-
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!
Verifiable evidence for creationism?
- Thread starter leibowde84
- Start date
Thief
Rogue Theologian
an item at rest will remain at rest.
the singularity doesn't have a secondary
it would not be singular if it did
Blastcat
Active Member
So, there should be some matter that came before the big bang. So what's the problem?
I don't think we KNOW that the universe started WITH a singularity, that's a hypothesis.
And you haven't defined what you MEAN by "substance".
Right now, I have no idea.
Blastcat
Active Member
Thanks for pointing us to an Islamic apologetic site.
Perhaps you can give us what you think is the BEST evidence in that site.
It seems that the EVIDENCE is that "how could Mohamed been so prophetic? So, creationism must be true" That's not evidence FOR creationism BUT a declaration of incredulity. Incredulity is NOT evidence.
So, if there is any REAL evidence for creationism in that site, give us what you consider to be the BEST one, and if it has ANY validity, we will be interested in what ELSE it has to say.
We KNOW you probably find these ideas convincing, so LET US KNOW what convinces you MOST.
This is your chance.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
science leans to the notion of a singular 'point'So, there should be some matter that came before the big bang. So what's the problem?
I don't think we KNOW that the universe started WITH a singularity, that's a hypothesis.
And you haven't defined what you MEAN by "substance".
Right now, I have no idea.
science stops there
science cannot define substance in that condition
it's the logic of regression that took science in that direction
movement as we know it does seem to have a 'point' of origin (genesis)
as a believer I place Spirit.....first.
substance is not the source of life
the dead do not beget the living
that point would be nonliving
it won't move of it's own......volition
it doesn't have any
Blastcat
Active Member
Science isn't in the business of pretending things. If the scientists can't observe something, they don't pretend that they do.
So they try to find out HOW to.. sometimes, that takes a bit of time.
Things are moving along quite nicely in that regard.
There's a whole LOT of things that we can't observe. So, we can make hypotheses and try to test them.
If we can't test them, or the tests come back negative, it's NOT REASONABLE to pretend that they came back POSITIVE.
I don't think that scientists USED a Bible story as a tool to observe nature. I think it was telescopes and OTHER tools.
And that's great. You have a belief.
That's great, too, You have another belief.
So why invent a volition if there isn't any?
Kinda defeats the idea OF volition. Creationism kinda NEEDS volition, doesn't it?
Do ROCKS need volition to fall down a mountain? Or do they need a mountain to fall down OFF of?
So, this is what I see so far.
You don't HAVE a definition for "substance", but you think that it comes "after" spirit.
You start OFF with a belief in creationism, and you OFFER your belief as EVIDENCE for your belief.
There seems to be a lot of words you fail to understand.
The word "evidence" seems to be one of those.
You don't give us evidence FOR creationism, but evidence of your misunderstanding of some concepts.
Apologists have messed with your capacity to reason when it comes to your beliefs, and ONE of those ways is to mess up your understanding of MANY words.
You simply CANNOT expect that your BELIEFS are any evidence for your BELIEFS.
You should really challenge the messed up kind of reasoning that apologists try to get you to use.
Blastcat
Active Member
Why should ANYONE do your work for you?
If you want to present some evidence for creationism, it's not up to ME, it's up to you.
I don't believe in creationism.
The thread is for people who want to present some evidence for it.
IF YOU DON'T care to do more than you have done so far, neither will anyone else.
THANKS FOR THE LINK.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Science isn't in the business of pretending things. If the scientists can't observe something, they don't pretend that they do.
science cannot place the singularity in a petri dish
and there will never be an experiment to your satisfaction
but science tends to be sure if calculation
and the observations we have at had lead to a regression of the universe....to a point
science stops there.
that beginning has no movement of it's own
you would need the snap of God's fingers for that
Jabar
“Strive always to excel in virtue and truth.”
Why should ANYONE do your work for you?
If you want to present some evidence for creationism, it's not up to ME, it's up to you.
I don't believe in creationism.
The thread is for people who want to present some evidence for it.
IF YOU DON'T care to do more than you have done so far, neither will anyone else.
THANKS FOR THE LINK.
The reason i told you to pick one was because i wanted to be generous. But of course, that is not the case in this situation due to a reason i am not sure of. Your welcome!
Blastcat
Active Member
I told you the reason. I don't CARE if you don't bother to make your own case. Some people like others to do that for them, so they post a link to what OTHER people say.
Thanks for NOT presenting your case, or your evidence.
Thanks for the link.
I went to it.
Now what?
Jabar
“Strive always to excel in virtue and truth.”
@Blastcat I guess you do not accept my generosity. Anyhow, the following proof:
Allah created every [living] creature from water. Some of them go on their bellies, some of them on two legs, and some on four. Allah creates whatever He wills. Allah has power over all things. (Qur'an, 24:45)
Do those who disbelieve not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not believe? (Qur'an, 21:30)
And it is He Who created human beings from water and then gave them relations by blood and marriage. Your Lord is All-Powerful. (Qur'an, 25:54)
This is only one of the many many. We have found this information out in modern science.
Allah created every [living] creature from water. Some of them go on their bellies, some of them on two legs, and some on four. Allah creates whatever He wills. Allah has power over all things. (Qur'an, 24:45)
Do those who disbelieve not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not believe? (Qur'an, 21:30)
And it is He Who created human beings from water and then gave them relations by blood and marriage. Your Lord is All-Powerful. (Qur'an, 25:54)
This is only one of the many many. We have found this information out in modern science.
McBell
Unbound
The Forer Effect is not as impressive as you seem to think it is.
Blastcat
Active Member
I suppose I welcome your generous INTENT, but I took it as a sign of intellectual laziness, not generosity. It's trivial to post a link these days.
It is NOT one.
I am not going to be impressed if you don't focus. I asked for your BEST. I asked for ONE.
You gave me 3.
I am only going to BOTHER with the one proof that you consider to be your BEST proof.
Take your time, think about it.. and if you still want to discuss ONE proof at a time, then good.
If you can't focus on one at a time, I won't be interested in your mess.
I'm looking forward to your more focused presentation.
Jabar
“Strive always to excel in virtue and truth.”
McBell
Unbound
I have no idea what you are trying to convey with this post.
McBell
Unbound
Your inability to quote posts you are replying to added to your seemingly lacking grasp of the English language in no way reflects upon my critical thinking skills.
Jabar
“Strive always to excel in virtue and truth.”
How do you know i am unable to reply to your post? I think a better statement would be ''The fact that you did not even quote posts you are replying to added to seemingly lacking grasp of the English language in no way reflects upon my critical thinking skills''. Just some advice for you.