Why science unable to control Death ?

[URAVIP2ME]

The question is can you provide evidence that they were set by somebody??? Nope.
The laws are descriptive, not proscriptive.

Or, can it be said, since it can Not be proven there is No God, then it is the 'exercise of faith' in the non-existence of God.
The so-called absence of evidence, still is Not evidence of absence.
And the orderly laws brought forth out of chaos ( Big Bang ) in that the universe would revert back in the absence of that which brings forth order out of chaos.
Who can banish the protection found in the descriptive Laws of Nature ?

 

[Milton Platt]

Or, can it be said, since it can Not be proven there is No God, then it is the 'exercise of faith' in the non-existence of God.
The so-called absence of evidence, still is Not evidence of absence.
And the orderly laws brought forth out of chaos ( Big Bang ) in that the universe would revert back in the absence of that which brings forth order out of chaos.
Who can banish the protection found in the descriptive Laws of Nature ?

If you went to the doctor and he did cancer screening on you and found no evidence of cancer would you take it as a sign that you were riddled with cancer and demand chemo? Or would you take the absence of evidence as evidence of absence?

It cannot be proven that any of the gods do not exist. Not 100%. Do you believe they all exist? Can you prove that fairies do not exist? If not, does that mean they do? Do you believe absolutely anything you are told exists until somebody proves it does not? What level of evidence do you need to be convinced that the gods you do not believe in do not exist?

And yes, the laws are descriptive as opposed to proscriptive The laws describe how matter and energy behave, they do not cause the behavior.

 

[Thief]

Absolutely. This is demonstrated by all NATURAL life, imcluding many lower life forms. But it is irrelevant to the argument and does not follow from anything you said above.

If you want to claim that a god made anything, you have to produce the god, and then demonstrate cause and effect.When you can do that, you will have an argument, until then, you are just peeing into the wind.

well gee....
if I saw an item of complexity....
and that item has appearance of design....
and that item greatly predates written history....

then applying Cause to the effect might be a trick.

still....that item of complexity continues to swim about and reproduce
and the item seems more than an accident can produce....

 

[McBell]

well gee....
if I saw an item of complexity....
and that item has appearance of design....
and that item greatly predates written history....

then applying Cause to the effect might be a trick.

still....that item of complexity continues to swim about and reproduce
and the item seems more than an accident can produce....

Snow flakes

 

[Milton Platt]

well gee....
if I saw an item of complexity....
and that item has appearance of design....
and that item greatly predates written history....

then applying Cause to the effect might be a trick.

still....that item of complexity continues to swim about and reproduce
and the item seems more than an accident can produce....

What are the criteria you are using to determine what is complex as opposed to non complex?

What accident are you referring to? I prefer abiogenesis which is based on the actions of the laws of physics rather than an accident.

 

[Thief]

What are the criteria you are using to determine what is complex as opposed to non complex?

What accident are you referring to? I prefer abiogenesis which is based on the actions of the laws of physics rather than an accident.

are you not assuming?....life is no longer a mystery

 

[Milton Platt]

are you not assuming?....life is no longer a mystery

There is pretty much nothing that one can be 100% certain of. But the evidence. So far points to everything being of natural origin. So yes, we must mske assumptions based on available evidence. I also assume gravity is an actual phenomenon based on the evidence.

You didn't answer my question.......

 

[Thief]

complex.....
the blending of life and chemistry.....

care to say there is no difference?

 

[Milton Platt]

complex.....
the blending of life and chemistry.....

care to say there is no difference?

It isn't a blend. The life did not exist before the chemisrty, but is a result of it. No difference between living and nonliving things?. Sure. Organic chemestry can be complex....so what?

What do you mean by "life is no longer a mystery"? Some things about it are not, some things are still being sorted out.

I asked you in a previous post what criteria you were using to define complex versus simple. Is that the dividing line for you? Life equals complex and non-living equals simple?

 

[Thief]

It isn't a blend. The life did not exist before the chemisrty, but is a result of it. No difference between what and what?

I don't believe that substance begets life.....
the dead cannot beget the living.

Spirit first

 

[Milton Platt]

well gee....
if I saw an item of complexity....
and that item has appearance of design....
and that item greatly predates written history....

then applying Cause to the effect might be a trick.

still....that item of complexity continues to swim about and reproduce
and the item seems more than an accident can produce....

How is it you consider

I don't believe that substance begets life.....
the dead cannot beget the living.

Spirit first

I did not say anything about the dead.

You are welcome to your beliefs as are all here. But believing does not make it so.

 

[McBell]

It isn't a blend. The life did not exist before the chemisrty, but is a result of it. No difference between living and nonliving things?. Sure. Organic chemestry can be complex....so what?

What do you mean by "life is no longer a mystery"? Some things about it are not, some things are still being sorted out.

I asked you in a previous post what criteria you were using to define complex versus simple. Is that the dividing line for you? Life equals complex and non-living equals simple?

Good luck in getting a clear concise answer from him.

 

[leibowde84]

When man sets off an explosion there is No organization afterwards, whereas the called Big Bang is all about organization in contrasts with other explosions.

Right, can Not say have it both ways: What the Bible really teaches is that the creative days are Not literal days but unknown time periods.
There is Nothing in Genesis to indicated a ' young ' earth because to say 'young' would mean God used deception ( lies ) to make a young earth look older.
There is Nothing in Genesis to indicate how long each creative day was, so CMBR dating is in harmony with an old earth. So, yes, billions of years Not less.
Not expecting you to take Scripture as God-given, but merely wanting to show what the Bible really teaches.
The false-religious teaching of a 'young earth made to look old' is Not what the Bible is teaching.

Can anyone demonstrate that God did Not create anything ?___________ As Antony Flew concluded," DNA research has shown by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved. There are evils in abundance which could Not be put down to a consequence of human sin."
So, where there is intelligence: there is a mind, where there is a mind: there is a person, where there is a person: there is a personality.

You really need to study the BB theory, as it explains perfectly your issue here. It is due to the rise in gravity for extremely large objects.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

If you went to the doctor and he did cancer screening on you and found no evidence of cancer would you take it as a sign that you were riddled with cancer and demand chemo? Or would you take the absence of evidence as evidence of absence?
It cannot be proven that any of the gods do not exist. Not 100%. Do you believe they all exist? Can you prove that fairies do not exist? If not, does that mean they do? Do you believe absolutely anything you are told exists until somebody proves it does not? What level of evidence do you need to be convinced that the gods you do not believe in do not exist?
And yes, the laws are descriptive as opposed to proscriptive The laws describe how matter and energy behave, they do not cause the behavior.

But aren't the Laws of Nature proscriptive in that we can put ' faith ' in the way the Laws of Nature behave. So much faith in that we can successfully cause flying to the moon and back.

Wouldn't a reasonable person want a second medical opinion over a serious condition, after all, the doctors have a medical arts building Not a medical science building.
An ' art ' because the medical is a talent, a practice, and Not a science. My experiences with the medical profession have 'for the most part' just been expensive.
So, in religion why not keep an open mind just to hear what others believe and why.
100% I can believe the Bible does exist. 100% I can believe the people of John 13:34-35 exist.
Jesus' teachings were Not gullible, but Jesus used logical reasoning on the old Hebrew Scriptures.

 

[Milton Platt]

But aren't the Laws of Nature proscriptive in that we can put ' faith ' in the way the Laws of Nature behave. So much faith in that we can successfully cause flying to the moon and back.

We can have confidence (faith is not needed) that the natural world behaves predictively. The laws merely describe the behavior. Faith had nothing much to do with traveling to the moon. It was based on scientific principles that were ttested beforehand.

Wouldn't a reasonable person want a second medical opinion over a serious condition, after all, the doctors have a medical arts building Not a medical science building.

What serious medical condition? The tests were negative. No reasonable person takes two of every test, anyway. Tests results are not "opinions". My point was that you said an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. My example proves you wrong. If a cancer screening says you have no cancer, you do not then assume it means you have cancer. The absence of evidence indicates an absence of cancer, does it not? So let's not use that argument. It is fallacious.


An ' art ' because the medical is a talent, a practice, and Not a science. My experiences with the medical profession have 'for the most part' just been expensive.

That is unfortunate for you. Much science is involved in medicine, but it is not, strictly speaking a scientific disipline. That is all irrelavant to my point is it not?

So, in religion why not keep an open mind just to hear what others believe and why.
100% I can believe the Bible does exist. 100% I can believe the people of John 13:34-35 exist.
Jesus' teachings were Not gullible, but Jesus used logical reasoning on the old Hebrew Scriptures.

An open mind is fine, but critical thinking skills are very important, as is proper considerstion of all the evidence.
Of course the Bible exists....I have several versions myself. So what?
Yes you can believe in any part of the bible you wish. What is important however is not what you believe, but what is actually true. Teachings cannot be gullible, people are sometimes gullible. Gullibility is a synonym for faith.

I have not seen any instance where Jesus was using logic, only expounding on old Jewish customs and laws.

 

[Thief]

How is it you consider


I did not say anything about the dead.

You are welcome to your beliefs as are all here. But believing does not make it so.

denial is not a trump card

 

[Thief]

It isn't a blend. The life did not exist before the chemisrty, but is a result of it. No difference between living and nonliving things?. Sure. Organic chemestry can be complex....so what?

What do you mean by "life is no longer a mystery"? Some things about it are not, some things are still being sorted out.

I asked you in a previous post what criteria you were using to define complex versus simple. Is that the dividing line for you? Life equals complex and non-living equals simple?

complex chemical reactions happen.....but that doesn't mean they are alive

perhaps you might list the requirements for life.....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Death is as essential to life as birth....just to remind us of out past, out present, and our future...what and who we really are....

I died as a mineral and became a plant;
I died as a plant and rose to animal;
I died as an animal and I was a man.
Why should I fear?
When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as man to soar...
With angels blest.
But even from an angel I must pass on:
All except God must perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel soul,
I shall become what no mind ever conceived. - Jalaluddin Rumi

 

[Thief]

has anyone offer a discussion......what if we are born to immortality?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

has anyone offer a discussion......what if we are born to immortality?

Sure we are....we all come from the one immortal father...

God sleeps in the rock,
Dreams in the plant,
Stirs in the animal,
And Awakens in Man. - Al Arabi