Interesting...

[tdrehfal]

OK good, because that would be a foolish endeavor.

But how do you think it could imply a designer? (Especially when Creation is only supposed to be a few thousand years old according to the Bible.)

If the universe sort of just 'came into being' fully formed very quickly it would imply a designer, regardless of what dates you believe in.

Further proof.

YOU see it. Give it up.....

What proof? If you shed whatever is causing such a combative attitude and quick to "disprove" Creation, you will eventually find your proof, your evidence with an open mind and willing desire for truth along with investigating facts. There are facts in the Bible that scientists have supported. Many think science and the Bible are at odds. This notion causes some to reject the Bible without truly investigating.

Skeptics and atheists who are aware of the latest breakthroughs in science are now being forced to reconsider doubts about the Bible. And many of today's most prominent scientists are for the first time considering, literally, the probability of the God of the Bible. For the first time ever, the explosion of knowledge provides enough information to understand scientific ideas written over 2000 years ago. Insights that only the Creator of the universe could have known.

Of course news affecting beliefs about God travel slow. Even with importance stressed on new findings. Evolutionists are determined to provide proof by using Scripture as a contradiction that causes doubt and closed perspective. So, where is the proof that we are creatures who share the same emotions, physical attributes, many commonalities, that we are here because of physics and the explosion of atoms and particles that could remotely just suddenly design how our bodies have organs that all need each other, how cells reproduce more human beings in this thing called life?

So, the world is billions of years old and there are archeologists still discovering fossils and the bones of creatures that at one time walked the earth. How does that disprove Creation and an Intelligent Designer called God?

The Bible stands alone -confirmed over centuries by millions of scholars. Scientific insights show: Accuracy, Inspiration from God - recorded accurately long before known by Man. There is proof in the Scriptures...i.e. God's delivery of his people by dramatic, miraculous events using ordinary people (Exodus).

God's law defined (Leviticus, Deuteronomy) God's judgement exemplified. (Exodus, Numbers). God's prophecy of the Savior to come. ( ALL BOOKS).

Most of what I have written is from a resource by Ralph O. Muncaster "The Bible - Scientific Insights" There is so much more I've just traversed over some of the facts. But, as you feel it necessary to see the world scientifically, others are open to the evidence of miracles and healings and that there truly is a supernatural higher power. That power is God.

Peace

[apothanein kerdos]

Thadius,

I take it you're a fan of Dawkins?

[hatsoff]

Skeptics and atheists who are aware of the latest breakthroughs in science are now being forced to reconsider doubts about the Bible. And many of today's most prominent scientists are for the first time considering, literally, the probability of the God of the Bible. For the first time ever, the explosion of knowledge provides enough information to understand scientific ideas written over 2000 years ago. Insights that only the Creator of the universe could have known.

Of course news affecting beliefs about God travel slow. Even with importance stressed on new findings. Evolutionists are determined to provide proof by using Scripture as a contradiction that causes doubt and closed perspective. So, where is the proof that we are creatures who share the same emotions, physical attributes, many commonalities, that we are here because of physics and the explosion of atoms and particles that could remotely just suddenly design how our bodies have organs that all need each other, how cells reproduce more human beings in this thing called life?

So, the world is billions of years old and there are archeologists still discovering fossils and the bones of creatures that at one time walked the earth. How does that disprove Creation and an Intelligent Designer called God?

The Bible stands alone -confirmed over centuries by millions of scholars. Scientific insights show: Accuracy, Inspiration from God - recorded accurately long before known by Man. There is proof in the Scriptures...i.e. God's delivery of his people by dramatic, miraculous events using ordinary people (Exodus).

God's law defined (Leviticus, Deuteronomy) God's judgement exemplified. (Exodus, Numbers). God's prophecy of the Savior to come. ( ALL BOOKS).

Most of what I have written is from a resource by Ralph O. Muncaster "The Bible - Scientific Insights" There is so much more I've just traversed over some of the facts. But, as you feel it necessary to see the world scientifically, others are open to the evidence of miracles and healings and that there truly is a supernatural higher power. That power is God.

If you're repeating what this Dr. Muncaster has written, then I would seriously question his qualifications, formal or informal, to lend insight to these matters. From the little information I have found on the web, it appears he's an intelligent guy, yet apparently his religious convictions must be seriously clouding his scientific judgment. For he is a vehement young-earth creationist and anti-evolutionist who can't seem to make up his mind whether to follow atheism or Christianity, two wholly illogical and unscientific worldviews. It's easy to be mislead by folks who pass off misinformation as generally-accepted facts, especially when you haven't much relatively unbiased information available to you. However, I do not want to let this post go unanswered.

I do not know of any "recent breakthroughs in science" which have changed the way the scholarly community appraises the truth or error of any Biblical passages. I would therefore remain skeptical of any such claims without citation of specific examples. Also, even if the statement is accurate, and there have been such breakthroughs, that is by no means evidence of the universal truth of the Bible as a whole.

What individual scientists think is of value, but, being people, they must be listened to in the context of the consensus, majority, or controversy. At this time, however, the majority agrees that the Bible contains no scientific truths not already understood by humans at the time of its writing.

Now, when you say that "evolutionists" are attacking the Bible, that is technically true but somewhat misleading. There have been attempts in peer-reviewed literature to discredit certain claims in the Bible, but this is done in a search for the truth, not with venomous anti-Christian spirit. Outside of the scholarly community, of course, there is much zealous rhetoric on both sides.

Creationism is often defended by attacking the opposing view--usually beginning with macroevolution. Often the claim is made that there is no proof for the scientific conclusions on the matter. This accusation, of course, is patently untrue. The proof that macroevolution did indeed occur is abundant, clear, and well-established. Objections are made, of course, that there is still room for doubt; indeed, if the proof were so obvious, why would not everyone accept it? Unfortunately, this line of reasoning stems from a misinterpretation of "proof" to mean "absolute proof," of which there is no single example in all the world. Non-absolute proof, therefore, the sort with which we are sadly forced to deal, can be defined borrowing legal terminology: that which is beyond reasonable doubt. So sure, one can reject the overwhelming body of evidence in support of macroevolution (which on the internet is probably best discovered through the talk.origins archive, if anyone demands to see it), but it would not be sensible or logical--that is, reasonable--to do so.

Another claim which is often batted around is that the Bible has been "confirmed" by archaeology and other scientific pursuits. Nothing could be further from the truth. While many specific passages have been accepted by historians as accurate, many others fly in the face of established scientific conclusions. The creation story is a great example of this; the deluge is another. In the mean time, the Bible even contradicts itself (1Ch 3/Mt 1/Lk 3, e.g.)--not absolutely, of course (cf. the previous paragraph), but clearly enough to prove itself errant. Moreover, a great bulk of the Bible remains historically uninvestigated for lack of additional evidence.

I expect you to repeat these opinions again, despite my disapproval thereof, but I hope at the very least you stop calling them "facts" when they are most certainly no such thing.

Edited February 10, 2007 by hatsoff

[cjrose]

Skeptics and atheists who are aware of the latest breakthroughs in science are now being forced to reconsider doubts about the Bible. And many of today's most prominent scientists are for the first time considering, literally, the probability of the God of the Bible. For the first time ever, the explosion of knowledge provides enough information to understand scientific ideas written over 2000 years ago. Insights that only the Creator of the universe could have known.

Of course news affecting beliefs about God travel slow. Even with importance stressed on new findings. Evolutionists are determined to provide proof by using Scripture as a contradiction that causes doubt and closed perspective. So, where is the proof that we are creatures who share the same emotions, physical attributes, many commonalities, that we are here because of physics and the explosion of atoms and particles that could remotely just suddenly design how our bodies have organs that all need each other, how cells reproduce more human beings in this thing called life?

So, the world is billions of years old and there are archeologists still discovering fossils and the bones of creatures that at one time walked the earth. How does that disprove Creation and an Intelligent Designer called God?

The Bible stands alone -confirmed over centuries by millions of scholars. Scientific insights show: Accuracy, Inspiration from God - recorded accurately long before known by Man. There is proof in the Scriptures...i.e. God's delivery of his people by dramatic, miraculous events using ordinary people (Exodus).

God's law defined (Leviticus, Deuteronomy) God's judgement exemplified. (Exodus, Numbers). God's prophecy of the Savior to come. ( ALL BOOKS).

Most of what I have written is from a resource by Ralph O. Muncaster "The Bible - Scientific Insights" There is so much more I've just traversed over some of the facts. But, as you feel it necessary to see the world scientifically, others are open to the evidence of miracles and healings and that there truly is a supernatural higher power. That power is God.

If you're repeating what this Dr. Muncaster has written, then I would seriously question his qualifications, formal or informal, to lend insight to these matters. From the little information I have found on the web, it appears he's an intelligent guy, yet apparently his religious convictions must be seriously clouding his scientific judgment. For he is a vehement young-earth creationist and anti-evolutionist who can't seem to make up his mind whether to follow atheism or Christianity, two wholly illogical and unscientific worldviews. It's easy to be mislead by folks who pass off misinformation as generally-accepted facts, especially when you haven't much relatively unbiased information available to you. However, I do not want to let this post go unanswered.

I do not know of any "recent breakthroughs in science" which have changed the way the scholarly community appraises the truth or error of any Biblical passages. I would therefore remain skeptical of any such claims without citation of specific examples. Also, even if the statement is accurate, and there have been such breakthroughs, that is by no means evidence of the universal truth of the Bible as a whole.

What individual scientists think is of value, but, being people, they must be listened to in the context of the consensus, majority, or controversy. At this time, however, the majority agrees that the Bible contains no scientific truths not already understood by humans at the time of its writing.

Now, when you say that "evolutionists" are attacking the Bible, that is technically true but somewhat misleading. There have been attempts in peer-reviewed literature to discredit certain claims in the Bible, but this is done in a search for the truth, not with venomous anti-Christian spirit. Outside of the scholarly community, of course, there is much zealous rhetoric on both sides.

Creationism is often defended by attacking the opposing view--usually beginning with macroevolution. Often the claim is made that there is no proof for the scientific conclusions on the matter. This accusation, of course, is patently untrue. The proof that macroevolution did indeed occur is abundant, clear, and well-established. Objections are made, of course, that there is still room for doubt; indeed, if the proof were so obvious, why would not everyone accept it? Unfortunately, this line of reasoning stems from a misinterpretation of "proof" to mean "absolute proof," of which there is no single example in all the world. Non-absolute proof, therefore, the sort with which we are sadly forced to deal, can be defined borrowing legal terminology: that which is beyond reasonable doubt. So sure, one can reject the overwhelming body of evidence in support of macroevolution (which on the internet is probably best discovered through the talk.origins archive, if anyone demands to see it), but it would not be sensible or logical--that is, reasonable--to do so.

Another claim which is often batted around is that the Bible has been "confirmed" by archaeology and other scientific pursuits. Nothing could be further from the truth. While many specific passages have been accepted by historians as accurate, many others fly in the face of established scientific conclusions. The creation story is a great example of this; the deluge is another. In the mean time, the Bible even contradicts itself (1Ch 3/Mt 1/Lk 3, e.g.)--not absolutely, of course (cf. the previous paragraph), but clearly enough to prove itself errant. Moreover, a great bulk of the Bible remains historically uninvestigated for lack of additional evidence.

I expect you to repeat these opinions again, despite my disapproval thereof, but I hope at the very least you stop calling them "facts" when they are most certainly no such thing.

Why is it that my resources "this" Muncaster... are not valid and yours are? The world, so tiny when viewed from oh, say a space shuttle, and compared to such endless dark space, with that thought, a tiny planet called earth, looks less powerful in context. You don't see the homeless, the poor, those who are struggling, the humble, the sorrow or pain, violence, abuse, that tarnishes a seemingly successful decent life and filling it with whatever fills a want often mistaken as a need. But seeing earth with a design where the mountains are, streams and rivers, oceans and lush green pastures woven together with a purpose in His design down to the tiniest insect. These are for our rejuvination and enjoyment. You speak many words and well written. Impressive perhaps to some. I am with your composition and style that is. With all your knowledge and resources, science mans attempt to explain the unexplainable so to further the arguement, all of the worlds mysteries must have a critical purpose, a purpose that rejects Creation and Higher Power, God, and labels what is unexplainable with "mythology" or our coming into being as flesh and bone, not to mention our unique and individual blueprint, just happened through an explosion. Atomic Structure, Nuclear Chemistry, Atomic Quantum numbers and orbitals, Thermodynamics and so on is a discovery of how intricate our makeup is down to the last hair on our heads and how precise the elements are in that a shift one way could throw off the balance of oxygen, gravity, etc..

Your statement that a great bulk of the Bible remains historically uninvestigated is because all of mankind, the earth, the universe is a work in progress and it is the mystery in what non believers percieve as lacking or false, mythological, a series of fairy tales, are not capable of understanding, comprehension, that what is being investigated and has been for centuries, is hope, believing in God's promises.

Faith is a powerful gift. I'll stop using the word "facts" if you do We don't put our faith in what we can see, feel, touch or smell and the worlds so called "facts" are truths to believers. The word "facts" even is so lacking any sense of human emotion and sounds rather sterile. But "Truth and Wisdom" is our evidence through our own transformation. See it as you will. Label your point of view as the only point of view if you must. But these attempts to tackle the challenge of how we came into "life" is already answered for us where those who deny continue to search for answers when it's all right there in huge numbers of languages, transcending over time, a Bestsellar that is timeless.

Despite your "disapproval" we are not here to succumb to "disapproval" and in our humble spirit appear to be weak or ignorant... now that is a myth indeed! Your disapproval is not new or unigue to Christians. Despite your disapproval, we will continue to stand firm in our Faith.

Peace

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

But these attempts to tackle the challenge of how we came into "life" is already answered for us where those who deny continue to search for answers when it's all right there in huge numbers of languages, transcending over time, a Bestsellar that is timeless.

Why is it that the faithful believe the bible to be so true when there is so much contradictory evidence? How can you take a self contradicting book to be true over a mountain of observable evidence? It has always puzzled me how intelligent people can believe something based on such faulty logic. Your reason for believing in god is that the bible told you about Jesus etc, and your reason for believing the bible is that it is the

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

Atheistreview,

I have no problem with believers who mind their own business. I'm all for the live and let live ideal.

This is a quote from your blogspot which I am removing the link for. There are no links allowed here of expressly anti-Christian content.

I wanted to ask though since you want to live and let live. Isn't it all right for us Christians to live right here on our own sponsored forums and to spread our Faith as we see fit?

Peace,

Dave

[cjrose]

But these attempts to tackle the challenge of how we came into "life" is already answered for us where those who deny continue to search for answers when it's all right there in huge numbers of languages, transcending over time, a Bestsellar that is timeless.

Why is it that the faithful believe the bible to be so true when there is so much contradictory evidence? How can you take a self contradicting book to be true over a mountain of observable evidence?

What mortal man percieves as contradictory, mighty man who has come into the light of the Lord by his own invitation in taking the first step to soar beyond the worldly understanding which causes doubt that leads to disbelief and ultimately denying themselves of the gifts God so generously gives to believers. One is faith. Faith in what we cannot see transforms us for starters. It may be a profoundly moving experience in a physical manifestation when the gift of the Holy Spirit awakens mans dead spirit and brings him out of the darkness and into the light. The light of Jesus whom we have surrendered our hearts, minds, soul, spirit, to His control.

You see the word "control" and most likely narrow the eyes... shake of the head and shrug it off because mortal man is in control of his destiny. This control is not like a worldly control of the person such as a parent or spouse. It is a divine intervention offered to all mankind out of an infinite love. God's love. By choosing to believe that the Word of God is truth, that Jesus paid a precious price for our eternal salvation in His death on the cross, that He was then resurrected and ascended into Heaven and through a personal relationship we inherit citizenship in the Kingdom eternal. This spiritual re-birth is the begining of a journey of awareness, miracles, the building of character through obedience and complete trust. This mortal man who became mighty man is given the understanding of Gods Word. Not just understanding but comprehension beyond what mortal man can even fathom.

Our surrender by believing is observable evidence in mighty man, awakened in Spirit results in ways that mortal man who does not understand nor comprehend, is a truly humbling experience. Now, if you read this again you will find what may appear as a contradiction. How can mighty man be humble when the word "mighty" creates an imagery of power and strength so how can man be mighty and humble at the same time. As "humble" may be associated with weakness. Soooo strength and weakness can be percieved in contradiction. This is where it becomes murky. Hmmm why give up all worldly things to become weak in our humbleness? This is the moment we weigh our benefits on the proverbial scale as to what is required of us to believe and is the scale tipping in God's favor or our own. In complete trust our faith grows as does our understanding of God's Word, our daily bread, our nourishment, lacking nothing in that the Bible speaks to us. Instructs us. Guides us. Comforts us. We, meaning a non believer and a true believer, can read the same words but see them in the light of knowledge because His Spirit is within us where those who use the Bible as a means of research simply to plant the seeds of doubt where the Lord's seeds are planted out of love and goodness. So many use "contradiction" as an acceptable means to what they do not understand. Those see and comprehend not in goodness but to ridicule Christianity. It is a simple matter of taking the first step in that you are puzzled. Why are you puzzled? Is it because you faintly hear the knock but are not yet ready to relinquish life as you know it and welcome a life of discovery, acceptance of evidence within, change? The very fact you are puzzled raises questions though you are somewhat vague in your statements such as what are your questions, specifically other than you acknowledge that even intelligent people believe and why do we believe? And what is it specifically that you find contradictory.

Post a list and Worthy will respond. Read Worthy's statement of faith that Christians live by.

It has always puzzled me how intelligent people can believe something based on such faulty logic. Your reason for believing in god is that the bible told you about Jesus etc, and your reason for believing the bible is that it is the

[Joshua-777]

Matthitjah,

[MorningGlory]

But these attempts to tackle the challenge of how we came into "life" is already answered for us where those who deny continue to search for answers when it's all right there in huge numbers of languages, transcending over time, a Bestsellar that is timeless.

Why is it that the faithful believe the bible to be so true when there is so much contradictory evidence? How can you take a self contradicting book to be true over a mountain of observable evidence? It has always puzzled me how intelligent people can believe something based on such faulty logic. Your reason for believing in god is that the bible told you about Jesus etc, and your reason for believing the bible is that it is the

[MorningGlory]

The answer to your question is very simple. God created the physical laws; He is not a product of them nor is He subject to them. He created man, and all life, to be self replicating. Think of starting a pendulum swinging; same principle.

That doesn't answer my question at all. My main one still stands unanswered. Why is the bible assumed inerrant?

Classic example is Steven Layfield's lecture. Another is FresnoJoe's post in "Hold on...". If you don't believe in the inerrancy of the bible then this question isn't directed at you.

All questions or comments concerning Christianity are directed at me and all true Christians. I most certainly do believe in the inerrancy of the bible. My question DID answer yours which was...if God created life who created God? I was not answering anything else then but I will now. The bible is not assumed to be anything; it has been proven factual by the course of time thus making your question, "Why is the bible assumed inerrant?" , irrelevant. Beating a dead horse won't make it win races, my friend.

Btw, you didn't answer MY question as to whether you are the same poster who was on this board a couple of months ago. Just curious.