break free from this mindset that had been infused into my psyche. So, I know that leaving a religion that you were indoctrinated into and have been a part of for a long time can be quite challenging and very difficult. I now help other people trying to leave Christianity.

Probably be honest for a change because you’ve been a medium for a long time now so saying you left the fellowship of believers as a Christian a year and a half ago isn’t making sense.
You cannot be a Christian and a medium at the same time, it’s one or the other. Certainly not born again and still practice what the Bible calls witchcraft.