Uh huh. (Sounds like my son, figured everything out already)I seriously doubt I would hear anything from you that I haven't heard many times before.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Uh huh. (Sounds like my son, figured everything out already)I seriously doubt I would hear anything from you that I haven't heard many times before.
I'm quite a bit older than your son.Uh huh. (Sounds like my son, figured everything out already)
No, the stars, or starry heavens, were NOT made ( as in created ) on the 4th day.
In the beginning (Day One)God created the heavens and earth ( that means the starry heavens were before earth )
Please notice at Genesis 1:16 the word used there is the word ' made ' and Not the word created.
So, God ' made ' the existing lights: sun, moon and stars to do something.
Their already created light was now ' made ' to reach earth's surface.
Just as a parent's child can be ' made ' to do something like ' made ' to sit in a chair or 'made' to go to school.
God ' made ' the already created lights to do their job so we could enjoy living life on Earth.
It is fully understood how the universe has evolved.
we have no evidence that can't be accounted for naturalistically, and therefore we have no need for a god hypothesis.
Yet you sound like him at 16.I'm quite a bit older than your son.
Uh huh. (Sounds like my son, figured everything out already)
Yet you sound like him at 16.
I've run out of things you're willing to learn anything about. You made that clear in saying you already know everything I have to say. If I'm not mistaken, that was you ending discussion.I guess you've run out of anything reasonably intelligent to say so you resort to one liner insults. OK.
So you thought I was ending the discussion, but you couldn't help yourself and just had to make a final insulting post.I've run out of things you're willing to learn anything about. You made that clear in saying you already know everything I have to say. If I'm not mistaken, that was you ending discussion.
Young earth is not a science claim. It's a religious claim that lacks any science supporting it. What you mean to say is, you are open to religious claims regarding science matters, over science's claims regarding science matters? Is that an accurate assessment of your position?
You certainly can question how people read the Bible. But are you qualified to question how science interprets the data from science? Are you qualified to offer other scientific explanations? Do you think that science is a matter of opinion, and nothing more? Do you believe that Jane in the checkout lane of the Kwiki Mart can weigh in with her opinions about Black Holes, equally to that of the late Stephen Hawking?
What do you mean "the hypothesis method"? What is that? Do you mean to say the "scientific method"? Hypothesis is only one part of that. Testing and independent verification is also part of that method. Otherwise, an hypothesis is just an educated guess. And if you're not knowledge about science, that does even qualify as an educated guess. It's just uninformed opinion at that point, and worth nothing in a discussion about science.No, you have not accurately assessed my position. I've always used the hypothesis method to evaluate both scientific and religious claims.
All one needs to do, is look at Day 6, and notice all that was going on...way too much for a literal 24 hours!
An omnipotent god couldn't get that done in 24 earth hours?
Certainly Jehovah could. But does that mean, he has to?
Only changes within species, genera, possibly families.
The evidence of life itself cannot be explained naturalistically
Why are you making this an either/or case? I don't see any reason that is necessary.
I am a musician. I create music from my soul. I know what inspiration is. It is raw, spontaneous, and unique.
Why must God be some entity outside of yourself, and not living inside your heart and speaking to you through it?
Gen.1:16God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth,
If the stars were already in the expanse why did God have to place them in the expanse of the heavens?
What do you mean "the hypothesis method"? What is that? Do you mean to say the "scientific method"? Hypothesis is only one part of that. Testing and independent verification is also part of that method. Otherwise, an hypothesis is just an educated guess. And if you're not knowledge about science, that does even qualify as an educated guess. It's just uninformed opinion at that point, and worth nothing in a discussion about science.
There is no such thing, to the best of my knowledge. This is what the scientific method is, it includes an hypothesis, but there is no "hypothesis method". That sounds made up. Here is what the scientific method actually is: Scientific method - WikipediaThe hypothesis method inside the scientific method
Such as?--test observable, verifiable FALSIFABLE items--the Bible gives quite a few appropriate tests.
The hypothesis method inside the scientific method--test observable, verifiable FALSIFABLE items--the Bible gives quite a few appropriate tests.
Where does it say water is before the stars? Water was here from the beginning....and so were the heavenly bodies. (Genesis 1:1-2)
And all because you rather believe in a book written by unknown ancient goat herders without a clue.