Is there a Christian cosmology that doesn't include miracles?

[Lon]

No. :up:

:think:
Isaiah 55:9
1 Corinthians 2:6-10
Hebrews 11:1-3
John 15:5

(else only those 'capable' would be saved, not the deaf/dumb )
Someone may be 'logical' in basic math but missing the boat entirely with quantum physics, thus their logic only goes so far, nevertheless, Romans 10:11

 

[Clete]

:think:
Isaiah 55:9
1 Corinthians 2:6-10
Hebrews 11:1-3
John 15:5

(else only those 'capable' would be saved, not the deaf/dumb )
Someone may be 'logical' in basic math but missing the boat entirely with quantum physics, thus their logic only goes so far, nevertheless, Romans 10:11

Sounds great until you actually quote the passages you cite....
`

Isaiah 55:9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways,
And My thoughts than your thoughts.​

Quite so! And as such, they are not BELOW are thoughts!

This verse does not in any way imply that God is irrational or that anything we are asked to believe is irrational.

There are plenty of things we have no way of knowing or understanding because of a lack of information or context but that isn't remotely the same thing.


`

1 Corinthians 2:6 However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9 But as it is written:
“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.​

Amen!

Once again, not a single syllable here about belief in the irrational or that sound reason is to be distrusted or in any other way undermined or discounted.


`

Hebrews 11:1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.
3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.​

This is one of my very favorite passages!

Why?

Because it is teaching just the exact opposite of what practically every mindless Christian on the planet thinks it's teaching. It isn't trying to tell you that faith itself is the evidence of things unseen! How would that make any sense? People believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy and billions have believed in Baal and Zeus or every other false god you can name. Their faith wasn't evidence for anything other than their own stupidity.

This passage uses a figure of speech. It's saying that faith is the proper response to the substantive evidence that is presented before us and which is all around us every day. The heaven declare the glory of God and He has made Himself plain to us through the things He has made, even our own selves, our own bodies and own own minds testify not only to God's existence but to His righteousness and power.


`

John 15:5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.​

This verse is not relevant. It is, at the very best, taken out of context and has exactly nothing to do with whether we are able to understand the difference between the truth and error, between the rational and the irrational, between reality and fantasy.

(else only those 'capable' would be saved, not the deaf/dumb )

This makes not sense. No one will have an excuse on judgement day. People will be held to that which they are capable and no more or less. God is not unjust.
`

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Luke 12:47 And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. 48 But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more.

James 3:1 My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.​

Someone may be 'logical' in basic math but missing the boat entirely with quantum physics, thus their logic only goes so far, nevertheless, Romans 10:11

Quantum physics (it's actually called Quantum Mechanics) is a strictly mathematically based theory and it is not logical and intentionally so!

Look Lon, you really aught to stick with what you know something about. I mean, you literally could not possibly have found something less appropriate to use as an analogy. Quantum Mechanics has aspects of it that are rational and it happens to be those aspects that yield some useful predictions and information about the world in which we live but the thing with mathematics is that you can take things to whatever extreme you desire and well past anything that has any practical application, or analog in, the real world. And it happens to be the fact that such mathematical theories suggest blatantly irrational things that tells us that we have not figured out what is actually going on. In other words, just because, in a mathematical sense, it is useful to talk about one photon going through both slits at once in a double slit experiment, doesn't mean that this is what actually happens and just because you can talk quite accurately about a photon being a particle or a wave, does not mean that it is actually both things in some fundamentally contradictory way. If you think it does then I promise you that you do not know what you're talking about.

But none of that even matters! In fact, it is so entirely irrelevant that I won't discuss it further. The point is not about theoretical "science" it is about epistemology. You cannot know anything without reason. You cannot even attempt undermine reason without using reason in the attempt! To say that reason is untrustworthy is to admit that you don't know that reason is untrustworthy because you had to use some process of reason to come to that conclusion in the first place. Any attempt to undermine the veracity of sound reason is immediately, totally and utterly irrefragably self-stultifying before the first syllable of it is uttered because no meaningful syllable can be uttered without reason.

Did you fail to notice the irony of your having started your post with the "think" smiley?! :think:

 

[oatmeal]

I use to love learning about all the proofs that God Created the universe. I especially liked geochronometry.
I still enjoy hearing new things as they are discovered on a daily bases that prove a young earth.
But a lot of creation science gets a little too far into the weeds for the average person to wittiness with.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that those things shouldn't be explored, they should be. But it appears so so deep into the weeds . . . that it almost seems like people are trying to convince themselves and not others.

From my prospective as a firm believer in a young earth, I think a broader more hypothetical approach would win more converts to the young earth. I would love to see the brilliant minds on this forum tackle, just how God did creation. Was it all miracles?

My favorite way to start with a evolutionist is with the joke about the scientist who eventually created life in the lab, using a piece of clay. And as they presented the life to God, of course God says, get your own clay.

If, E=MC2 and I think most concede that it probably does, then why can't creationist take M=E/C2 and put it in the place of some or all of the so called miracles.

Maybe the term miracle may not be what we think it is. Maybe, just maybe miracle is a figure of speech meaning something like "things that are hard to understand". My understanding is the term "miracle" is defined as actions that violate the laws of physics. If you believe in E=MC2 then I think you have to believe in M=E/C2, or energy into matter that would not violate physics.

Miracles are in the eyes of the beholder. If you gave a cell phone to Moses, he would surely call it a miracle. Heck, the amount of diodes they can now get on the head of a pin, makes me think its a miracle! LOL

Is there a Christian cosmology that doesn't include miracles? Maybe there should be? Why would God create laws of physics such as He did, only to immediately break them? Or, at least ask the question, if God wanted to create without violating "His" laws of physics, could He do it?

Without God's power, there was no creation.

Sadly, when some Christians speak of creation, they talk of seven days of creation, which is wrong on several levels and the six days of creation are misnamed as well.

God created in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27 only

The other acts He did were not acts of creation.

If they were God would have said create in all those other places, but He did not.

He said, divided, made, etc. but did not create in those passages.

So, if you believe that Genesis 1:1 is the first day then there were only three days that creation took place

 

[Aimiel]

Saying it doesn't make it so.

​

True for us, but for God... if He says it: it IS so.​

No, it does'n't Aimiel! You quoted the verse itself! It absolutely does not say that God knows the future! It says, as you clearly quoted it as saying, that God declares the end from the beginning. It's simply says that God tells people what He intends to do in advance. It's no different, in principle, than when American Airlines tells you that a particular flight will depart Tulsa International Airport at 8:00 am on the 4th of May. The only major difference being that God has more ability to make His plans come to pass than American Airlines does.

You see, if the verse you quoted actually said that God knows the future then I could not make the point I just made and have even the dumbest public schooled third grade child take me seriously because no such understanding of the verse would be possible. Not only that but if this verse stated that God knows the future then it would falsify the entire bible because there are lots and lots of times when the bible depicts God wanting one thing and getting another and where He states explicitly that some thing will come to pass that DOES NOT EVER HAPPEN!

​

He doesn't give us the Knowledge that He, alone, needs to be privy to. He has exhaustive knowledge of everything that ever will happen. Not taking that as a given means you've put limits upon Him. Historically, that's a mistake.​

And more than once when He has done so, what He states will happen doesn't happen!

​

He's never lied, even about the future.​

It's really too bad that you've not ever actually read the bible for yourself and choose to blindly believe whatever that man behind the curtain - oh - I mean pulpit, tells you.

​

I have no idea why you went off the path there, but... whatever. I've read the Bible through several times and have a personal relationship with it's Author.​

So, no, He isn't blind to the future. You and I aren't even blind to the future, not completely.

​

Actually, we are. God can grant us 'glimpses' of it, through dreams, visions or prophecy; but the future is His alone. He keeps His Mystery, as He wills.​

I know that baring some catastophy, I'll be doing a home inspection on a new house later today. I know this because someone has called in and scheduled the inspection and I've agreed to do it today. I am not remotely as powerful as God and don't have access to .01% of the information He has acccess to, nor am I able to prevent all possible obstacles to the extent that God is able but even so, I can say with a great deal of accuracy and assurance that I will, in fact, be doing that inspection today and I have known it for almost a week! What's more is that I didn't need to step outside of time or by whatever means peak into the future at all!

​

Should your life have expired, your guesswork would be moot. God doesn't deal in guesses. He knows everything. Not just what you believe CAN be known. He is WAY above your interpretation of Him. Thank God that He is!​

Genesis 2:19 Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.

​

That was out of deference for the fact that He gave this earth to Adam.​

This was a stupid thing to say.

​

I know you are... but what am I?​

As for being "every-when" He wants to be, that is not only a Greek idea, it is also quite meaningless. The notion is a contradiction. More specifically, it commits what is known as a stolen concept fallacy because there can be no existence outside of time because the concept of existence presupposes the concept of time. In other words, the concept of existence is logically dependent upon the concept of time. If you deny the existence of time then you don't get to use the concept of existence anymore and if you do so, you've "stolen" the concept of time, thus the name "stolen concept fallacy".

​

Actually, it's quite clear in Scripture, since He said that He created in the beginning. There cannot be a beginning unless time, itself, was created.​

Time is not a substance, it is not an ontological thing, it's just an idea. Time is a convention of language used to communicate the duration and sequence of events relative to other events. If an event occurs and it can be spoken of relative to the occurrence of another event (i.e. before, after, during, etc) then the act doing so employs the concept of time, even if you don't call it that or use those terms. The concept of existence implies duration, thus to suggest timeless duration is to suggest existence without duration which is non-existence. A thing cannot be its negation, thus timeless existence is an oxymoron and meaningless.

​

God is above time. In your philosophy: time is God.​

No, that's how your doctrine has redefined the term. Eternity is not timelessness, it's the opposite of that! It is infinite duration.

​

ibid​

Here's the proof in formal terms. You kind of have to read this slowly and make sure you're following it (that goes for everyone not just you)...


T = You answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am

1. Yesterday God infallibly believed T. [Supposition of infallible foreknowledge]
2. If E occurred in the past, it is now-necessary that E occurred then. [Principle of the Necessity of the Past]
3. It is now-necessary that yesterday God believed T. [1, 2]
4. Necessarily, if yesterday God believed T, then T. [Definition of “infallibility”]
5. If p is now-necessary, and necessarily (p → q), then q is now-necessary. [Transfer of Necessity Principle]
6. So it is now-necessary that T. [3,4,5]
7. If it is now-necessary that T, then you cannot do otherwise than answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am. [Definition of “necessary”]
8. Therefore, you cannot do otherwise than answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am. [6, 7]
9. If you cannot do otherwise when you do an act, you do not act freely. [Principle of Alternate Possibilities]
10. Therefore, when you answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am, you will not do it freely. [8, 9]

​

God knowing what I shall or shall not do doesn't preclude me deciding. It merely means that He already knew, even before I decided (omniscience).​

Omniscience is a Greek concept, not a biblical one! God knows what He wishes to know of the which is knowable, nothing more! If you try to biblically prove otherwise you will fail.

​

Only someone who thinks that they know everything about God's Word and every Truth there is would attempt to say such nonsense.​

I didn't write Genesis nor any other portion of the bible. I have quoted you scripture and you have quoted scripture yourself! It's really too bad that you don't permit the bible to inform your theology proper (i.e. your theology of God).

​

Ditto.​

It is just astounding to me that people can directly testify against their own position with text from God's own word and remain steadfastly unmoved off that position! How is that even possible?

​

Ditto.​

 

[Stripe]

:think:
Isaiah 55:9
1 Corinthians 2:6-10
Hebrews 11:1-3
John 15:5

Uh .. I see no connection between those passages and what I said.

(else only those 'capable' would be saved, not the deaf/dumb )

We were not discussing salvation.

Someone may be 'logical' in basic math but missing the boat entirely with quantum physics, thus their logic only goes so far, nevertheless, Romans 10:11

This is utterly unhelpful. :idunno:

 

[Clete]

True for us, but for God... if He says it: it IS so.He doesn't give us the Knowledge that He, alone, needs to be privy to. He has exhaustive knowledge of everything that ever will happen. Not taking that as a given means you've put limits upon Him. Historically, that's a mistake.He's never lied, even about the future.I have no idea why you went off the path there, but... whatever. I've read the Bible through several times and have a personal relationship with it's Author.Actually, we are. God can grant us 'glimpses' of it, through dreams, visions or prophecy; but the future is His alone. He keeps His Mystery, as He wills.Should your life have expired, your guesswork would be moot. God doesn't deal in guesses. He knows everything. Not just what you believe CAN be known. He is WAY above your interpretation of Him. Thank God that He is!That was out of deference for the fact that He gave this earth to Adam.I know you are... but what am I?Actually, it's quite clear in Scripture, since He said that He created in the beginning. There cannot be a beginning unless time, itself, was created.God is above time. In your philosophy: time is God.ibidGod knowing what I shall or shall not do doesn't preclude me deciding. It merely means that He already knew, even before I decided (omniscience).Only someone who thinks that they know everything about God's Word and every Truth there is would attempt to say such nonsense.Ditto.Ditto.[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

Nice!

Why do you even bother spending the time to write such stupidity as though methodically rrestating what I have already refuted counts as a rejoinder.

Who are you trying to convince? Yourself perhaps.

Regardless, you're a complete waste of time at this point.

 

[Clete]

Without God's power, there was no creation.

Sadly, when some Christians speak of creation, they talk of seven days of creation, which is wrong on several levels and the six days of creation are misnamed as well.

God created in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27 only

The other acts He did were not acts of creation.

If they were God would have said create in all those other places, but He did not.

He said, divided, made, etc. but did not create in those passages.

So, if you believe that Genesis 1:1 is the first day then there were only three days that creation took place

Completely pure moronic stupidity!

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Exodus 31:15 Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. 16 Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. 17 It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.’ ”

The places JWs will go to strain out gnats from the camels they are swallowing!

The cultist idiot is making an unwarranted extreme distinction between the Hebrew words bara' and `asah as though the words "create" and "make" cannot be synonymous. He may as well claim that because someone states that they "made a cake" that they therefore couldn't possible have "baked a cake" because the words "made" and "baked" are not perfect synonyms.

He is literally deranged.

The most beneficial aspect of his post is that it gives a good example of how cultists do their doctrine.

 

[Gary K]

I use to love learning about all the proofs that God Created the universe. I especially liked geochronometry.
I still enjoy hearing new things as they are discovered on a daily bases that prove a young earth.
But a lot of creation science gets a little too far into the weeds for the average person to wittiness with.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that those things shouldn't be explored, they should be. But it appears so so deep into the weeds . . . that it almost seems like people are trying to convince themselves and not others.

From my prospective as a firm believer in a young earth, I think a broader more hypothetical approach would win more converts to the young earth. I would love to see the brilliant minds on this forum tackle, just how God did creation. Was it all miracles?

My favorite way to start with a evolutionist is with the joke about the scientist who eventually created life in the lab, using a piece of clay. And as they presented the life to God, of course God says, get your own clay.

If, E=MC2 and I think most concede that it probably does, then why can't creationist take M=E/C2 and put it in the place of some or all of the so called miracles.

Maybe the term miracle may not be what we think it is. Maybe, just maybe miracle is a figure of speech meaning something like "things that are hard to understand". My understanding is the term "miracle" is defined as actions that violate the laws of physics. If you believe in E=MC2 then I think you have to believe in M=E/C2, or energy into matter that would not violate physics.

Miracles are in the eyes of the beholder. If you gave a cell phone to Moses, he would surely call it a miracle. Heck, the amount of diodes they can now get on the head of a pin, makes me think its a miracle! LOL

Is there a Christian cosmology that doesn't include miracles? Maybe there should be? Why would God create laws of physics such as He did, only to immediately break them? Or, at least ask the question, if God wanted to create without violating "His" laws of physics, could He do it?

I see some big time problems with your reasoning.

We humans have a limited understanding of God, what He can do, what all He understands. Our understanding of our world and the universe is extremely limited when we think about God's understanding of it. Why is that? Anytime we compare finite with infinite finite comes infinitely short of infinite now matter what area of knowledge, understanding, wisdom, or power in which we choose to compare ourselves to God. How many times has human understanding and knowledge had to acknowledge it's thinking and understanding came up woefully short?

I'd posit that God has laws governing the universe in the area we call science that our understanding of the laws that govern God's creation are so far beyond our ability to understand that we can't even comprehend their existence. To place our understanding as being the ultimate in truth is foolish. We finite beings cannot come close to matching the knowledge and understanding of God.

God spoke life on earth into existence. That is so far beyond our ability to understand how He did it that to claim in any way shape or form that God broke His own laws pertaining science is, in my eyes, foolishness. The Bible tells us that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. So just how is it wise or trusting of God to say God had to break His own laws of the foundation of the universe? I would say that in our understanding of the universe God broke our understanding of the foundational laws of the universe, not His own. I see the idea that God broke His own laws coming from a idea of a finite God that is capable of being fully understood by humanity. I find that idea to be founded on blasphemy as it denigrates God to no more than a human being when the reality is that we will be able to study Him throughout eternity and still never fully understand Him.

He is infinite. We are finite.

 

[oatmeal]

Completely pure moronic stupidity!

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Exodus 31:15 Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. 16 Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. 17 It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.’ ”

The places JWs will go to strain out gnats from the camels they are swallowing!

The cultist idiot is making an unwarranted extreme distinction between the Hebrew words bara' and `asah as though the words "create" and "make" cannot be synonymous. He may as well claim that because someone states that they "made a cake" that they therefore couldn't possible have "baked a cake" because the words "made" and "baked" are not perfect synonyms.

He is literally deranged.

The most beneficial aspect of his post is that it gives a good example of how cultists do their doctrine.

Please reread what I wrote, not what you assume I wrote

 

[Clete]

Please reread what I wrote, not what you assume I wrote

I read it fine the first time, moron.

 

[oatmeal]

I read it fine the first time, moron.

Clearly you have not.

Try again, this time more slowly

 

[Lon]

Uh .. I see no connection between those passages and what I said.



We were not discussing salvation.



This is utterly unhelpful. :idunno:

God reasons with us, but the problem with imperializing 'logic' our finite and incomplete logic to be specific, is that we become the centers of our universe. The fellow you are talking to imperializes his own logic, with a basic-math level of grasp. The problem is that we not trust in ourselves, but in Him. Salvation is found in no one else. When some trust in chariots, others their own theology, 'we will remember the name of the Lord our God.' While debate on TOL is good for honing, it is the further delving into God's Word, prayer, and fellowship that God makes and molds us.

 

[Clete]

Clearly you have not.

Try again, this time more slowly

The thread is all still here for everyone to read, idiot.

 

[Clete]

Some people just refuse to learn that contradicting yourself is no way to win a debate or to convince anyone of anything worth being convinced of!

God reasons with us, but the problem with imperializing 'logic' our finite and incomplete logic to be specific, is that we become the centers of our universe.

This is a completely meaningless platitude.

Just what do you mean by "our finite and incomplete logic"?

Be specific! What about it is finite? What does it mean for it to be finite?

What about it is incomplete? Again, be specific!

And how did you come to know this information? That is to say, what supposedly complete or at least more complete, non-logical source did you consult that told you that our logic is somehow "incomplete" and by what means did you gain access to this "super-logic" and by what means did you understand it?

The fellow you are talking to imperializes his own logic, with a basic-math level of grasp.

I certainly hope you aren't referring to me with this tripe!

I do not emperialize logic and I certainly don't imperialize my own use of it. I have nothing without the God who is Reason itself.

In the beginning was Reason and Reason was with God and Reason was God!

Cogito ergo Deus!

The problem is that we not trust in ourselves, but in Him.

That's my line!

Your position cuts the mooring lines! Without sound reason ANYTHING goes, Lon! Anything at all! There is no way to say that anything is right or wrong without sound reason! There is no way to say God exists without reason. Without reason David Koresh is the Messiah and so is the dog next door. There is no way for you to tell me that I'm wrong without your use of the very reason that you're telling me not to trust!

Salvation is found in no one else.

The same bible that tells you that tells you also that God is Reason (John 1) and both ideas are communicated via nothing else other than the proper use of reason!

When some trust in chariots, others their own theology, 'we will remember the name of the Lord our God.' While debate on TOL is good for honing, it is the further delving into God's Word, prayer, and fellowship that God makes and molds us.

Once against, the same passage (Psalm 20) that teaches you this uses reason to do so! It makes sense when you read it because logic works and because your mind has no other tool by which to understand or communicate any information.

Clete

 

[oatmeal]

The thread is all still here for everyone to read, idiot.

However, you have failed to read and comprehend what I have wrote

By the way, your insults prove my point

 

[Right Divider]

Some people just refuse to learn that contradicting yourself is no way to win a debate or to convince anyone of anything worth being convinced of!

This is a completely meaningless platitude.

Just what do you mean by "our finite and incomplete logic"?

Be specific! What about it is finite? What does it mean for it to be finite?

What about it is incomplete? Again, be specific!

And how did you come to know this information? That is to say, what supposedly complete or at least more complete, non-logical source did you consult that told you that our logic is somehow "incomplete" and by what means did you gain access to this "super-logic" and by what means did you understand it?

I certainly hope you aren't referring to me with this tripe!

I do not emperialize logic and I certainly don't imperialize my own use of it. I have nothing without the God who is Reason itself.

In the beginning was Reason and Reason was with God and Reason was God!

Cogito ergo Deus!

That's my line!

Your position cuts the mooring lines! Without sound reason ANYTHING goes, Lon! Anything at all! There is no way to say that anything is right or wrong without sound reason! There is no way to say God exists without reason. Without reason David Koresh is the Messiah and so is the dog next door. There is no way for you to tell me that I'm wrong without your use of the very reason that you're telling me not to trust!


The same bible that tells you that tells you also that God is Reason (John 1) and both ideas are communicated via nothing else other than the proper use of reason!

Once against, the same passage (Psalm 20) that teaches you this uses reason to do so! It makes sense when you read it because logic works and because your mind has no other tool by which to understand or communicate any information.

Clete

Excellent post Clete... thanks.

 

[Stuu]

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that those things shouldn't be explored, they should be. But it appears so so deep into the weeds . . . that it almost seems like people are trying to convince themselves and not others.

Wise words.

My favorite way to start with a evolutionist is with the joke about the scientist who eventually created life in the lab, using a piece of clay. And as they presented the life to God, of course God says, get your own clay.

If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.- Carl Sagan

Stuart

 

[Right Divider]

If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.- Carl Sagan

Stuart

Carl Sagan thinks that he is "god".

My favorite silly Carl Sagan quote is "The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be".

You atheists are a hoot!

 

[Stuu]

Carl Sagan thinks that he is "god".

My favorite silly Carl Sagan quote is "The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be".

You atheists are a hoot!

Glad you are so easily entertained by definitions of words!

Stuart

 

[Aimiel]

Nice! Why do you even bother spending the time to write such stupidity as though methodically rrestating what I have already refuted counts as a rejoinder. Who are you trying to convince? Yourself perhaps. Regardless, you're a complete waste of time at this point.

Ad homenim.