UK loses faith

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by passingbat

How can you be so sure? There seem to be many scientists who believe in creation.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-ed...cientists.html

I am not in a position to argue either way. But personally, I don't need to. I believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and therefore believe in creation.

Yes, that is a faith position, a faith that is bourn out of my walk with Jesus. But given that there are qualified scientists that believe Evolution is wrong and Creation is right, your belief in Evolution also becomes a faith belief. A faith belief you are entitled to hold.

My view is that as scientific discovery increases, Bible believing Christians need not fear that those discoveries will negate what the Bible says in any way at all.

I would think that scientists that believe in Creation especially in the Biblical definition would be a contradiction. To be a scientist, you would demand proof of theory and you would assess any evidence against the proposed theory in order to reach a conclusion as to the veracity of the theory.

I can see that some scientists could ignore evidence of the age of the solar system, evolution, etc but I doubt that any have proof of the alternative, biblical, alternative.

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I would think that scientists that believe in Creation especially in the Biblical definition would be a contradiction. To be a scientist, you would demand proof of theory and you would assess any evidence against the proposed theory in order to reach a conclusion as to the veracity of the theory.

I can see that some scientists could ignore evidence of the age of the solar system, evolution, etc but I doubt that any have proof of the alternative, biblical, alternative.

It seems that from a science perspective, without absolute proof on a specific matter, it's a case of 'what model fits best'. Some believe Creation fits best and some believe Evolution fits best. That's why Creation and Evolution are both a belief/faith issue; each person chooses which set of scientists to believe.

A former Evolutionist, Dr. Wilder-Smith debated various leading scientists on the subject throughout the world. In his opinion, the Evolution model did not fit as well with the established facts of science as did the Creation model of intelligent design.

"The Evolutionary model says that it is not necessary to assume the existence of anything, besides matter and energy, to produce life. That proposition is unscientific. We know perfectly well that if you leave matter to itself, it does not organize itself - in spite of all the efforts in recent years to prove that it does." 5


http://www.christiananswers.net/q-ed...cientists.html

The integrated message of the whole Bible, given it's authorship timespan of 2000 years by multiple authors, shows 'intelligent design' to me.

I'll be happy when Dawkins isn't held up as some representative for all atheists out there as the man only represents himself and his own ignorance and prejudice, majority of atheists are like me in my experience in that we have made our choice and respect others to make theirs whether they are the same or different. As for the rest of it Bible or science doesn't really matter individually follow whatever one makes you happier or just seems more acceptable. Don't understand why topics like this always have to end up confrontational and divisive.

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Don't understand why topics like this always have to end up confrontational and divisive.

TBF, on the whole, I don't think it has. No forum member has disrespected any other forum member's belief. I don't think there is anything wrong with respectful disagreement.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by ianch99

OK,



Agreed



So you agree that Religion is mandated for our children even when it is now a minority belief in this country



The Sky salesman is not trying to tell me what to believe or save my soul



Agreed, Dawkins can be a pompous ass at times. As you find him personally offensive, this is why I gave you a number of other sources.



How is that any different from Christians, Muslims, etc. doing exactly the same thing? Dawkins won't knock on your door asking you to become an atheist .. Evangelicial Christians will.

---------- Post added at 08:15 ---------- Previous post was at 08:13 ----------



I guess atheism is an anti-faith but your point is a good one. He is no worse or better than anyone who is trying to pursuade you of their viewpoint.

It is however, your personal choice whether you choose to listen to the man

he's just a reverse evangelist he's still spreading the word .

[denphone]

Originally Posted by passingbat

TBF, on the whole, I don't think it has. No forum member has disrespected any other forum member's belief. I don't think there is anything wrong with respectful disagreement.

Indeed l think it has been pretty reasoned debate with members disagreeing as they usually do on issues.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by passingbat

It seems that from a science perspective, without absolute proof on a specific matter, it's a case of 'what model fits best'. Some believe Creation fits best and some believe Evolution fits best. That's why Creation and Evolution are both a belief/faith issue; each person chooses which set of scientists to believe.

The integrated message of the whole Bible, given it's authorship timespan of 2000 years by multiple authors, shows 'intelligent design' to me.

Isn't it more the case of "what model fits [the evidence] best"? You can believe any model you can imagine but until you have objective, demonstrable evidence as proof, you would not have be able to present the model as a viable scientific theory.

---------- Post added at 16:56 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ----------

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

I'll be happy when Dawkins isn't held up as some representative for all atheists out there as the man only represents himself and his own ignorance and prejudice, majority of atheists are like me in my experience in that we have made our choice and respect others to make theirs whether they are the same or different. As for the rest of it Bible or science doesn't really matter individually follow whatever one makes you happier or just seems more acceptable. Don't understand why topics like this always have to end up confrontational and divisive.

I don't think he is being held up as such. He is a renowned scientist and has strongs views on the subject, as do a lot of people. His personal style and his sometimes, stupid remarks can and do alienate people but that does not negate all he has to say.

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Isn't it more the case of "what model fits [the evidence] best"? You can believe any model you can imagine but until you have objective, demonstrable evidence as proof, you would not have be able to present the model as a viable scientific theory.

I'm not a scientist, and don't know what is the norm in these things. The scientist in my quote seems to think 'established facts of science' is a parameter. Maybe because evidence is likely to change with new discoveries, whereas, established facts don't change? I don't really know.

Talking evidence, which obviously you have to decide the validity of yourself, there are 353 Old Testament prophecies that had to be fulfilled in the person of Jesus.

Statistically impossible if Jesus wasn't the true prophesised Messiah, especially the genealogy ones.

"...all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me" (Jesus Christ, Luke 24:44)

http://www.accordingtothescriptures....rophecies.html

[Russ]

Originally Posted by ianch99

So you agree that Religion is mandated for our children even when it is now a minority belief in this country

No I don't agree anything of the sort but I do think Religion is too important a subject to not be taught about in our schools given the amount of religious ignorance in the world. Be careful you're not falling in to the trap of assuming RE equates to ensuring all pupils believe.

Originally Posted by ianch99

The Sky salesman is not trying to tell me what to believe or save my soul

Yes he is, he/she turns up uninvited and is trying to make you believe Sky is your only/best option.

Originally Posted by ianch99

Agreed, Dawkins can be a pompous ass at times. As you find him personally offensive, this is why I gave you a number of other sources.

Thanks I think.

Originally Posted by ianch99

How is that any different from Christians, Muslims, etc. doing exactly the same thing? Dawkins won't knock on your door asking you to become an atheist .. Evangelicial Christians will.

If you believe what he's doing is the same then I'm assuming that means you can see the delicious irony in his actions.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Russ

No I don't agree anything of the sort but I do think Religion is too important a subject to not be taught about in our schools given the amount of religious ignorance in the world. Be careful you're not falling in to the trap of assuming RE equates to ensuring all pupils believe

I think you are conflating the teaching of Religious Studies where children learn about the faiths of the world without prejudice with being expected to attend & participate in Christian prayer & worship.

Originally Posted by Russ

Yes he is, he/she turns up uninvited and is trying to make you believe Sky is your only/best option.

I am surprised you equate a Sky TV salesman with someone who wants to challenge and change your belief system. One wants to change the contents of your bank balance, the other the contents of your head.

Originally Posted by Russ

If you believe what he's doing is the same then I'm assuming that means you can see the delicious irony in his actions.

From my understanding, *you* have to choose to listen to the guy. If you don't like him, don't buy his book, don't read his articles and don't watch his videos ..

---------- Post added at 19:43 ---------- Previous post was at 19:35 ----------

Originally Posted by passingbat

I'm not a scientist, and don't know what is the norm in these things. The scientist in my quote seems to think 'established facts of science' is a parameter. Maybe because evidence is likely to change with new discoveries, whereas, established facts don't change? I don't really know.

Talking evidence, which obviously you have to decide the validity of yourself, there are 353 Old Testament prophecies that had to be fulfilled in the person of Jesus.

Statistically impossible if Jesus wasn't the true prophesised Messiah, especially the genealogy ones.

http://www.accordingtothescriptures....rophecies.html

I am not sure what you mean by a "parameter"? Scientific facts are generally determined by a consensus amongst a scientific community when a theory, predicting various scenerios is tested against observed and validated data and judged to be correct or not.

I am not a Bible scholar so it is difficult for me to debate the veracity of the 353 prophecies so I will opt out of that one ..

[Russ]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I think your are deliberately conflating the teaching of Religious Studies where children learn about the faiths of the world without prejudice with being expected to attend & participate in Christian prayer & worship.

I know exactly what I mean and I've made my views on this plain on here for years. You've tried to put words in my mouth and I corrected you. You used the word 'mandated' - not me.

Originally Posted by ianch99

I am surprised you equate a Sky TV salesman with someone who wants to challenge and change your belief system. One wants to change the contents of your bank balance, the other the contents of your head.

You're just fudging the issue now. The point I made was someone knocking on your door trying to get you to buy in to what they're offering - what salesmen and some evangelicals do - is not 'forcing' which is what you described it as. Forcing would be refusing to leave.

Originally Posted by ianch99

From my understanding, *you* have to choose to listen to the guy. If you don't like him, don't buy his book, don't read his articles and don't watch his videos ..

*You* brought him up and cited his book as a source, I countered. Forum discussion 101.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Russ

I know exactly what I mean and I've made my views on this plain on here for years. You've tried to put words in my mouth and I corrected you. You used the word 'mandated' - not me.



You're just fudging the issue now. The point I made was someone knocking on your door trying to get you to buy in to what they're offering - what salesmen and some evangelicals do - is not 'forcing' which is what you described it as. Forcing would be refusing to leave.



*You* brought him up and cited his book as a source, I countered. Forum discussion 101.

Oh dear ...

Let me clarify (again): when I am discussing Religion in school I am talking about the expectation to attend & participate in Christian prayer & worship and not the tutition of Religious Studies. I thought that would have been obvious but I guess not ..

I cited Dawkins as I feel his work was relevant to the discussion. End of ..

Let's agree to disagree as anything I say you seem to object to ..

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I am not sure what you mean by a "parameter"? ..

My interpretation is that he is using 'established facts of science' to base his decision on; that is the parameter he is using.

If they are indeed 'facts', they must be true. If they are established, I guess it means they have been around for a long time.

Given that I'm not in the know about the science community, I'm not sure if that is the case or not.

But what it boils down to is that there are a bunch of scientists who believe in intelligent design and creation and bunch who believe in Evolution. Therefore, if you are looking at it from a scientific perspective, it comes down to which you choose to believe.

As I've said before my belief comes from what the Bible says. What I was trying to do initially was to encourage Christians not to be concerned about proclaiming the Bible view of creation, because contrary to what is generally assumed to be the case, Evolution is not fact. According to that article I quoted, there are increasing numbers of scientists are believing in creation. Evolution is just as much a faith choice as is Creation, And as Christians, we believe we have the final authority on all matters, the Word of God, the Bible.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Isn't religeon just that? You choose to believe there is a God or not, go to church or not, believe in the afterlife or not...

No it isn't, you wouldn't dream of describing someone's sexuality as a lifestyle choice as it's ignorant and crass, attempting to say the same of someone's faith is pretty much the same imo, choosing which coffee shop or bar to drink at is a lifestyle choice and if someone's religion is simply a lifestyle choice it's pretty much worthless imo, but to so many the spirituality they find in their faith means it's a much a part of their make up as any other aspect of their personality.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Oh dear ...

Let me clarify (again): when I am discussing Religion in school I am talking about the expectation to attend & participate in Christian prayer & worship and not the tutition of Religious Studies. I thought that would have been obvious but I guess not ..

I cited Dawkins as I feel his work was relevant to the discussion. End of ..

Let's agree to disagree as anything I say you seem to object to ..

I need to apologise if this came across patronising. I was fustrated when, having tried to explain my points a number of times, my explanations seemed to be ignored in favour of a different interpretation.

---------- Post added at 23:30 ---------- Previous post was at 23:01 ----------

Originally Posted by passingbat

My interpretation is that he is using 'established facts of science' to base his decision on; that is the parameter he is using.

If they are indeed 'facts', they must be true. If they are established, I guess it means they have been around for a long time.

Given that I'm not in the know about the science community, I'm not sure if that is the case or not.

But what it boils down to is that there are a bunch of scientists who believe in intelligent design and creation and bunch who believe in Evolution. Therefore, if you are looking at it from a scientific perspective, it comes down to which you choose to believe.

As I've said before my belief comes from what the Bible says. What I was trying to do initially was to encourage Christians not to be concerned about proclaiming the Bible view of creation, because contrary to what is generally assumed to be the case, Evolution is not fact. According to that article I quoted, there are increasing numbers of scientists are believing in creation. Evolution is just as much a faith choice as is Creation, And as Christians, we believe we have the final authority on all matters, the Word of God, the Bible.

Do you have any links to papers published supporting Creationist science? I am really interested in how they prove their hypothesis.