I will scientifically prove the existence of God to you

[Hans Blaster]

It was the thinking of the ancient world, Hans. Obviously, scientific reductionists and those adhering to scientism think that Occam solved the problem.

The people I was speaking of do live in the ancient world. William of Occam is too modern for them.

 

[AV1611VET]

I tend to think that accepting anything without evidence leans heavily towards insanity,

Including such things as love?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Speaking of applying science, what do you think when academians expect us to come up with physical evidence of an act of creatio ex nihilo?

Or, put another way, want physical evidence of a miracle?

Speaking of... I don't really care.

 

[AV1611VET]

Speaking of... I don't really care.

How convenient.

It keeps them from asking you for evidence, doesn't it?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

How convenient.

It keeps them from asking you for evidence, doesn't it?

I'm not the one making claims.

 

[Discussion]

My Boolean Standards: *

1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own

Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted.

* I'd hate to disappoint Warden.

What do you mean by contradicting the bible though? Under a completely literal interpretation?

 

[Discussion]

Just so you know, from AI Overview:

The law of supply and demand is a fundamental principle in economics that describes how prices are determined in a market.

Economics is a social science ...

I didn't say anything about science I jusst pointed out that when you said the law of supply and demand was a principle of academics its not its an economic rule which sure is a social science but what are you getting at?

 

[Discussion]

Speaking of applying science, what do you think when academians expect us to come up with physical evidence of an act of creatio ex nihilo?

Or, put another way, want physical evidence of a miracle?

Science expects to explain everything it is able to rather than making things up. What do you even mean by "academians" anyway? I don't know any science that claims "an act of creatio ex nihilo" in fact a law of science (first law of thermodynamics) is "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another." directly contradicting the idea of "an act of creatio ex nihilo".

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm not the one making claims.

I know.

You don't care enough to make any.

And I suspect it's because you fear having to go through what I go through.

But I'm not afraid.

And it's because I have [boolean] standards I adhere to.

And again, I suspect your standards are the same as your inquisitors; viz. the scientific method.

Correct me if I'm wrong please.

(Either that, or just say NO, like you're wont to do at times.)

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I didn't say anything about science I jusst pointed out that when you said the law of supply and demand was a principle of academics its not its an economic rule which sure is a social science but what are you getting at?

AV has a very... all encompassing view of what science is. Very all or nothing.

 

[dlamberth]

You're pretty new so here's the rundown on AV's 'logic': anything related to his twisted personal view of academia, i.e. anything that runs counter to his own personal and very strange interpretation of the Bible = BAD.

I also put 'logic' in quotes because he has no logic whatsoever for what he says. Just wait until he brings up thalidomide, the Challenger disaster, the L'Aquila earthquake, the Titanic disaster and the Hindedenburg disaster as his 'proofs' about 'academia' and 'scientists' being at fault for anything and everything.

And that's just the beginning.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I know.

You don't care enough to make any.

And I suspect it's because you fear having to go through what I go through.

But I'm not afraid.

And it's because I have [boolean] standards I adhere to.

And again, I suspect your standards are the same as your inquisitors; viz. the scientific method.

Correct me if I'm wrong please.

(Either that, or just say NO, like you're wont to do at times.)

... You're entirely wrong.

 

[Discussion]

Including such things as love?

Depends on what you mean by love, but I would argue that we can observe the effects of love on things and thus prove that it exists (repeatedly). The reason this differs from God's existance by viewing the works of Christians is that it proves that people believe in God is a true fact just as it can be proven people feel love but it doesn't say anything about whether God exists.

 

[AV1611VET]

What do you mean by contradicting the bible though? Under a completely literal interpretation?

Do you agree that the order of appearance of the universe is not even close to the order of appearance of the universe as lined out in Genesis 1?

QV my creationism test that I made up:

1. Define Embedded Age.
2. Explain the difference between creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex materia; and give two examples of each.
3. Why is "heaven" singular in Genesis 1, but plural in Genesis 2?
4. Eden in the Bible is known as __________ on a secular map.
5. Put the following in order that they appeared in the universe: whales, stars, trees, sun, land, sea, outer space.
6. What day was Adam created on?
7. Was the universe created a closed system and, if not, what kind of energy did it run off of? if it was created open, what closed it?
8. Describe terra aqua and what kind of water it consisted of and why.
9. Photosynthesis required light from the sun prior to the Fall. true or false?
10. Explain how a 24-hour day could transpire before the sun was created.
11. Explain the difference between "miracles" and "magic."
12. What literary device reconciles Genesis 1 and Genesis 2?
13. When discussing Creationism, why should one never let himself stray from Genesis 1 or 2?
14. What was the first object in the universe that had mass?

 

[Discussion]

I know.

You don't care enough to make any.

And I suspect it's because you fear having to go through what I go through.

But I'm not afraid.

And it's because I have [boolean] standards I adhere to.

And again, I suspect your standards are the same as your inquisitors; viz. the scientific method.

Correct me if I'm wrong please.

(Either that, or just say NO, like you're wont to do at times.)

I'm sure they do make claims, just not about what they don't know. Such as how it would be foolish of me to guess your height and assert that it must be right and that anyone who says they don't know what your height is is afraid and won't make claims.

 

[Discussion]

Do you agree that the order of appearance of the universe is not even close to the order of appearance of the universe as lined out in Genesis 1?

QV my creationism test that I made up:

1. Define Embedded Age.
2. Explain the difference between creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex materia; and give two examples of each.
3. Why is "heaven" singular in Genesis 1, but plural in Genesis 2?
4. Eden in the Bible is known as __________ on a secular map.
5. Put the following in order that they appeared in the universe: whales, stars, trees, sun, land, sea, outer space.
6. What day was Adam created on?
7. Was the universe created a closed system and, if not, what kind of energy did it run off of? if it was created open, what closed it?
8. Describe terra aqua and what kind of water it consisted of and why.
9. Photosynthesis required light from the sun prior to the Fall. true or false?
10. Explain how a 24-hour day could transpire before the sun was created.
11. Explain the difference between "miracles" and "magic."
12. What literary device reconciles Genesis 1 and Genesis 2?
13. When discussing Creationism, why should one never let himself stray from Genesis 1 or 2?
14. What was the first object in the universe that had mass?

Sorry what are you asking here? No I'm not a young earth creationist, are you?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Sorry what are you asking here? No I'm not a young earth creationist, are you?

Oh, he is.

 

[dlamberth]

Including such things as love?

I experience Love. Even Love that made me go crazy over the women I married. So I know Love exist.

 

[dlamberth]

Sorry what are you asking here? No I'm not a young earth creationist, are you?

Now you are in for a treat.

 

[AV1611VET]

Science expects to explain everything it is able to rather than making things up.

Show me science in Genesis 1.

What do you even mean by "academians" anyway?

Educated people.

I don't know any science that claims "an act of creatio ex nihilo" ...

Neither do I.

... in fact a law of science (first law of thermodynamics) is "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another." directly contradicting the idea of "an act of creatio ex nihilo".

As I'm fond of pointing out:

God created the universe over a six-day period, by a series of miracles that raised the level of mass/energy in it from zero to what it is today.