• 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!

Science or Religion?

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Why do you think it is bogus? Can you support it?
It is not my term. And no of course I cannot support it. That is why the term appears to be bogus Please note, to support that idea he ran away from his burden of proof. The burden of proof lies upon the person that invents a term, claims that something exists, etc.. I only said that it looks bogus and so far we have only had confirmation of that belief.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
Why can't it be both? I don't see one opposing the other.
When the governor claims that everything concerning the scientists who created the vaccine and people getting the vaccination are a result of everyone involved complying with God's wishes, and those that don't have the vaccine are ignoring God's wishes.

I don't think this is a correct scientific view of the reality concerning covid, nor is it imho a valid religious view. I mean if God were really that involved, He could stop covid in its tracks, or even prevent it in the first instance.

In the broader sense of the potential for science to be in harmony with God, of course it can be, but that does not mean all scientific claims are in harmony with God's 'wishes'.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
It is not my term. And no of course I cannot support it. That is why the term appears to be bogus Please note, to support that idea he ran away from his burden of proof. The burden of proof lies upon the person that invents a term, claims that something exists, etc.. I only said that it looks bogus and so far we have only had confirmation of that belief.
You misunderstood, my question is, can you support your suspicion for it being a bogus term? Iow, why do you think the concept of 'creative evolution' is a bogus term?
 

Fallen Prophet

Well-Known Member
When the governor claims that everything concerning the scientists who created the vaccine and people getting the vaccination are a result of everyone involved complying with God's wishes, and those that don't have the vaccine are ignoring God's wishes.

I don't think this is a correct scientific view of the reality concerning covid, nor is it imho a valid religious view. I mean if God were really that involved, He could stop covid in its tracks, or even prevent it in the first instance.

In the broader sense of the potential for science to be in harmony with God, of course it can be, but that does not mean all scientific claims are in harmony with God's 'wishes'.
I do think that the governor is wrong by trying to combine Church and State - but I do believe that all of our modern medical and technological breakthroughs come by inspiration from God.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
I do think that the governor is wrong by trying to combine Church and State - but I do believe that all of our modern medical and technological breakthroughs come by inspiration from God.
Fine, does that include all modern medical technological breakthroughs in biological weapons?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You misunderstood, my question is, can you support your suspicion for it being a bogus term? Iow, why do you think the concept of 'creative evolution' is a bogus term?
Yes. That is rather easy. As far as I know there is no evidence for anything besides just "evolution". There is no evidence that I know of that implies a creator at all. And since I do try to keep up on the science that is a strong indicator that it is a bogus term. But perhaps he can show us that it is not. When it comes to claims in the sciences they are not accepted until after they have been well supported with evidence. If one uses a term and cannot support it then it is all but guaranteed to be bogus.

For example if I claimed that Joe Biden is the best President ever (it is too early to know either way) and could not support it then you would be right in saying that claim is bogus. It does not mean that it might be shown to be true later, but for right now it would appear to be false.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Fine, does that include all modern medical technological breakthroughs in biological weapons?
And what would those be? As you should now know a reliable source is necessary for such a claim. Since it is a science claim it needs peer reviewed science behind it.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
Yes. That is rather easy. As far as I know there is no evidence for anything besides just "evolution". There is no evidence that I know of that implies a creator at all. And since I do try to keep up on the science that is a strong indicator that it is a bogus term. But perhaps he can show us that it is not. When it comes to claims in the sciences they are not accepted until after they have been well supported with evidence. If one uses a term and cannot support it then it is all but guaranteed to be bogus.

For example if I claimed that Joe Biden is the best President ever (it is too early to know either way) and could not support it then you would be right in saying that claim is bogus. It does not mean that it might be shown to be true later, but for right now it would appear to be false.
Or is it because you are an atheist, and the idea of creative influence to evolution is not consistent with your belief system.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Or is it because you are an atheist, and the idea of creative influence to evolution is not consistent with your belief system.

That has nothing to do with it. I follow the evidence. Show me some reliable evidence, some scientific evidence, for a creator behind evolution and I will change my mind.

Careful you appear to be projecting your flaws upon others.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
That has nothing to do with it. I follow the evidence. Show me some reliable evidence, some scientific evidence, for a creator behind evolution and I will change my mind.

Careful you appear to be projecting your flaws upon others.
You are an atheist, why would I waste time trying to convey to you something you do not believe in? You are being silly, stop it!
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You are an atheist, why would I waste time trying to convey to you something you do not believe in? You are beng silly, stop it!
I am an atheist because reality appears to support me. When you make claims you take on a burden of proof. And since no one can appear to support the term "creative evolution" it does appear to be quite bogus.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
I am an atheist because reality appears to support me. When you make claims you take on a burden of proof. And since no one can appear to support the term "creative evolution" it does appear to be quite bogus.
Only in the mind of an atheist! This is not rocket science, you don't believe in God so end of story! You don't need to interrupt discussions that include God to ask everyone to provide proof to an atheist that God actually exists. You see how silly your position is?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Only in the mind of an atheist! This is not rocket science, you don't believe in God so end of story! You don't need to interrupt discussions that include God to ask everyone to provide proof to an atheist that God actually exists. You see how silly your position is?

This discussion is not only about God. Did you not see the title of the thread? And this is an open forum. There is no "interrupting'. Private conversations are had using the PM function. Open ones where anyone can join in are in areas like this.

There is also the option of using a DIR which can limit it to a specific religious group. I would be just as justified in arguing that you do not belong here. But I know why that would be wrong.

Now you have made quite a few rather obviously false claims about me. Asking serious questions is not "being silly". You might want to remember that.
 
Top