Is Intelligent Design a Bad Scientific Theory or a Non-Scientific Theory?

Tech Central Station ^ | 11/10/2005 | Uriah Kriegel

[xzins]

prove that Jesus resurrected...

Fine.

The first step is that you truly from your heart confess Him as your Lord and Savior, and you will be born again. Upon your repentance and baptism into His body of believers He will begin the process of revealing Himself to you.

[connectthedots]

You might also consider the historical fact that all of history is now idexed and measured from the birth of Jesus Christ.

Obviously, there was something very special about Jesus if even secular historians uniformly use his birth as the reference point of all of history.

Can any reasonable person realy believe there was nothing special about such a person? It's not like he was the the first person to be crucified.

If the resurrection of Christ is not true, why would his disciples hide in fear after his crucifiction and then speak boldly and then suffer horrible deaths. Would anyone do that for a lie? No reasonable man could possibly think so; especially when it was all of them.

[Alamo-Girl]

The first step is that you truly from your heart confess Him as your Lord and Savior, and you will be born again. Upon your repentance and baptism into His body of believers He will begin the process of revealing Himself to you.

So very, very true and beautifully said!

[P-Marlowe]

The first step is that you truly from your heart confess Him as your Lord and Savior, and you will be born again. Upon your repentance and baptism into His body of believers He will begin the process of revealing Himself to you.

[r9etb]

Can you prove the nonexistence of god? Is very any possible proof to do that?

The question in play is whether one can make a general statement about the impossibility of proving a negative. The answer to that claim is "no." (Because one can produce examples where a negative statement can in fact be proved, as in math, the general claim is demonstrably untrue.)

This is not to say that one can always prove a negative -- I'm perfectly happy to accept that there are cases where one cannot do so. The problem comes when one tries to make a general claim.

That being the case, then any particular statement must be addressed on its own terms. The question of proving the non-existence of God ... I have no idea what the form of such a proof might take. (Actually, I rather doubt it is possible to find one, having decided based on my own experience and obvservation that He does exist.)

[r9etb]

Are you that thick?

Is it "thick" to point out that it is unnecessary to attempt to prove statements that are already refuted? Gosh ... I must be thick, then.

[highball]

Upon your repentance and baptism into His body of believers He will begin the process of revealing Himself to you.

That's what I thought you'd say - emotional evidence is the only kind you can offer.

I'm sure that the followes of Mohammed have the same certainty within themselves that Allah is the One True God.

[furball4paws]

I didn't believe it possible, but it is. You are that thick.

The White Crow Fallacy is not about the existence of White Crows.

[Stark_GOP]

"I'm just curious why people receive eternal damnation for disbelieving the six days of creation, but remain blissfully ignorant of the rules for acquiring and beating their slaves."
---
Not believing in a literal six days of creation will not send you to Hell, and believing in a literal six days of creation will not get you to Heaven.

The problem is that we cannot keep God's law. No one is perfect including me. God doesn't send anyone to Hell; we send ourselves by sinning (breaking His law).

The good news is that He has made a way for us to go to His heaven. Jesus did all the work for us.

p.s. I'm still working on an answer to your previous post. I don't have all the answers but I'm trying to find them.

[r9etb]

The White Crow Fallacy is not about the existence of White Crows

Gasp!!! I actually understood that before you so kindly elucidated. Golly. I must not be that thick after all!

Of course, the name itself is suggestive -- it banks on the supposed scarcity of White Crows, and the related difficulty of proving that the statement of non-existence is true.

I posted the picture to make an ancillary point; namely, that there is no need to continue trying to prove the truth of a statement that has already been shown to be false.

I'm guessing that you're not too thick to understand that.

[js1138]

I wish you luck. I personally think moral thinking evolves.

I also think evolution is not the same as progress. So it is possible for moral thinking to improve at times and regress at time. The current thinking about slavery is, I think, and example of improvement over time.

[Alamo-Girl]

Buuuump!

[highball]

I also think evolution is not the same as progress.

You're absolutely right - there is this misconception that evolution means "always getting better."

We see the opposite in action in Asia right now with a certain elephant population. Elephants born without tusks have a harder time foraging for food, but as hunters kill elephants for their tusks the tuskless ones live and pass on their genes in greater numbers. In this case, the elephant population is evolving into a "lesser" version due to predation.

[js1138]

I also think evolution is not the same as progress. So it is possible for moral thinking to improve at times and regress at time. The current thinking about slavery is, I think, and example of improvement over time.

My spelling seems to be evolving. I note that this post passes right through the spell checker.

[Stark_GOP]

I wish you luck. I personally think moral thinking evolves.

I also think evolution is not the same as progress. So it is possible for moral thinking to improve at times and regress at time. The current thinking about slavery is, I think, and example of improvement over time.
---
Thank you.
We must be in a state of regress.
Yes, in the United States, slavery has been outlawed, but it is all to prevalent around the globe.

[Stark_GOP]

"We see the opposite in action in Asia right now with a certain elephant population. Elephants born without tusks have a harder time foraging for food, but as hunters kill elephants for their tusks the tuskless ones live and pass on their genes in greater numbers. In this case, the elephant population is evolving into a "lesser" version due to predation."
---
But isn't everything suppose to get bigger and better.
Yeah know...like the famous picture of the horses. And the one of man starting with the creepy neighbor down the street and ending with the GQ guy without a Brooks Brothers suit.

[highball]

But isn't everything suppose to get bigger and better.

Only in marketing brochures and creationist myths about evolution.

[Stark_GOP]

Very good. It made this Bible thumping, Fundamentalist, young earther, creationist wacko smile.

[highball]

Well, smiling is a good first step. ;-)

[xzins]

It's not emotional.

It's objective.

Those are the steps He gave. Follow them.

Think about it. We are saying that a dead man rose again and stayed that way. That means He's alive according to us, doesn't it?

It is as if I told you that treasure is buried in a local field. How would you prove that I'm telling the truth?

Lot's of circumstantial things might point to the truth. Perhaps I'm known as an honest man. Perhaps I've been seen spending more than I should really have. Maybe those who are my friends have all been sporting fancy garments and big cars.

But, for you, the ultimate proof is digging up the field, isn't it?

Some would "sell everything that they have and buy that field."