Do you mean incorrectly interpreted according to the account in Genesis?
Your link leads to a page that criticises movie directors for their special effects. Do you think that is a valid conspiracy theory of evolutionary biology?
Stuart
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Your link leads to a page that criticises movie directors for their special effects. Do you think that is a valid conspiracy theory of evolutionary biology?
Stuart
I don't think I know of any Biology claims of AiG. Not that they don't have any.
noguru
Well-known member
Exactly. This is why you remain in the dungeon in regard to science and navigating the world. I do not envy you for that, I do hope some day you will see the light.
Nope. Are you being sarcastic or perhaps facetious?
I don't see where you think this sentence of mine that I composed fails?
I am always thinking critically, through the lens or filter of my beliefs or bias. But I try to remain open to learning new things. I have not studied Biology past High School... of that I am certain.
noguru
Well-known member
That is not surprising.
From what I have seen they do not have any biology claims at AIG, all they do is try to undermine the naturalistic model.
noguru
Well-known member
:think:
And you will never see, until you are open to admitting your errors.
Oh and I did not say your sentence fails. I actually agree with it. You just do not live up to that standard.
What is the naturalistic model? Does it allow for the possibility or certainty of God's existence?
Philosophers and scientists (scientists can have philosophical or theological views too) do have beliefs or biases. Even the scientific method has philosophical roots or input. But from my recollection unless science is done recognizing creation and a Creator of that creation science neither approves (affirms) or denies the existence of God.
There is a difference between what is natural and what is supernatural.
The idea of an observable universe may or may not include that which some people term supernatural.
But making measurements in the natural world makes sense to me.
noguru
Well-known member
No, that is the obvious truth. If you think I am being inaccurate, can you please elaborate?
It is the standard I just put forth... a standard I believe I can measure up against. As do you. But I don't see the reason for our disagreement with each other. I believe God is the creator and that in science we study the natural world.:think:
And you will never see, until you are open to admitting your errors.
Oh and I did not say your sentence fails. I actually agree with it. You just do not live up to that standard.
I don't know if you are joking. That is different and simple to admit to if you are.
noguru
Well-known member
On this basic assumption you and I agree, and we share these basic philosophical assumptions in science. You just add another assumption to the fundamental assumptions of science, in your attempt to study the natural world. That assumption being a "literal interpretation of Genesis". This is why you will remain blinded to and by your error.
noguru
Well-known member
No, I am not joking.
Is the truth too difficult for you to hear? So difficult that you must avoid it by thinking I am joking?
What do you mean by "literal interpretation of Genesis"? I'm not totally gathering what it is about what I have said that you don't agree with. Of course I believe the Bible. I would hope you do to. But apparently we have an issue in the area of Biblical interpretation? I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, inerrant in the autographs.
Well I certainly don't understand you. Are you saying you meant to be serious, injurious, or maybe direct? I can withstand a lot, but I don't know why you are responding the way that you are to me. I thought maybe you were trying to make light of the situation at my expense.
noguru
Well-known member
Oh my. We have been through all of this many times. But it does not seem to get past your thick skull. Your commitment to being stubborn presents an impasse for us. You refuse to understand what I post to you, no matter how clearly I express it.
I am pretty certain that this problem of yours is not confined to discussions on theology and science on this site. I'll bet many in your daily life see the face of your stubborn adherence to unreasonable ideas. But since you are not one to hear, they do not waste time trying to get through to you. They realize it is much easier to just walk around you.
Again you mean to insult me because I don't understand you, while I simply tell you I don't understand.
noguru
Well-known member
:bang:
For the love of God man, discussing things with you is downright painful sometimes.
- Status