Science isn’t always the answer.

[Hollie]

YU

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

There is evidence all around you. The heavens declare the glory of God. There is also the evidence you have inside you. Your conscience declaring there is a God. Man, himself, is evidence. He has been made in God's image. A rational, thinking, creative, loving being with a free will.

I understand what you're saying, though, I can remember when I felt the same. I always think of the blind man that Jesus healed when He walked this earth. When the people asked this man (who had been blind from birth) how it was that he could see. His reply was the same as mine and other believers, "I don't know, but once I was blind and now I can see."

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

True, man was created perfect but Adam and Eve ruined that. Now we inherit aging and death in our DNA (and epigenetics):

Romans 5:12
That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin,+ and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned+—.

Rather petty, vindictive gods who would punish all mankind for failing a "test" they knew humans would fail.

Yes, if Christendom is right about everything going according to God's plan in their doctrines of omniscience and pre-destination. You have pointed out one of the reasons they are wrong.

Genesis 6:6 proves the opposite - otherwise why was Jehovah "hurt at heart" over the outcome?

Btw, elohim could be the literal plural "gods." However, in Scripture it is usually the plural of excellence of singular individuals. This is why Jehovah referred to Moses as elohim in Exodus 4:16; 7:1.

Using your religious dogma in an attempt to prove your religious dogma is true is a viciously circular argument.

It really displays the weakness of the creationist argument because the creationist is forced to pick and choose those elements of the dogma that aren't contradictory. I accept that the various, largely unknown authors of the Bibles contradict each other, that scribes and translators of various languages can make errors, and in fact did. I think it is reasonable to acknowledge that one of many supreme beings allowed his "word" to be corrupted by the fallibility of man, and I know you will not see the fallacy of proffering an argument that is based on supernaturalism and alleged ''miracles".

The bible, as all the alleged holy texts has been misinterpreted and mistranslated. Now which parts are corrupt and which parts are not is the game of theologians and apologists such as yourself. But since Yahweh doesn't come on down and ref the match, the validity of one verse being questioned questions the validity of all verses. The preceeding obviously does not address the other issues of presuming supernaturalism as a mechanism for existence when never, ever, in all of human history has a supernatural event ever been demonstrated.

 

[Newtonian]

Getting back to epigenetics and specifically what was once called "junk DNA" - namely tandem repeat sequences (see my previous post on this for another excerpt):

Molecular origins of rapid and continuous morphological evolution

Mutations in cis-regulatory sequences have been implicated as being the predominant source of variation in morphological evolution. We offer a hypothesis that gene-associated tandem repeat expansions and contractions are a major source of phenotypic variation in evolution. Here, we describe a...

www.pnas.org

After noting that tandem repeats "are a major source of phenotypic variation in evolution" and "associated with significant differences in limb and skull morphology" and "provide molecular explanations for swift, yet topologically conservative morphological evolution" PNAS goes into further detail:

"The rapid pace of morphological evolution noted by Darwin along with Thompson's observations of topological conservation are not easily reconciled with the rates at which point mutations occur or with the sensitivity of complex organisms and their proteins to random point mutations. A broad consensus has emerged that contends with these difficulties by invoking mutations in cis-regulatory elements as the predominant source of the genetic diversity that underlies morphological variation and evolution."

This rapid microevolution explains how so many species came from a relatively few kinds on Noah's ark, btw. As I noted earlier, tandem repeats are 100,000 times faster than point mutations in producing microevolution as is demonstrated in the change in skull shape and dog snout in the Bull Terrier in 40 years due to tandem repeat variation. PNAS goes on:'
'
"Repeat expansions or contractions vary in a locus-specific manner and occur at rates up to 100,000 times higher than point mutations, because of the distinct mutational mode of slipped-strand mispairing rather than an incorporation error."

In other words, while point mutations in the DNA are errors and therefore mostly harmful, tandem repeat variations are not mistakes and are often helpful in adaptation to environment. Note again: 100,000 times faster! The 40 year change in Bull Terrier skull shape would formerly have been attributed to 4 million years of evolution by point mutations - the truth is that this occurred in 40 years!

An example of the advantage of actual observation vs. speculative theories of evolution.

to be continued.

 

[Newtonian]

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

There is evidence all around you. The heavens declare the glory of God. There is also the evidence you have inside you. Your conscience declaring there is a God. Man, himself, is evidence. He has been made in God's image. A rational, thinking, creative, loving being with a free will.

I understand what you're saying, though, I can remember when I felt the same. I always think of the blind man that Jesus healed when He walked this earth. When the people asked this man (who had been blind from birth) how it was that he could see. His reply was the same as mine and other believers, "I don't know, but once I was blind and now I can see."

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

True, man was created perfect but Adam and Eve ruined that. Now we inherit aging and death in our DNA (and epigenetics):

Romans 5:12
That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin,+ and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned+—.

So you are asserting that before original sin mankind had different tracks for eating and breathing? A bigger birth canal. A better-designed spine, etc. etc.?

I stated what I stated not what you claim I asserted. I suggest you read my post more carefully. I specifically referred to aging and death(Romans 5:12) - we do know these are inherited from our original parents. The mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam had the mechanisms responsible for aging and death in their genes.

Mutations have made matters worse.

I offered up a link citing undeniable flaws in how humans are designed. Undeniable because they cause a higher chance of discomfort, pain, and even death. You came back stating mankind was created perfect until Adam and Eve ruined that. Implying those flaws are a result of original sin. So that's how I deduced your meaning.

Well, you did not fully understand what I meant: aging and death are inherited from our original parents (Romans 5:12) - the mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam. The defects you are referring to are mostly the result of harmful mutations (usually recessive btw) that have been forced out by genetic inbreeding (genetic bottleneck = narrowing of the gene pool) after the flood. These mutations are errors not part of the original design before our MtDNA was corrupted.

In short, these defects were not designed - they were mostly caused by mutations since the original design.

More importantly - can we correct these errors?

 

[rightwinger]

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

I agree

Look at Newton’s law of gravity that objects create a gravitational field that attracts other objects.

Everyone knows that things fall to earth because God wants them to

 

[Hollie]

Getting back to epigenetics and specifically what was once called "junk DNA" - namely tandem repeat sequences (see my previous post on this for another excerpt):

Molecular origins of rapid and continuous morphological evolution

Mutations in cis-regulatory sequences have been implicated as being the predominant source of variation in morphological evolution. We offer a hypothesis that gene-associated tandem repeat expansions and contractions are a major source of phenotypic variation in evolution. Here, we describe a...

www.pnas.org

After noting that tandem repeats "are a major source of phenotypic variation in evolution" and "associated with significant differences in limb and skull morphology" and "provide molecular explanations for swift, yet topologically conservative morphological evolution" PNAS goes into further detail:

"The rapid pace of morphological evolution noted by Darwin along with Thompson's observations of topological conservation are not easily reconciled with the rates at which point mutations occur or with the sensitivity of complex organisms and their proteins to random point mutations. A broad consensus has emerged that contends with these difficulties by invoking mutations in cis-regulatory elements as the predominant source of the genetic diversity that underlies morphological variation and evolution."

This rapid microevolution explains how so many species came from a relatively few kinds on Noah's ark, btw. As I noted earlier, tandem repeats are 100,000 times faster than point mutations in producing microevolution as is demonstrated in the change in skull shape and dog snout in the Bull Terrier in 40 years due to tandem repeat variation. PNAS goes on:'
'
"Repeat expansions or contractions vary in a locus-specific manner and occur at rates up to 100,000 times higher than point mutations, because of the distinct mutational mode of slipped-strand mispairing rather than an incorporation error."

In other words, while point mutations in the DNA are errors and therefore mostly harmful, tandem repeat variations are not mistakes and are often helpful in adaptation to environment. Note again: 100,000 times faster! The 40 year change in Bull Terrier skull shape would formerly have been attributed to 4 million years of evolution by point mutations - the truth is that this occurred in 40 years!

An example of the advantage of actual observation vs. speculative theories of evolution.

to be continued.

We have no evidence to support the Noah fable. The creationist invention of "kinds" has no objective definition and to suggest that the diversity of life on the planet came about within a mere few thousand years is unsupportable.

 

[forkup]

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

There is evidence all around you. The heavens declare the glory of God. There is also the evidence you have inside you. Your conscience declaring there is a God. Man, himself, is evidence. He has been made in God's image. A rational, thinking, creative, loving being with a free will.

I understand what you're saying, though, I can remember when I felt the same. I always think of the blind man that Jesus healed when He walked this earth. When the people asked this man (who had been blind from birth) how it was that he could see. His reply was the same as mine and other believers, "I don't know, but once I was blind and now I can see."

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

True, man was created perfect but Adam and Eve ruined that. Now we inherit aging and death in our DNA (and epigenetics):

Romans 5:12
That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin,+ and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned+—.

So you are asserting that before original sin mankind had different tracks for eating and breathing? A bigger birth canal. A better-designed spine, etc. etc.?

I stated what I stated not what you claim I asserted. I suggest you read my post more carefully. I specifically referred to aging and death(Romans 5:12) - we do know these are inherited from our original parents. The mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam had the mechanisms responsible for aging and death in their genes.

Mutations have made matters worse.

I offered up a link citing undeniable flaws in how humans are designed. Undeniable because they cause a higher chance of discomfort, pain, and even death. You came back stating mankind was created perfect until Adam and Eve ruined that. Implying those flaws are a result of original sin. So that's how I deduced your meaning.

Well, you did not fully understand what I meant: aging and death are inherited from our original parents (Romans 5:12) - the mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam. The defects you are referring to are mostly the result of harmful mutations (usually recessive btw) that have been forced out by genetic inbreeding (genetic bottleneck = narrowing of the gene pool) after the flood. These mutations are errors not part of the original design before our MtDNA was corrupted.

In short, these defects were not designed - they were mostly caused by mutations since the original design.

More importantly - can we correct these errors?

So again you are stating that our original parents didn't have the flaws I described

you are asserting that before original sin mankind had different tracks for eating and breathing? A bigger birth canal. A better-designed spine, etc. etc.?

That is what you mean right? Before original sin and mutations mankind according to you was perfect?

 

[BreezeWood]

Or

I believe that scientific progress will be the undoing of mankind, one way or another. Some scientists will go too far and destroy us all. Nuclear or biological war, artificial intelligence, and human experiments could push us over the edge

Just before that happens -- when mankind is on the brink -- Scripture tells us the Lord will return. Armageddon.

Or, as stated, God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth - Revelation 11:18. However, there is something else hat will happen right before Armageddon...

Or, as stated, God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth - Revelation 11:18. However, there is something else hat will happen right before Armageddon...

.
you believe that because your book is incomplete - with the correct triumph as prescribed by the religion of antiquity that will have been accomplished by humanity as the harbinger for final judgement with or without the return of the Almighty - in your case they will return to destroy everyone.

 

[sealybobo]

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Actually, humans are arrogant to believe they are special and this world was made for us.

We even believe we are gods ourselves. Who else but gods live in paradise for the rest of eternity after they die? Talk about arrogant.

Science believes we will never know our true origins. It’s unknowable. Religious people claim they know our true origins not science. Get that right.

yes, some of the universes secrets we will never know. And no we are not in charge. But none of that leads to your conclusion that god exists let alone determines all. Nice try though.

I am religious and I claim our true origins are revealed both from science and from the Bible. For example, Acts 17:26 says all nations come from one man. Science has proven that to be true - note our literature points to the scientific evidence here:

An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. In 1988, Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports in 1995 about research on male DNA point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it."

What do you mean we all came from one man? Science says there was no one original first man.

 

[sealybobo]

F

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Arrogance is convincing yourself that you have The Answer, in either direction.

No one knows. If you want to have faith that it's one of the 2,500 or so gods that humans have maintained over the millennia, great, cool, run with that.

Some of us admit we just don't know, that it's likely we won't know during our lifetime, and we accept that and move on to things over which we have more control.

Meanwhile, it's fun and interesting and stimulating, watching science try to figure stuff out, and learn as it goes.

I’ll translate what they were trying to say. Science doesn’t have all the answers and we as humans hate not knowing the answers to all our questions. So, since religion claims to have all the answers, they love it.

Some false religions claim to have all the answers - the true religion does not make that claim.

That's why we keep doing research and change our beliefs when good research demands it.

We used to favor the annular theory - now we are not so sure.

The classic, only my religion is the one true....and my religion doesn’t do that....

But the other 999 religions do do it.
How many members do you have in your big cult?

 

[sealybobo]

Your "... because I say'' commandment about 900 year old humans is utterly unsupported. More to the point, your unsupported comment is presented in the context of unsupported events that are mere legend and fable.

Please identify what supported knowledge you can present in regard to any biblical fables surrounding Adam and Noah.

I didn't say....the Bible says.

I'm not able to prove the existence of God to someone who is so PROUD they call Scripture a fable.

You will remain in the DARK until and if you finally humble yourself and seek the Lord. God does resist the proud. Not what I say...what the Bible says. And, we see that with your post.

The only difference between a fable and Christianity is a fable happened in a far off place a long time ago. Your story happened 2020 years ago in bethlaham

 

[BreezeWood]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.​

​

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.​

​

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Faith is nothing like science. Science requires someone to present evidence for their hypothesis and demands for that evidence to be peer-reviewed.
I have never, not ever seen any faith requiring anything of the sort. In fact faith actively discourages it and celebrates that it doesn't require any proof.

Then, apparently, you have not studied the Greek text of the Biblical definition of faith in Hebrews 11:1!

Hebrews 11:1
Faith+ is the assured expectation* of things hoped+ for, the evident demonstration* of realities* though not beheld.+

NW ref. footnote on "evident demonstration" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“Evident demonstration.” Or, “convincing evidence.” Gr., eʹleg·khos; Lat., ar·gu·menʹtum. Compare Joh 16:8 ftn."

Convincing evidence is in harmony with the thought conveyed in the use of another Greek word (def.: be you proving) at 1 Thessalonians 5:21 - "Prove all things" - KJV.

It seems likely you are not familiar with my religion either.

Hebrews 11:1
Faith+ is the assured expectation* of things hoped+ for, the evident demonstration* of realities* though not beheld.+

.
for you, assured through your book is far from - faith. faith of reaching the believed goal. (for some out of necessity) - - the goal.


"though not beheld" - true faith is not assured till realized in the sense of religion the triumph the faith was meant to accomplish.

is that why you need a messiah, you can not accomplish the goal yourself is what your book has made you believe ...

 

[sealybobo]

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Actually, humans are arrogant to believe they are special and this world was made for us.

We even believe we are gods ourselves. Who else but gods live in paradise for the rest of eternity after they die? Talk about arrogant.

Science believes we will never know our true origins. It’s unknowable. Religious people claim they know our true origins not science. Get that right.

yes, some of the universes secrets we will never know. And no we are not in charge. But none of that leads to your conclusion that god exists let alone determines all. Nice try though.

I am religious and I claim our true origins are revealed both from science and from the Bible. For example, Acts 17:26 says all nations come from one man. Science has proven that to be true - note our literature points to the scientific evidence here:

An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. In 1988, Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports in 1995 about research on male DNA point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it."

Just so you know, there was no one original man and women. If there was, incest occurred. Moms and daughters fucked cousins brothers and fathers for centuries. Science says your story is bullshit. Don’t misconstrue what science says.

A more ape like species evolved into man. And that ape like species evolved from something lesser. Go back far enough our ancestor livedunder water.
And earth went through 2 or 3 mass extinction periods. Do we even know when life first started? Or do we know if our ancestor survived those global extinctions? Must have. I wonder after the last great extinction what our ancestor was doing? What was it. Was it a land creature? I know science has theories. Ones with evidence and no supernatural shit from an ancient religion

 

[sealybobo]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.​

​

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.​

​

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Faith is nothing like science. Science requires someone to present evidence for their hypothesis and demands for that evidence to be peer-reviewed.
I have never, not ever seen any faith requiring anything of the sort. In fact faith actively discourages it and celebrates that it doesn't require any proof.

Then, apparently, you have not studied the Greek text of the Biblical definition of faith in Hebrews 11:1!

Hebrews 11:1
Faith+ is the assured expectation* of things hoped+ for, the evident demonstration* of realities* though not beheld.+

NW ref. footnote on "evident demonstration" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“Evident demonstration.” Or, “convincing evidence.” Gr., eʹleg·khos; Lat., ar·gu·menʹtum. Compare Joh 16:8 ftn."

Convincing evidence is in harmony with the thought conveyed in the use of another Greek word (def.: be you proving) at 1 Thessalonians 5:21 - "Prove all things" - KJV.

It seems likely you are not familiar with my religion either.

Hebrews 11:1
Faith+ is the assured expectation* of things hoped+ for, the evident demonstration* of realities* though not beheld.+

.
for you, assured through your book is far from - faith. faith of reaching the believed goal. (for some out of necessity) - - the goal.


"though not beheld" - true faith is not assured till realized in the sense of religion the triumph the faith was meant to accomplish.

is that why you need a messiah, you can not accomplish the goal yourself is what your book has made you believe ...

Well it’s true. You can’t believe you are going to heaven if you don’t believe in religion. So yes he needs god to accomplish his goal. Which isn’t real. Shh

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It is your job not mine to support your claim

Again, and please pay attention this time:

I can show you dinos with wings and feathers, human ancestors, and plenty of other fossils that are obviously intermediates between earlier and later species. Like archaeopteryx. But you reject that.

Unless you are mentally chalenged or 5 years old, you know these fossils exist (that scientists are convinced are intermediaries). So, in the interest of you acting like an adult for 3 seconds, tell me what would constitute a transitional species to you.

In now way does doing so do any of the work of supporting my claim. So you can drop that idiotic talking point immediately.

So again i ask: what sort of traits of a fossil or living species would compel you to believe it is a "transitional species"? Its a si.ple question. But you are going to do a little dance to avoid it. Forever. Guaranteed. Because you're a fraud.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken.

Well that's ass backwards wrong. You can say god created everything and still believe , for example, that evolution is how he did it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

There is evidence all around you. The heavens declare the glory of God. There is also the evidence you have inside you. Your conscience declaring there is a God. Man, himself, is evidence. He has been made in God's image. A rational, thinking, creative, loving being with a free will.

I understand what you're saying, though, I can remember when I felt the same. I always think of the blind man that Jesus healed when He walked this earth. When the people asked this man (who had been blind from birth) how it was that he could see. His reply was the same as mine and other believers, "I don't know, but once I was blind and now I can see."

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

True, man was created perfect but Adam and Eve ruined that. Now we inherit aging and death in our DNA (and epigenetics):

Romans 5:12
That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin,+ and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned+—.

So you are asserting that before original sin mankind had different tracks for eating and breathing? A bigger birth canal. A better-designed spine, etc. etc.?

I stated what I stated not what you claim I asserted. I suggest you read my post more carefully. I specifically referred to aging and death(Romans 5:12) - we do know these are inherited from our original parents. The mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam had the mechanisms responsible for aging and death in their genes.

Mutations have made matters worse.

I offered up a link citing undeniable flaws in how humans are designed. Undeniable because they cause a higher chance of discomfort, pain, and even death. You came back stating mankind was created perfect until Adam and Eve ruined that. Implying those flaws are a result of original sin. So that's how I deduced your meaning.

Well, you did not fully understand what I meant: aging and death are inherited from our original parents (Romans 5:12) - the mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam. The defects you are referring to are mostly the result of harmful mutations (usually recessive btw) that have been forced out by genetic inbreeding (genetic bottleneck = narrowing of the gene pool) after the flood. These mutations are errors not part of the original design before our MtDNA was corrupted.

In short, these defects were not designed - they were mostly caused by mutations since the original design.

More importantly - can we correct these errors?

You know, there is a good reason you creationist frauds are trolling anonymous message boards and not publishing scientific research or contributing in any way whatsoever to science.

 

[barn sour]

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

Being made in God's image has nothing to do with our physical body.
God is Spirit.

Being made in the image of God means we are thinking, rational beings with a conscience and free will. We aren't ruled by instinct as the animals are. Being made in the image of God is a thread all it's own.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is your job not mine to support your claim

Again, and please pay attention this time:

I can show you dinos with wings and feathers, human ancestors, and plenty of other fossils that are obviously intermediates between earlier and later species. Like archaeopteryx. But you reject that.

Unless you are mentally chalenged or 5 years old, you know these fossils exist (that scientists are convinced are intermediaries). So, in the interest of you acting like an adult for 3 seconds, tell me what would constitute a transitional species to you.

In now way does doing so do any of the work of supporting my claim. So you can drop that idiotic talking point immediately.

So again i ask: what sort of traits of a fossil or living species would compel you to believe it is a "transitional species"? Its a si.ple question. But you are going to do a little dance to avoid it. Forever. Guaranteed. Because you're a fraud.

You REALLY should learn to read what I post, it would help a lot.

 

[forkup]

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

Being made in God's image has nothing to do with our physical body.
God is Spirit.

Being made in the image of God means we are thinking, rational beings with a conscience and free will. We aren't ruled by instinct as the animals are. Being made in the image of God is a thread all it's own.

You know I tend to be rather good natured in these kinds of discussions. I understand perfectly well that when speaking to religious people some leeway has to be given since by definition faith is accepting something without evidence.

This however kind of ticks me of. I'm allowing you to defend your position within your own framework, namely the bible. Yet you choose to make an assertion not just wholly unsupported by the Bible but actually in direct contradiction of it. Either mankind was created in gods image or he wasn't. His soul was but his body wasn't is simply bullshit.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You are using the bible as evidence for the bible that is circular reasoning. We have been made in God's image right? And God is perfect right? The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body We have some pretty obvious design flaws.

Being made in God's image has nothing to do with our physical body.
God is Spirit.

Being made in the image of God means we are thinking, rational beings with a conscience and free will. We aren't ruled by instinct as the animals are. Being made in the image of God is a thread all it's own.

You know I tend to be rather good natured in these kinds of discussions. I understand perfectly well that when speaking to religious people some leeway has to be given since by definition faith is accepting something without evidence.

This however kind of ticks me of. I'm allowing you to defend your position within your own framework, namely the bible. Yet you choose to make an assertion not just wholly unsupported by the Bible but actually in direct contradiction of it. Either mankind was created in gods image or he wasn't. His soul was but his body wasn't is simply bullshit.

One can NOT know the mind of God. There is no reason to assume that in his image only means physical. Or that it means physical at all. Though I do believe that.