[Capuchin]

I have a question for you, is the sun going to rise in the morning? Show Me Proof, or are you like me and just have faith that it is going to.?

So have a good day tomorrow.

This is fairly easy to show proof for. I don't see your argument here.

Starman, do you have any non-creationist sources that state that scientists are tending more towards creationism? Surely the sources that you have used are rather biased.
Yes many scientists believe in God, I have no argument with that. A belief in God can live happily alongside the scientific truth of evolution, and this is the view of most religious scientists.

[self_lnflicted_hell]

It says in Revelations that God will appear in the beginning of the end of the world to collect all his disciples and followers and take them to the gates of Heaven. The rest shall be left to suffer a fate far worse than death.

This only applies to those who believe... For the rest of us, we don't worry.

[otto186]

This only applies to those who believe...For the rest of us, we don't worry.

I was answering according to what the Bible says. I myself am a non-believer, so I don't have any reason to worry either. :)

[self_lnflicted_hell]

I was answering according to what the Bible says. I myself am a non-believer, so I dont have any reason to worry either. :)

I thought I saw in another post of yours that you are Atheist... But now I can't find it. And are you the one who said there should be an Atheist board? If so, either way, I agree.
I think maybe it was on a different post :confused:

[otto186]

I thought I saw in another post of yours that you are Atheist...But now I can't find it. And are you the one who said there should be an Atheist board?? If so, either way, I agree.
I think maybe it was on a different post :confused:

Sorry if I confused you. When I said non-believer I was impying that I was Atheist.

Yes I did mention there should be an Atheist forum. I guess it files under "Other Religion". But maybe they will make one, because there are more Atheists out in the world than some people think.

[self_lnflicted_hell]

Sorry if I confused you. When I said non-believer I was impying that I was Atheist.

Yes I did mention there should be an Atheist forum. I guess it files under "Other Religion". But maybe they will make one, because there are more Atheists out in the world than some people think.

I think you actually said you are Atheist.. but it's no big deal.

True, true... And a lot of them were actually former christians & such. :p

[Starman]

This is fairly easy to show proof for. I don't see your argument here.

Starman, do you have any non-creationist sources that state that scientists are tending more towards creationism? Surely the sources that you have used are rather biased.
Yes many scientists believe in God, I have no argument with that. A belief in God can live happily alongside the scientific truth of evolution, and this is the view of most religious scientists.

Do you have any non-evolutionist sources which support evolution? All the pro evolutionist sources are rather biased. Actually, as soon as a pro or con statement is made it can easily be tagged as biased simply because the one making it or the source
From which it is derived is pro or con. That would make all pro democracy statements by the USA government biased. It would make all anti rape statements by anti rape sources biased. All pro space exploration statements of NASA biased. Isn't that rather strange?

True, a non-commited source is preferable. But then again that source, such as perhaps Time Magazine will feature articles by a certain writer, like Hawkings, who is an atheist
And pro evolutionist. Does that make the article unbiased because it appears in a supposedly unbiased Magazine? In fact, the argument can be made that if Time Magazine features predominantly pro Evolutionist articles it is biased despite its claims otherwise.


The public education system which systematically indoctrinates or inculcates pro evolutionary and anti creation ideas and all the pro atheist literature it uses is biased.
Yet the very same people who are very keen on Creationist sources are the very ones defending the biased way in which our children are taught simply because it fits in
With their preconceptions and biases.

THE EVOLUTION DECEIT

[Capuchin]

Do you have any non-evolutionist sources which support evolution? All the pro evolutionist sources are rather biased. Actually, as soon as a pro or con statement is made it can easily be tagged as biased simply because the one making it or the source
from which it is derived is pro or con. That would make all pro democracy statements by the USA government biased. It would make all anti rape statements by anti rape sources biased. All pro space exploration statements of NASA biased. Isn't that rather strange?

True, a non-commited source is preferable. But then again that source, such as perhaps Time Magazine will feature articles by a certain writer, like Hawkings, who is an atheist
and pro evolutionist. Does that make the article unbiased because it appears in a supposedly unbiased Magazine? In fact, the argument can be made that if Time Magazine features predominantly pro Evolutionist articles it is biased despite its claims otherwise.


The public education system which systematically indoctrinates or inculcates pro evolutionary and anti creation ideas and all the pro atheist literature it uses is biased.
Yet the very same people who are very keen on Creationist sources are the very ones defending the biased way in which our children are taught simply because it fits in
with their preconceptions and biases.


The Evolution Deceit

I'll take that as a no then.

[Starman]

I'll take that as a no then.

No, simply a request that you produce what you are requesting of me-- a source which cannot be tagged immediately as biased simply for being pro or con.

BTW

I know that belief in a creator can live along the belief in the evolutionary process quite happily and it does in many cases. But from a purely Christian viewpoint, what the evolutionary explanation CANNOT live happily alongside of is the Bible as the inspired word of God which clearly tells us that man was made fully man and that animals and man are two unrelated creations.

[Capuchin]

Wikipedia tries to be unbiased at all times:
Level of support for evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is quite a good article which actually is quite favourable towards creationism.

[Freethinka]

Everyone has questions!! I don't care how religious or how non religious you are. Just some are raised to believe so strongly or others are so warped to even think of asking questions that might interfere with their beliefs.

Self_inflicted_hell you've done it again. :D

[Starman]

Wikipedia tries to be unbiased at all times:
Level of support for evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is quite a good article which actually is quite favourable towards creationism.

True, yet I could simply dismiss it by saying that the author is biased--no? Actually, the real question is what constitutes bias? Which of course is a totally different subject which will throw the whoile trhread off theme. Perhaps the subject can be discussed further in another forum such as philosophy? In any case, thanks for your decent informative responses. : )

[Freethinka]

Do you have any non-evolutionist sources which support evolution? All the pro evolutionist sources are rather biased. Actually, as soon as a pro or con statement is made it can easily be tagged as biased simply because the one making it or the source
from which it is derived is pro or con. That would make all pro democracy statements by the USA government biased. It would make all anti rape statements by anti rape sources biased. All pro space exploration statements of NASA biased. Isn't that rather strange?

True, a non-commited source is preferable. But then again that source, such as perhaps Time Magazine will feature articles by a certain writer, like Hawkings, who is an atheist
and pro evolutionist. Does that make the article unbiased because it appears in a supposedly unbiased Magazine? In fact, the argument can be made that if Time Magazine features predominantly pro Evolutionist articles it is biased despite its claims otherwise.


The public education system which systematically indoctrinates or inculcates pro evolutionary and anti creation ideas and all the pro atheist literature it uses is biased.
Yet the very same people who are very keen on Creationist sources are the very ones defending the biased way in which our children are taught simply because it fits in
with their preconceptions and biases.

THE EVOLUTION DECEIT

Starman: an oxymoron is a christian scientist, a conflictiog situation, what do you think. :confused:

[METERRE]

Starman: an oxymoron is a christian scientist, a conflictiog situation, what do you think.

Not exactly... as I said in my other reply, It says in the Bible that God also created science.
I really do not think it says anywhere in the Bible that God doesn't want us to believe in science altogether. Because he created it. Don't you think that if he hadn't then many people would die of all those mortal diseases, I don't think God wants that.
Yet, taking it all the way back to Adam and Eve, remember, they disobeyed God. The world was perfect before that happened. Remember it says that the serpent offered them "knowledge?" To know "Good from bad?" Remember it says that the serpent/satan is always misleading? That it's actions seem like it's the right thing but it's just dressed up.
Anyway when Adam and Eve decided to take the serpent's offer, God punished them. Yeah they acquired "knowledge" but just take a look at how we're using it now. Now we use the science that God created for something evil. Such as weapons and all sorts of things that damage this world and God's people. Which it is the price to pay for that initial disobedience. Since then, satan has been controlling our actions. And what Jesus was and still is trying to do, is save us from what we ourselves put us into.

[otto186]

Not exactly....as i said in my other reply, It says in the Bible that God also created science.

Out of curiosity, where in the Bible does it say that? I would like to read it. I have read the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, and part of the King James, and nowhere did I read that God created science. So please, enlighten me. :)

[JoeCanada76]

God created everything. God is the creator of everything. So that means he created the minds for science and discovery as well.

[otto186]

God created everything. God is the creator of everything. So that means he created the minds for science and discovery as well.

Can you point me in the direction of where it says that he created science in the Bible? Thanks :)

[JoeCanada76]

I never made that statement but since God is the creator of everything. That would mean that God created man the mind to actually understand science.

[otto186]

I never made that statement but since God is the creator of everything. That would mean that God created man the mind to actually understand science.

I know you didn't make that statement, I was just wondering if you could point me in the right direction.

If God created everything, show me black and white, hard evidence, or proof. I can explain how everything came to be through the science, astronomy and the theory of evolution.

[JoeCanada76]

In the bible it states that God created the world. So to me that says he created everything.

As far as saying specifically science, the answer is no. Since God created all things then that would lead me to believe that God is in charge of all things. Right? Even Science?