... They Used the "L" Word!

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kpierce

I think any objective person who reads this thread will agree that I've been very logical. However, I'll be happy to end it because it will go on forever.

It goes now where because you have refused three times to explain what evidence you would accept as proof.

It is obvious to most that you have no interest in discovery, so I'm done here.

Others can waste their time with you if they so desire. Bye.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mlarson

It goes now where because you have refused three times to explain what evidence you would accept as proof.

It is obvious to most that you have no interest in discovery, so I'm done here.

Others can waste their time with you if they so desire. Bye.

I've answered your question and you refuse to hear me. Empirical evidence of the existence of God or Jesus etc. You call it vague yet it has a very descriptive meaning:

The word empirical denotes information gained by means of observation, experience, or experiment.[1] It is a central concept in science and the scientific method is that all evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. Empirical data are data that are produced by experiment or observation.[citation needed] It is usually differentiated from the philosophic usage of empiricism by the use of the adjective "empirical" or the adverb "empirically." "Empirical" as an adjective or adverb is used in conjunction with both the natural and social sciences, and refers to the use of working hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this sense of the word, scientific statements are subject to and derived from our experiences or observations.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mnahrgang

10,000 clergy members from where? Not my church. And not from anyone who has seriously studied evolutionary science with an opened mind. There are way too many holes in the theory to be taken seriously unless you have an Atheistic bias to support.

What about the Pope?

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by klott

No evidence, just theories, they keep saying they are looking for the missing link. They will never find it. You say you have never read the Bible, but yet you claim it is false.

This is the mis-conception that many religious people have. Kenneth, you're only talking about human evolution. Evolution encompasses all life on earth and there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to support this theory. Even the Pope agrees.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mlarson

It goes now where because you have refused three times to explain what evidence you would accept as proof.

It is obvious to most that you have no interest in discovery, so I'm done here.

Others can waste their time with you if they so desire. Bye.

You refuse to answer many questions Michael.
1. What do you think about 10,000 clergymen and the Pope agreeing that evolution takes place?
2. Are you willing to admit that the Bible may be wrong?

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mnahrgang

Yet you have never read it. Once again, seems close minded.

Close minded is one who believes in one book and will plead the 5th when evidence is displayed to prove it's fallacies. Even when the most respected religious man on the face of the Earth accepts evolution, you still dig your feet in. That, my friend, is close minded.

[Michael Larson]

One last try.

You are asking for empirical evidence of the existence God when what is at question is the reliability of the biblical record.

If you want to whole enchilada it's not going to happen but if you are willing to examine the accuracy of the documents as a starting point to consider the possibility that God exists, we can get somewhere.

God has given sufficient evidence of Himself but only to those willing to hear it.

Perhaps you are perhaps you are not.

If you are convinced there is no God you will have to explain how everything you see exists.

There is no evidence that something can evolve from nothing without the intervention of an outside force.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kpierce

You refuse to answer many questions Michael.
1. What do you think about 10,000 clergymen and the Pope agreeing that evolution takes place?
2. Are you willing to admit that the Bible may be wrong?

OK and not without evidence.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mlarson

One last try.

You are asking for empirical evidence of the existence God when what is at question is the reliability of the biblical record.

If you want to whole enchilada it's not going to happen but if you are willing to examine the accuracy of the documents as a starting point to consider the possibility that God exists, we can get somewhere.
Even if we have found evidence that the Bible has some historical truth, like the walls of Jericho, all that says is that ancient men documented that in a book. That has nothing due do with the magical powers of Jesus or Moses or any other feat that has allegedly taken place. I accept that the men can document events in books. I don't accept that men had magical powers.
God has given sufficient evidence of Himself but only to those willing to hear it.
Let's hear some evidence.
Perhaps you are perhaps you are not.
Depending on the accuracy of the evidence, perhaps I will.
If you are convinced there is no God you will have to explain how everything you see exists.

There is no evidence that something can evolve from nothing without the intervention of an outside force.
And there is no evidence that God waved a wand.....just faith.

I have never said there is no God. If there is empirical evidence of his existence, I'll believe.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mlarson

OK and not without evidence.

What do you mean? This is a very simple question. What are your thoughts about the entire Catholic religion accepting evolution?
BTW, are you Catholic?

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kpierce

What do you mean? This is a very simple question. What are your thoughts about the entire Catholic religion accepting evolution?
BTW, are you Catholic?

Does the Catholic church speak for all Christians?

You should ask a Catholic what he thinks. My opinion would be irrelevant.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kpierce

I have never said there is no God. If there is empirical evidence of his existence, I'll believe.

You, exist right?

Now if there was truly nothing and the scientists tell us, where did you come from?

What percentage of the biblical record would have to be proved to you to make you realize that it is likely all accurate?

[Mark Nahrgang]

Originally Posted by kpierce

Close minded is one who believes in one book and will plead the 5th when evidence is displayed to prove it's fallacies. Even when the most respected religious man on the face of the Earth accepts evolution, you still dig your feet in. That, my friend, is close minded.

No that's educated. I BELIEVED in evolution at one time and I was very closed minded as you seem to be, in regards to other options. Then I studied it and started to see a number of flaws with it. That opened my mind, and I came to the learned conclusion that it evolutionary theory is very weak, and is actually the only answer an Atheist can hold to describe the creation. What someone else says or thinks is irrelevant that is their opinion. I've personally studied it, and when you look at the evidence it actually points to a creation moment. Logically if something has a creation moment, then that points to a creator. So evidence, and logic support my position of faith.

Out of 24 scientific age indicators of the Earth, only 2 come to a date age greater than 100,000 years. That means that 22 of them point, not to an earth that is millions of years old, but one that is measured in the thousands of years. Its interesting that so many "open minded scientists" seem to overlook the preponderance of the evidence and still support a theory that the earth is ancient.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Does the Catholic church speak for all Christians?

You should ask a Catholic what he thinks. My opinion would be irrelevant.

It certainly speaks for MILLIONS of Christians. We're not talking about a small group of people here.

Irrelevant or not, what is your opinion? Do you believe the Catholic religion to be wrong?

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kpierce

Do you believe the Catholic religion to be wrong?

About what?