What's supernatural is making claims that no one in the past or present has witnessed or documented. They're called fantasies. So a half-man, half-ape is supernatural.
Discussions about Carico's God
- Thread starter Carico
- Start date
What's supernatural is making claims that no one in the past or present has witnessed or documented. They're called fantasies. So a half-man, half-ape is supernatural.
But the fossils do exist.
Your accusation that scientists are involved in eliminating God or the Bible's role in the study of history is ridiculous. Many scientists are very religious. My father is a scientist, and many of his associates go to church. I don't understand it, but there it is. As an atheist, I depend on knowing the history of religion in order to show just how damaging it's effects have been on the human search for knowledge. Galileo was one famous victim, but it continues to this day when religious nuts deny evolution.
Your accusation that scientists are involved in eliminating God or the Bible's role in the study of history is ridiculous. Many scientists are very religious. My father is a scientist, and many of his associates go to church. I don't understand it, but there it is. As an atheist, I depend on knowing the history of religion in order to show just how damaging it's effects have been on the human search for knowledge. Galileo was one famous victim, but it continues to this day when religious nuts deny evolution.
Last edited:
Given that science popularly works exclusively in the language of empiricism, what "supernatural" things do you suppose it could locate it?
It's interesting how afraid scientists are of the bible. One would think they'd love the chance to refute it. But they don't. They're scared to death of God's word.
After all, you guys allow myths on this board in the sci-fi category. So not allowing that the bible here, you obviously don't believe the bible is a myth. Carico, you seem like the friendly, humorous sidekick to adstar. I'm christian, and it amuses me when a christian pops up who wants to smack around non-believers. Mocking won't work, threatening won't work, even having actual discussion won't work. Pearls to the swine, buddy.
spidergoat Science is biased towards the non-supernatural since nothing supernatural has been shown to exist. Science is not inherently opposed to the idea of the supernatural.
Sort of, but let me help clarify.
Science as a discipline strives not to be biased for or against anything, though science is done by people and people have difficulty getting past their bias.
All science cares about is can it be observed? can it be measured? can questions be proposed about it that can be disproved? can these be shared, replicated and verified publicly? That's it at the core.
"Natural" or "supernatural" is not a question for science. Those are metaphysical claims. Metaphysical claims, by definition, are about things which cannot be observed.
Sort of, but let me help clarify.
Science as a discipline strives not to be biased for or against anything, though science is done by people and people have difficulty getting past their bias.
All science cares about is can it be observed? can it be measured? can questions be proposed about it that can be disproved? can these be shared, replicated and verified publicly? That's it at the core.
"Natural" or "supernatural" is not a question for science. Those are metaphysical claims. Metaphysical claims, by definition, are about things which cannot be observed.
Carico: It's interesting how afraid scientists are of the bible. One would think they'd love the chance to refute it.
That's because its not actually that interesting or fearsome. You like to pretend its some great thing, but its just a tired collection of myths and so most can't be bothered. Also because it is so rife with error the task is some what daunting. But luckily there are people with lot's of time on their hands.
Start here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/errancy.html
But of course you won't read any of it, which is the other reason people usually don't bother. Your type is impervious to fact and reason.
That's because its not actually that interesting or fearsome. You like to pretend its some great thing, but its just a tired collection of myths and so most can't be bothered. Also because it is so rife with error the task is some what daunting. But luckily there are people with lot's of time on their hands.
Start here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/errancy.html
But of course you won't read any of it, which is the other reason people usually don't bother. Your type is impervious to fact and reason.
spare us the straw men arguments,its just silly..
the reason why you cant use the bible to prove your god
its circular reasoning fallacy:
stating in one's proposition that which one aims to prove. (e.g. God exists because the Bible says so; the Bible exists because God influenced it.)
it doesnt work
naw thats just a MYTH..
whatever he said is still only HEARSAY..not acceptable in todays society
and why do YOU deny all the other gods
www.godchecker.com
yes up on the mountain with no one around...hmmm sounds like bullshyt to me
Jesus never said He was god!
btw why would God need to sacrifice Himself to Himself to fix the Sin which He created in the first place..is he and idiot?
so refute Allah the Great for us then!
Hey I was just taking the story at face value, from the King James Version of the Bible. You can tack on whatever theories you want. That was mine.
I find it amusing when a newcomer preaching religion, ufos or psuedoarcheology tells skinwalker to "go do some reasearch".
Whi I do believe that Jesus existed (and started a thread about it, which I was very disaapointed that very few of the Jesus deniers bothered to post in: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=85618)...
...I defy you to show me where Jesus said he was God incarnate.
You claim that Jesus said he was God incarnate, then say others are in denial??
Chapter and Verse, please.
When did he say this?
Quote him.
Sorry but Jesus is God incarnate. So since you have to make up your own history to deny that Jesus is who he said he was, then that imaginary history is the degree to which you have to go to deny God. So you are in error because God has shown himself to people, not only in the form of Jesus Christ, but by the awesome miracle of creation which you also deny. So sorry, but denial isn't a valid refutation.
...I defy you to show me where Jesus said he was God incarnate.
You claim that Jesus said he was God incarnate, then say others are in denial??
Chapter and Verse, please.
When did he say this?
Quote him.
*************It's interesting how afraid scientists are of the bible. One would think they'd love the chance to refute it. But they don't. They're scared to death of God's word.
M*W: I asked you to answer a question earlier today. You as yet have not, and I am still waiting. Either you don't know the answer or your religion is false. Which is it?
I asked you to tell us what language did god speak. So far, no christian on this forum has been able to answer this question. Seeing as how you think you have all the answers, please answer this one now.
I suppose a lot of the militant attitude comes from atheists who have had others attempt to force religion upon them in their lives. I don't like the very bitter attitude in some atheists either but I believe I can see where and how it came about.
I believe God exists based on my own intuition and what I feel is suggesive evidence for God based on things like NDEs and such but I would be too rigid in my mindset if I could not keep open the possibility that there is no God.
I think you're allowed to quote the bible to make a point. Did a moderator tell you otherwise?
I asked you repeatedly for a scripture reference & you won't give it.
I asked you a question, repeatedly, related to another scripture but you won't answer it.
If 20% of what scientists claim isn't true, that does nothing for your case.
It's interesting how afraid scientists are of the bible. One would think they'd love the chance to refute it. But they don't. They're scared to death of God's word.
Absurd blathering.
I'm stealing that!
======I don't know whether gods exist but I know the god of the KJVHoly Babble doesn't any more than there can be a square triangle.
========If NDEs are valid, that says nothing of whether there's a god.
Last edited by a moderator:
If they are valid and not simply a dream taking place in the dying mind, it says everything about God.That's what NDEs are all about..not an afterlife that has no God.
Again, since there's not a picture of the common ancestor, or any transitional species on a fossil, then interpreting fossils is as subjective as imagining what images leaves on a tree represent.
Hitler once said; "People are so stupid. It's not hard to fool the public." And of all people, he should know. It's the samewith anyone who reads a science book. They automatically believe anything scientists say because they have letters after their names. So Hitler's right; it's not hard to fool the public, especially when they look to certain humans as infallible gods as they did to Hitler and they do to scientists. And that's why people who are easily duped never question the methods of scientists even when their methods are as unscientific looking at a dead body and making up a story about it. Then that belongs in the category of science fiction. But since Christ's words and deeds were witnessed and recorded, that belongs in the category of history.
So the first thing you need to understand is the difference between science and science fiction. Science fiction is about what could happen in reality. Science is about what does happen in reality. So research the history of Israel. Only then will you be on your way to distinguishing between the real and the imaginary. 
Again, since there's not a picture of the common ancestor, or any transitional species on a fossil, then interpreting fossils is as subjective as imagining what images leaves on a tree represent.
So is it better to believe a book with no evidence than it is to believe a scientist who can throw as much evidence at you as you like (in your case probably none, as you wouldn't want to be proved wrong on anything an old story book told you)?
Carico,
As a fellow Christian, I think you're taking the wrong approach here. Take a look at this, and you may be better prepared the next time you post a thread:
http://www.ex-atheist.com/games-skeptics-play.html
Good luck.
As a fellow Christian, I think you're taking the wrong approach here. Take a look at this, and you may be better prepared the next time you post a thread:
http://www.ex-atheist.com/games-skeptics-play.html
Good luck.