Evolution? How?

here is an example...

Abortion... Science looks at abortion clinically.. the simply abort the fetus in a surgical procedure...

Yet the theist is not necessarily against abortion they are against it being used strictly in a clinical way.. they think science has no inherent ethics and that the clinical view can dehumanize life and the sanctity thereof...

So the theist sees science as often empty and devoid of spiritual ethical considerations and balance.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

Rex, I submit that the term "true spirituality" pretty much falls within the concept of oxymoron.

You don't think spirituality has it's counterfeit?

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

timberlandko wrote:
Rex, I submit that the term "true spirituality" pretty much falls within the concept of oxymoron.

You don't think spirituality has it's counterfeit?

Spirituality is itself counterfeit.

0 Replies

Doktor S wrote:

RexRed wrote:
timberlandko wrote:
Rex, I submit that the term "true spirituality" pretty much falls within the concept of oxymoron.

You don't think spirituality has it's counterfeit?

Spirituality is itself counterfeit.

Spirituality unfortunately is over run with counterfeit...

But the spirit cannot be corrupted... The mind can become corrupted, the thoughs can be filled with corruption, the heart can be corrupt and the world can decay and seek corruption but the spirit is pure and uncorruptable...

What we feel and see around us does not always reflect the true spiritual reality within....

0 Replies

The idea of 'spirit' is also counterfeit.

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

real life wrote:
Odd then, that when I asked to to reconcile your assumption of the naturalistic origin of life with the apparent problems that this assumption causes , you choose to ignore it.

There are no "problems". Everything you have listed is a problem only to you. Why should I concern myself with your problems?

Hmmm ok you sure?

It seems to me that there are notable non-creationists who have argued that the mathematical odds against the spontaneous generation of life and all that it entails is, for all practical discussion, insurmountable. Francis Crick comes to mind.

0 Replies

The mathematical odds of a god with super powers poofing into existence are even greater.

0 Replies

talk72000 wrote:

The mathematical odds of a god with super powers poofing into existence are even greater.

Really?

Crick was willing to put his calculations on paper and show them to the world. And he had the credentials to back it up.

How 'bout you?

0 Replies

Can you even show this god exist.

0 Replies

O/O is definitely infinity.

0 Replies

talk72000 wrote:

O/O is definitely infinity.

Did you mean to use the zero key? As in 0/0 ?

If that's your venture into mathematical probability, best give it up.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

talk72000 wrote:
O/O is definitely infinity.

Did you mean to use the zero key? As in 0/0 ?

If that's your venture into mathematical probability, best give it up.

If 0 = nothing or non existence
and 1 = existence, evolution and creation

Like binary, existence on existence off

God is the switch...

Smile

0 Replies

Doktor S wrote:

RexRed wrote:
timberlandko wrote:
Rex, I submit that the term "true spirituality" pretty much falls within the concept of oxymoron.

You don't think spirituality has it's counterfeit?

Spirituality is itself counterfeit.

There is holy spirit then there is unholy spirit yet only one spirit per soul... To choose the wrong spirit is an unforgivable sin... We choose and are often fooled by the wrong spirit but the giver of "holy" spirit ultimately knows the heart... Some look to their senses rather than their spirit, therein lies the diviner of the two paths of life and death, good and evil... Some are even tricked into thinking they have obtained the wrong spirit... but God knows the future and will apply the true spirit when it is called upon accordingly in earnest...

God will not allow someone to accept a counterfeit spirit who will later in life call out for the true spirit... But the mind and habit patterns can exhibit the personalities of both spirits often irregardless of what spirit is born within. Yet the true spirit does not ever possess... Spiritual seed once born within is permanent and cannot be "unborn"... Why? Because each time someone is born of "holy" spirit it is a new "creation"... Smile

So God is still "creating", even today... We are born owned by this world spiritually and we are offered a choice once we reach an age of spiritual consciousness to receive power from on high or to perish on this earth in obscurity...

0 Replies

Quote:

There is holy spirit then there is unholy spirit yet only one spirit per soul...

What reason, outside of your holy bible, can you give me to accept the existance of such things as 'soul' or 'holy spirit'?(or any other kind of spirit)
I see no reason to hold such superstitions.

0 Replies

As far as can be shown a god cannot be proven to exist so it is zero. A zero poofing out of nothing is zero over zero as you posit that a god precedes 'creation'.

0 Replies

talk, But doesn't two negatives make a positive? LOL

0 Replies

Maria von Trapp (Julie Andrews):

"Nothing comes from nothing
Nothing ever could..."

0 Replies

Cricks calculations were , just like any of the myriads of "life out there calcs"(like the Drake equation) loaded with personal assumptions and variables that you either "bought" or didnt.. As far as having credentials, he and Watson have been accused of major plagiarism and stealing Rosalyn Franklins Xray crystallography of DNA, they had admittedly taken her powder photos and saw that the photos described a helix.
There is serious talk of awarding her (posthumously) the Nobel , with a lengthy explanation. Watson lightly blew the whistle on himself and Crick in his Book DNA, but made it sound that he and Crick were farther ahead than they were, especially since Franklin tore apart their first attempts at structuring DNA.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Hmmm ok you sure?

It seems to me that there are notable non-creationists who have argued that the mathematical odds against the spontaneous generation of life and all that it entails is, for all practical discussion, insurmountable. Francis Crick comes to mind.

And yet the vast majority of scientists do not see any insurmountable, or even improbable, problems.

No matter how you slice it, naturalistic explanations for evolution, and everything else around us, continue to prove themselves, while supernatural events and irreducibly complex systems are nowhere to be found. Nowhere.

0 Replies

real, 99.8 percent of geological and biological scientists believe in evolution. Why do you keep negating this fact? Nothing in science is "insurmountable." Which scientists claims such?

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know