There is no scientific evidence for an "infinite Christ."
There is no scientific evidence that supernatural entities influence physics.
I didn't say there was. I merely affirmed The Fundamental Axioms of Seventh-day Millerites, Circa 2017.
I didn't say there was. I merely affirmed The Fundamental Axioms of Seventh-day Millerites, Circa 2017.
I understand there is respectable school of theological thought that God upholds the order in nature.
You're fooling yourself. Established science has no explanation for the cause of quantum events. Mainstream theory strongly asserts the nonexistence of mechanistic causes and the sole certainty underlying reality being the existence of probability amplitudes.
No, you asked what was inconsistent about science, Jesus and the axioms. I listed three inconsistencies between the axioms and science. (But don't worry too much about that; all religions have significant inconsistencies between their axioms and science.)
Nor is there any evidence for an omniscient, omnipotent creator who influences such events. Thus, a belief that "God did it" is not scientific. (Or to be more accurate, is as scientific as "the Easter Bunny did it" or "leprechauns did it.")
Indisputably, you're not qualified to talk about the foundations of physics and The Fundamental Axioms of Seventh-day Millerites, Circa 2017.
"All of science is uncertain and subject to revision. The glory of science is to imagine more than we can prove." - Freeman Dyson.
And there is no question that you are not qualified to talk about the science of evolution, since you misunderstand much of the basic science - but you do so. Which is what this forum is for.
Very true. The job of scientists is to push those limits.
All science is either physics or stamp collecting. Charles Darwin, the foremost creator of "just-so stories," was a stamp collector.
OK. In that case, so was Watson, Crick, Pasteur, Fermat, Pauling, Fibonacci, Nobel, Fleming, Watt, Skinner, Pythagoras, Mendel, Leeuwenhoek, Hooke, Descartes and Bernoulli. I have a feeling Darwin would be proud to be counted among such "stamp collectors."
Was it Watson or Crick, Darwin's co-creator of evolutionism, that was the spiritualist?
No, Darwin was a physicist. Evolution is nuclear physics on a biological scale.
What standards of evidence do you use to evaluate the supernatural claims of Jesus? Certainly not scientific ones, since the only evidence is a book.
In his defense, he did not claim any supernatural attributes for Jesus in that post. There's no conflict inherent in believing that Christ existed and that science is valid, just as there is no conflict inherent in believing that Joseph Smith existed and that science is valid.
The conflict is evident in the cowardice of Darwinists to freely acknowledge the dark side of the spiritualistic leanings of evolutionism's co-creator and their complete unfamiliarity with the power and presence of the Holy Spirit.
That's a very important puzzle. Thanks for mentioning it. It is permissible to answer that challenge and to affirm that Seventh-day Millerites have a God-given revelation that resolves that allegedly unanswerable mystery? http://everythingimportant.org/3scenarios
Your sad (and sadly predictable) attempt at a personal attack aside, there is no conflict between spiritualism and science. It's only when you get into supernatural omniscient/omnipotent beings that there becomes a conflict.