Or perhaps like most anti-evoluionists, you're so blinded by your fear that you don't *want* to understand.I just love the way you berate the people who disagree with your conclusions. /s You leave no possibilityforf other explanations, because you accept the dogma of evolutionary "science". Good for you.
Faith is secular, just as it is religious. Understanding the theories of scientists does nothing to confirm the evidence presented. Evey one of the "laws" of science are subject to varieties of interpretations. When the high priests differ on their facts, (you know, the Nobel lauriates, etc) one is scoffed and ridiculed until someone proves it to be wrong. Often, it is mere acceptance of a theory, properly "reasoned" that makes the difference.
I honestly don't know how to "beleive". I do believe in God, and have no problem accepting His CREATION of this universe. It makes a lot more sense than the ramblings of all you "ex-spurts"!
If my God exists, He is able to do anything. He can stop the sun, part the sea, or heal the blind. Natural laws do not apply, except as He allows, or mandates.
If He does not exist, this universe is just an accident. I don't "believe" it is an accident. Do you believe in God?
[Or perhaps like most anti-evoluionists, you're so blinded by your fear that you don't *want* to understand.] I just love the way you berate the people who disagree with your conclusions.
That's not what I was doing in that post. Try reading it again. If you're still unclear afterwards, feel free to ask me and I'll be glad to explain it to you in small words.
Hint: I wasn't talking about "people who disagree with my conclusions", I was talking about people who *misrepresent* my conclusions, and my reasons for them.
And look, here you are doing the same thing:
You leave no possibilityforf other explanations, because you accept the dogma of evolutionary "science".
Utter nonsense. Stop telling lies about me and my motivations, and I'll stop "berating" you for it.
Faith is secular, just as it is religious.
It does not follow, however, that every secular belief is equivalent to "faith". This is the bizarre mistake all too many of the "faithful" make. They think that just because *they* use faith as the basis for their beliefs, that *everyone* does likewise. Horse manure.
Understanding the theories of scientists does nothing to confirm the evidence presented.
Of course not. what *does* confirm the evidence/theories is the results of verification/falsification tests.
Evey one of the "laws" of science are subject to varieties of interpretations.
But then those "varieties of interpretations" are subject to verification/falsication tests in order to determine which of them hold water and which of them are in error.
When the high priests differ on their facts, (you know, the Nobel lauriates, etc) one is scoffed and ridiculed until someone proves it to be wrong.
There you go again -- no one in science are "high priests". You again make the mistake of thinking that everyone sees the world the way a dogmatic theist does. This is false.
Often, it is mere acceptance of a theory, properly "reasoned" that makes the difference.
Wrong again. Try to learn something about science before you make more false claims about it.
I honestly don't know how to "beleive".
Thanks for sharing.
I do believe in God, and have no problem accepting His CREATION of this universe. It makes a lot more sense than the ramblings of all you "ex-spurts"!
Feel free to believe whatever you're able to find sensible.
If my God exists, He is able to do anything. He can stop the sun, part the sea, or heal the blind. Natural laws do not apply, except as He allows, or mandates.
If Superman exists, he is able to fly fast enough to go back in time.
If He does not exist, this universe is just an accident.
That conclusion does not follow from your premise.
I don't "believe" it is an accident.
Neither do I, but probably not in the same way you mean it.