THE MASSIVE GRAND CANYON—IT'S GENESES

[CrowCross]

Surely, every now and then it has got to bother you that more than 99% (or is it 99.9%) of geologists with PhDs disagree with your interpretation the geological evidence. Accepting the nearly unanimous consensus of the experts is hardly evidence of an extreme bias on my part.

The typical secular scientist only knows what they have been taught.
if you disagree with the main stream you find yourself fired or losing your grant.

It seems what you do is to take a great deal of pride in interpreting scripture in a very rigid, literal fashion and see that approach as being the mark of a more faithful Christian... not altogether unlike the Roman Catholic Church that was offended by Galileo’s suggestion that the earth moved around the sun. Fortunately you don't have the power to imprison your opponents

Fortunately neither do you.

Here's some news for you...
Attorneys for a California State University, Northridge scientist who was terminated from his job after discovering soft tissue on a triceratops fossil have filed a lawsuit against the university.

While at the Hell Creek Formation excavation site in Montana, researcher Mark Armitage discovered what he believed to be the largest triceratops horn ever unearthed at the site, according to attorney Brad Dacus of Pacific Justice Institute.

Upon examination of the horn under a high-powered microscope back at CSUN, Dacus says Armitage was "fascinated" to find soft tissue on the sample - a discovery Bacus said stunned members of the school's biology department and even some students "because it indicates that dinosaurs roamed the earth only thousands of years in the past rather than going extinct 60 million years ago." ref

 

[JIM]

Oh really????? Do you know what happens to a dead body after day 3? The blood pools, it bloats, rigor mortis .....hoe does science not say a dead man can rise from the dead on day 3?

Science has no way to reject God or reject what God can do. God is Spirit. Science doesn't deal with the spiritual.

When will you as a christian acknowledge the truth of the bible?

I acknowledge the truth of the Bible every day of my life. Occasionally that means I must disagree with folks like you.

 

[Arial]

Science has no way to reject God or reject what God can do. God is Spirit. Science doesn't deal with the spiritual.

Why do you separate the things of science from God? Our scientific theories may be far from the truth of a matter, but the truth of the matter faithfully functions by the power and faithfulness of God. There is more than meets the eye.

 

[JIM]

Why do you separate the things of science from God? Our scientific theories may be far from the truth of a matter, but the truth of the matter faithfully functions by the power and faithfulness of God. There is more than meets the eye.

I don't separate the things of science from God. I separate science from God. Science is the study of the physical nature of God's creation. All things spirit and spiritual are outside the purview of science.

 

[Arial]

I don't separate the things of science from God. I separate science from God. Science is the study of the physical nature of God's creation. All things spirit and spiritual are outside the purview of science.

Did God create the physical things? Is what we call science the study of those physical things? Is what we find in those physical things and the ways in which they work, then have to do with God? Nothing is separate from Him.

 

[JIM]

Did God create the physical things? Is what we call science the study of those physical things? Is what we find in those physical things and the ways in which they work, then have to do with God? Nothing is separate from Him.

Have you ever studied anything in a field of science? What precisely did you learn about God from that study?

 

[Simons]

The typical secular scientist only knows what they have been taught.

that would be the way it is for secular and non-secular, scientist and non-scientist…

if you disagree with the main stream you find yourself fired or losing your grant.

well there's only so much grant money and only so many positions and so you should be able to understand that limited resources can't be wasted on the fringe

Fortunately neither do you.

yeah I guess that's probably a good thing…. sleepy Joe wouldn't understand what was happening and Kamala’s cackling would drive the other inmates crazy

Here's some news for you...

I'm not sure why you think this article is relevant. Finding micro samples of soft tissues within fossils is getting to be more a common thing. Armitage’s lawyer is claiming that Armitage was fired for his religious beliefs… so is that a concession that his belief (that dinosaurs roamed the earth only thousands of years in the past) is a religious belief and not a scientific belief?

 

[Simons]

Nothing is separate from Him.

that sounds rather pantheistic....science is the study of the things and processes within the natural world and God, (in the Christian view) is supernatural and not part of the natural world. That kinda sounds like 2 separate things: the natural and the supernatural

 

[Arial]

that sounds rather pantheistic....science is the study of the things and processes within the natural world and God, by definition is supernatural and not part of the natural world. That kinda sounds like 2 separate things: the natural and the supernatural

He isn't a part of our natural works---or that he is not bound by it but is outside of it. He created it. Scripture tells us that in Him we live. In Him we move. In Him we have our being. Everything exists because he brought it into existence and that means everything that is in those things that makes them what they are. Everything exists according to his design.

There is nothing pantheistic about it. God is not a tree, and he is not dwelling in a tree, but he designed the tree and down to its last atom and molecule, each thing playing its part. What I am hearing from a couple of folks does sound very much like deism.

 

[JIM]

There is nothing pantheistic about it. God is not a tree, and he is not dwelling in a tree, but he designed the tree and down to its last atom and molecule, each thing playing its part. What I am hearing from a couple of folks does sound very much like deism.

He created the life system whereby the tree, consisting of those atoms and molecules, grew and propagated. He did not design and make each tree. That is not deism.

 

[Alive]

Have you ever studied anything in a field of science? What precisely did you learn about God from that study?

What is the point you wish to make here?

 

[JIM]

What is the point you wish to make here?

The study of science will not teach you about God. As Romans 1 says, there is enough about creation to persuade us that there is a God. But it takes the written revelation of God to teach us about God.

 

[Alive]

The study of science will not teach you about God. As Romans 1 says, there is enough about creation to persuade us that there is a God. But it takes the written revelation of God to teach us about God.

I have learned about God from observing His Creation.

 

[JIM]

I have learned about God from observing His Creation.

I don't think so. You can perceive that there is a God of creation, but beyond that you cannot really know much at all about God. You can't know about Jesus, about the Holy Spirit, about man being in the image of God, about sinning and needing salvation, etc., etc.

 

[Alive]

I don't think so. You can perceive that there is a God of creation, but beyond that you cannot really know much at all about God. You can't know about Jesus, about the Holy Spirit, about man being in the image of God, about sinning and needing salvation, etc., etc.

I do…think so.
Here is one for ya.
God enjoys diversity.

 

[Simons]

What I am hearing from a couple of folks does sound very much like deism.

the deism that I am familiar with holds that the creator God does not interact with its creation (which would rule out the incarnation of Jesus and his ministry and sacrifice)....what exactly have these "couple of folks" said against the incarnation and the cross?

 

[Simons]

Here is one for ya.
God enjoys diversity.

....so how does this game work? Simply take a feature from the natural world and declare that God enjoys it? So then: God enjoys round things. God enjoys hot things. God enjoys cold things......doesn't really get us anywhere, does it?

 

[Alive]

....so how does this game work? Simply take a feature from the natural world and declare that God enjoys it? So then: God enjoys round things. God enjoys hot things. God enjoys cold things......doesn't really get us anywhere, does it?

It does for me.

 

[Arial]

the deism that I am familiar with holds that the creator God does not interact with its creation (which would rule out the incarnation of Jesus and his ministry and sacrifice)....what exactly have these "couple of folks" said against the incarnation and the cross?

Separating the natural world from God. The statement God is spirit, the natural world is physical

science is the study of the things and processes within the natural world and God, (in the Christian view) is supernatural and not part of the natural world. That kinda sounds like 2 separate things: the natural and the supernatural

I don't separate the things of science from God. I separate science from God. Science is the study of the physical nature of God's creation. All things spirit and spiritual are outside the purview of science.

But we are just talking sideways of one another. I am talking about one thing, you another.

 

[Arial]

He created the life system whereby the tree, consisting of those atoms and molecules, grew and propagated. He did not design and make each tree. That is not deism.

Do you think he has disassociated himself from the trees? Or from any aspect of his creation?