Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 91 (8840 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-28-2018 5:42 AM
234 online now:
Meddle, PaulK (2 members, 232 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Calvin
Post Volume:
Total: 832,644 Year: 7,467/29,783 Month: 1,691/1,708 Week: 94/488 Day: 5/89 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
45
6
78
...
13Next
Author Topic:   Is String Theory Supernatural?
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 76 of 181 (697847)
04-30-2013 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Taq
04-30-2013 4:42 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Taq writes:

How does it inform it?

I already gave you the example that science has shown me that God used an evolutionary process for creation.

Taq writes:

What I find more interesting is that christianity does not seem to inform science.

Science only uses what can be verified through the scientific method. Science might verify some aspects of Christianity but it won't work the other way around.

Taq writes:

The Bible is the claim, not the evidence.

It has many authors but they have a point in writing what they did. The Gospel writers obviously intended to chronicle an account of what happened that they claim to be correct. I agree that it isn't a conclusive argument but it is evidence. They may have gotten it wrong, but maybe they didn't.

Taq writes:

Where in the theory of evolution does it describe how God interacts with the world? What evidence or experiments have demonstrated how this interaction takes place? What experiments have tested the interaction of God with our "hearts and minds"?

I'm starting from the position of being a believing Christian, just as you start from the position of being an atheist. Science gives an account of how we have evolved so I understand that God has interacted with the world in such a way as to be a first cause of the evolutionary process. For you it is, presumably, simply the result of a process with a non-intelligent first cause .

There is no evidence that God interacts through our hearts and minds. It is belief. I know for example that we have a conscience. Is that God speaking to our hearts and minds? I believe that it is whereas you believe that isn't.

I'm just saying that if God is part of a co-existing universe that interlocks in some way with our own that that could be the point of connection between God and our hearts and minds.

We are probably miles off topic here by the way.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Taq, posted 04-30-2013 4:42 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 9:06 AM GDR has responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 77 of 181 (697848)
04-30-2013 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by New Cat's Eye
04-30-2013 5:29 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
C S writes:

But its one of the main tenets of christianity... That kinda screws up the whole "congruent with science" thing.

Not at all. It is a miracle because it only contravenes the natural laws that we experience. When science talks about other dimensions and universes then we have no comprehension of what laws if any might be part of another form of existence.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-30-2013 5:29 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-01-2013 10:09 AM GDR has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7430
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 78 of 181 (697865)
05-01-2013 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by GDR
04-30-2013 7:11 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
I already gave you the example that science has shown me that God used an evolutionary process for creation.

What science informed you that God used evolutionary processes? I am unaware of any scientific study that has shown a deity being part of evolutionary processes.

Science only uses what can be verified through the scientific method. Science might verify some aspects of Christianity but it won't work the other way around.

Why do you immediately assume that some aspects of Christianity are unverifiable? Why immediately assume that the supernatural is unverifiable through scientific means?

It has many authors but they have a point in writing what they did.

It has authors making claims of what they did.

Science gives an account of how we have evolved so I understand that God has interacted with the world in such a way as to be a first cause of the evolutionary process.

What scientific studies have shown that God interacted with the world as a first cause for evolutionary processes?

For you it is, presumably, simply the result of a process with a non-intelligent first cause .

It is the result of whatever the evidence indicates. If there is no evidence then "I don't know" is the correct answer for the time being.

As I stated before, there were atheists before Darwin, and there were after. Right now we do not know how universes are produced, and there are still atheists. We don't know the specifics of how life started on Earth, or how life could start. There are still atheists.

There is no evidence that God interacts through our hearts and minds. It is belief.

Then why try to continually attach science to these beliefs?

I'm just saying that if God is part of a co-existing universe that interlocks in some way with our own that that could be the point of connection between God and our hearts and minds.

And if the world was created by an invisible pink unicorn then ice cream is made of spirits. I can make stuff up, too.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by GDR, posted 04-30-2013 7:11 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 2:47 PM Taq has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 181 (697869)
05-01-2013 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by GDR
04-30-2013 7:14 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
C S writes:

But its one of the main tenets of christianity... That kinda screws up the whole "congruent with science" thing.


Not at all. It is a miracle because it only contravenes the natural laws that we experience.

**sigh**

I don't think you're getting it.

If it contravenes the natural laws that we experience then it is not congruent with science.

quote:
My point is simply that science does not mitigate against Christianity and can be used to inform it.

Uh, scientifically speaking... when people die they don't come back to life 3 days later.

That's why it is called a miracle.

Miracles aren't congruent with science.

That was my point. It is a miracle for that reason.

But its one of the main tenets of christianity... That kinda screws up the whole "congruent with science" thing.

Not at all. It is a miracle because it only contravenes the natural laws that we experience.


lol wut?

When science talks about other dimensions and universes then we have no comprehension of what laws if any might be part of another form of existence.

You could use that on any crazy thing that you want to believe in. Is Puff the magic dragon real? Well we don't know because science talks about other dimensions. Come on now, GDR. We don't really live in the Matrix. There's a real world out there and science has a pretty good handle on it. The miracles that happened in the Bible are not congruent with science. Otherwise, they wouldn't be miracles.

String, and Multiverse, Theory do not give you a wide open hole to pull any old belief out of and call it congruent with science because "there could be anything".

The better point with the congruency with science is that you can use science to better understand some aspects of your faith. But there's no good reason to argue that there are not any aspects of your faith that are not congruent with science. Besides, that just turns god's miracles into cheap parlor tricks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by GDR, posted 04-30-2013 7:14 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 3:14 PM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 162 days)
Posts: 10198
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 80 of 181 (697886)
05-01-2013 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by GDR
04-30-2013 3:23 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Straggler writes:

Do you think physicists are putting forward supernatural explanations to observable phenomena?

GDR writes:

Not at all.

Straggler writes:

Then in what sense are the parallel universes physicists are talking about and the place in which you are suggesting your supernatural god resides congruent?

GDR writes:

If God exists in another universe that is silently interwoven with our own, and if that universe experiences time or change through more than one dimension, then we can gain a better understanding of how what has been taken on faith can be conceived of scientifically.

So the same parallel universes that physicists are suggesting are possible explanations for the gravitational effects of dark matter and suchlike you are citing as the supernatural dwelling place of your god.

The parallel universes physicists are suggesting as possible explanations for observable phenomena are, according to you, supernatural. So, if we follow the logic of your argument, physicists are in fact putting forward supernatural explanations for observable phenomena.

GDR writes:

I’ll go back to that SA headline. “Entire Universe May Be Silently Interwoven With Our Own”

Frankly I think you have seen that headline, gotten very over-excited, and started making all sorts of leaps of logic that are entirely unjustified. I can see how a theist eager to see their beliefs justified might read that headline and think something like “I knew it! The unseen and silently interwoven reality I always theistically knew existed is now being confirmed by scientists”. But are physicists and you talking about remotely similar things? Here is the fuller quote from your article:

quote:
Scientists are increasingly considering the possibility that dark matter, in particular, is not just a contrivance to account for the motion of visible matter but a hidden side of the universe with a rich inner life. It may consist of a veritable zoo of particles interacting through novel forces of nature—an entire universe interwoven silently with our own.

Does it really sound like physicists are talking about heaven here? Or something that is congruent with Jesus resurrection? Or congruent with the notion that some intelligent being in another universe is silently influencing our hearts and minds in some sort of non-physical fashion? Really?

GDR writes:

Do you know if there has been any information back on that project?

This is pretty hot off the press. First results. Nothing conclusive Link

GDR writes:

I believe that God is eternal. On the assumption that I am correct then there is no question of origins as there is in what we experience in a universe with one time dimension and a point where T=0.

How is this different from saying that complex intelligent entities just randomly exist rather than not? I thought one of your key objections to non-theistic origins was “randomness”….? No?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by GDR, posted 04-30-2013 3:23 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 6:22 PM Straggler has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 81 of 181 (697908)
05-01-2013 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Taq
05-01-2013 9:06 AM


Re: What is supernatural?
Taq writes:

What science informed you that God used evolutionary processes? I am unaware of any scientific study that has shown a deity being part of evolutionary processes.

I didn’t claim that. You used a quote out of context. I assumed my belief that we are a creation of God. I am only saying that science is compatible with my Christian faith and in the case of evolution I have learned about the process that I believe God used to bring about life as we know it. I am not claiming that science gives us any objective position on the existence of a deity.

Taq writes:

Why do you immediately assume that some aspects of Christianity are unverifiable? Why immediately assume that the supernatural is unverifiable through scientific means?

I suppose you may want to argue the point but I do assume that science is not going to provide answers as to why we have a sense of morality. I understand the naturalist philosophical argument but that isn`t science.

Taq writes:

It has authors making claims of what they did.

Sure, I’m fine with that.

Taq writes:

What scientific studies have shown that God interacted with the world as a first cause for evolutionary processes?

None

Taq writes:

It is the result of whatever the evidence indicates. If there is no evidence then "I don't know" is the correct answer for the time being.
As I stated before, there were atheists before Darwin, and there were after. Right now we do not know how universes are produced, and there are still atheists. We don't know the specifics of how life started on Earth, or how life could start. There are still atheists.

OK, but we all have our beliefs, whether we know something objectively or not.

Taq writes:

Then why try to continually attach science to these beliefs?

As I’ve said before. My posts have assumed that I am correct in my theistic beliefs. Science itself is agnostic as you pointed out. However, if I am correct, then as science would be the study of what God has created and so it seems to me that science will tell us something about the creator.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 9:06 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 5:03 PM GDR has responded

    
Straggler
Member (Idle past 162 days)
Posts: 10198
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 82 of 181 (697910)
05-01-2013 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by 1.61803
04-30-2013 11:43 AM


Re: The limit of size
As I said previously:

The challenge that remains for string theorists is to come up with some predictions that are experimentally verifiable.

But to just say "strings are too small to detect" is to completely miss the point of how most conclusions in science are actually drawn. The logical consequences (aka predictions) of string theory being correct could manifest at all sorts of size levels from the cosmological to the Planck.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by 1.61803, posted 04-30-2013 11:43 AM 1.61803 has acknowledged this reply

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 83 of 181 (697919)
05-01-2013 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by New Cat's Eye
05-01-2013 10:09 AM


Re: What is supernatural?
C S writes:

The better point with the congruency with science is that you can use science to better understand some aspects of your faith. But there's no good reason to argue that there are not any aspects of your faith that are not congruent with science. Besides, that just turns god's miracles into cheap parlor tricks.

Thank you. That is what I have been trying to say and obviously not doing much of a job of it.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-01-2013 10:09 AM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7430
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 84 of 181 (697929)
05-01-2013 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by GDR
05-01-2013 2:47 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
I didn’t claim that. You used a quote out of context. I assumed my belief that we are a creation of God. I am only saying that science is compatible with my Christian faith and in the case of evolution I have learned about the process that I believe God used to bring about life as we know it. I am not claiming that science gives us any objective position on the existence of a deity.

Why bring science into it at all? Why not just say, "These are my beliefs, and I have no evidence for them." I just don't see how unevidenced beliefs are compatible with science.

OK, but we all have our beliefs, whether we know something objectively or not.

I agree. I, as an atheist, have beliefs. For example, I believe that helping out my fellow human beings is a worthy cause and worth my time. I believe that Delta Blues is far better than Chicago Blues. I believe that desert landscapes are extremely beautiful. However, at no time do I feel the need to say that my beliefs are compatible with science. That's the part that I don't get.

My posts have assumed that I am correct in my theistic beliefs. Science itself is agnostic as you pointed out. However, if I am correct, then as science would be the study of what God has created and so it seems to me that science will tell us something about the creator.

Why bring science into it at all? It starts with unevidenced beliefs, does not touch anything that can be considered evidence, and then ends on unevidenced beliefs. It reads to me like an attempt to add legitimacy to your beliefs where none exists.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 2:47 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 6:40 PM Taq has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 85 of 181 (697932)
05-01-2013 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Straggler
05-01-2013 12:20 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Straggler writes:

So the same parallel universes that physicists are suggesting are possible explanations for the gravitational effects of dark matter and suchlike you are citing as the supernatural dwelling place of your god.

The parallel universes physicists are suggesting as possible explanations for observable phenomena are, according to you, supernatural. So, if we follow the logic of your argument, physicists are in fact putting forward supernatural explanations for observable phenomena.

I don’t intend to go that far. The point is that Christianity has had the position that God is ever-present and interacts with this world. Science is now talking about the existence of other universes, that we are unable to perceive directly, and that influence our existence. I realize that what scientists are looking at is by no means theistic nor even close to what I’m suggesting. However, as a Christian it gives me a concept of heaven that frankly one isn’t likely to get from reading the Bible. Certainly this view is dependent on my pre-existing beliefs, but we all have those.

Straggler writes:

Does it really sound like physicists are talking about heaven here? Or something that is congruent with Jesus resurrection? Or congruent with the notion that some intelligent being in another universe is silently influencing our hearts and minds in some sort of non-physical fashion? Really?

In the article they have a part headed by “IN BRIEF” which is a synopsis of the article. It says this:

quote:
Scientists have two independent reasons for thinking that the cosmos is filled with some unknown form of matter, dark matter. Not only do stars, galaxies and gas clouds move as if they are being tugged by the gravity of hidden material, but processes such as radioactivity present puzzles that can be solved by the existence of hitherto unknown particles. Dark matter is usually assumed to consist of WIMP’s, a kind of particle that scarcely interacts with the visible world. Boringness is its sine qua non.

Or at least that is the usual assumption. Might dark matter in fact have a rich inner life? Particle physicists striving to understand what makes up dark matter think it could interact through a full range of forces, including a form of light to which our eyes are totally blind.


Now I realize that when it talks about a “deep inner life” it is talking about particle life. (Mind you our bodies are nothing but particles.) But when it talks about a form of light which are unable to perceive then it goes to show that there is a lot that we don’t know about it.

Here is another wild speculation that will again lead me wide open to attack and ridicule. (Fortunately I have broad shoulders, unfortunately I’m only speaking figuratively.) Here is a wiki article on The Hard Problem of Consciousness It seems to me that it is conceivable that it is our consciousness which is the point at which we interlock with some part of the 95.5% of the universe that we don’t perceive.

Straggler writes:

How is this different from saying that complex intelligent entities just randomly exist rather than not? I thought one of your key objections to non-theistic origins was “randomness”….? No?

I’m not sure how you draw that from what I said. There is certainly a great deal of randomness in our existence. I made the choice about who I was going to mate with. There certainly appears to be considerable randomness in evolution yet we have wound up with an existence that despite all the apparent obstacles continues to flourish.

I also think that we can look at randomness even in terms of the evolution of our morality. That Robert Wright book, The Evolution of God that we both appreciated was instrumental in forming my thinking of how God interacts with us. The title in one way says it all. Our morality, which as a Christian I see as the working of God in our hearts, is an evolutionary process itself and it is essentially random. If we are born of moral parents then we are more likely to become moral people ourselves and so on through the generations. Also as moral people interact with less moral people they can influence them and of course the opposite is true as well. However if I am right about God then, we should suspect that in spite of all that randomness in the process, mankind should slowly and irregularly grow to be more moral. Certainly there are huge inconsistencies but I contend that it is a more moral world now than it was 2000 years ago.

That was a long way of saying that I don’t really have a problem with randomness.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Straggler, posted 05-01-2013 12:20 PM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Straggler, posted 05-02-2013 8:06 PM GDR has responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 86 of 181 (697933)
05-01-2013 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Taq
05-01-2013 5:03 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Taq writes:

Why bring science into it at all? Why not just say, "These are my beliefs, and I have no evidence for them." I just don't see how unevidenced beliefs are compatible with science.

Why bring science into it at all? It starts with unevidenced beliefs, does not touch anything that can be considered evidence, and then ends on unevidenced beliefs. It reads to me like an attempt to add legitimacy to your beliefs where none exists.

Well I don’t agree that my beliefs are unevidenced. We exist which is evidence of something. There are claims made by the writers of the Bible as well as other books about our origins. Those books are evidence and we come to our own beliefs of what to believe about the various claims.

Science is one way of helping us form those beliefs. If I understand the Bible as a science text dictated by God then I will have a very different take on our origins than I will if I accept the scientific account. Science, history and philosophy have very much helped from my beliefs.

Do you believe that your atheism is compatible with science? If you say yes I wouldn’t disagree. Presumably as you learn more your views change and one of the things that we can learn more about is science. I am quite prepared to have science changed my views. I, like everyone else am just trying to sort out truth, or as close as I can get to it.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 5:03 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 6:54 PM GDR has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7430
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 87 of 181 (697934)
05-01-2013 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by GDR
05-01-2013 6:40 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Well I don’t agree that my beliefs are unevidenced.

This constant vassilation between evidence for God and God can never be evidenced is a bit much.

There are claims made by the writers of the Bible as well as other books about our origins. Those books are evidence and we come to our own beliefs of what to believe about the various claims.

They are evidence that people can write down stories. That is not what we are talking about.

If I understand the Bible as a science text dictated by God then I will have a very different take on our origins than I will if I accept the scientific account.

I am unaware of a scientific account by which God has dictated anything. Again, you are trying to cozy your beliefs up next to science in the hopes that the legitimacy of science will rub off onto your beliefs. Doesn't work that way.

Do you believe that your atheism is compatible with science?

My atheism has nothing to do with science. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. That's it. Science has to do with a methodical process of determining how the the universe works. Two different things. There were atheists before modern science existed, before we understood the things we now understand.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 6:40 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 7:09 PM Taq has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 88 of 181 (697936)
05-01-2013 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Taq
05-01-2013 6:54 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Taq writes:

I am unaware of a scientific account by which God has dictated anything. Again, you are trying to cozy your beliefs up next to science in the hopes that the legitimacy of science will rub off onto your beliefs. Doesn't work that way.

As I have said before I am assuming that my theistic beliefs are accurate. I am not using science to legitimize my beliefs, I am using science to help form them.

Taq writes:

My atheism has nothing to do with science. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. That's it. Science has to do with a methodical process of determining how the the universe works. Two different things. There were atheists before modern science existed, before we understood the things we now understand.

Sure. I get that. However you don't find anything in science that causes you to disbelieve your atheism. I don't find anything in science that causes me to disbelieve my theism.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 6:54 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 7:12 PM GDR has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7430
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 89 of 181 (697937)
05-01-2013 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by GDR
05-01-2013 7:09 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
I am not using science to legitimize my beliefs, I am using science to help form them.

So what scientific studies have demonstrated that God dictated what is found in the Bible?

Sure. I get that. However you don't find anything in science that causes you to disbelieve your atheism.

Nor do I find anything in a Mary Kay brochure that makes me doubt my atheism, but I don't go around saying that my atheism is compatible with Mary Kay products.

So why science? Why do you feel the need to compare your beliefs to science?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 7:09 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by GDR, posted 05-01-2013 8:06 PM Taq has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4414
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 90 of 181 (697940)
05-01-2013 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Taq
05-01-2013 7:12 PM


Re: What is supernatural?
Taq writes:

So what scientific studies have demonstrated that God dictated what is found in the Bible?

None. For that matter I don't believe God dictated the Bible. Good grief, I have had enough arguments with Faith and others on that point.

Taq writes:

So why science? Why do you feel the need to compare your beliefs to science?

Because I believe that science can tell us a great deal about the world.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Taq, posted 05-01-2013 7:12 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Taq, posted 05-02-2013 11:18 AM GDR has responded

    
Prev1
...
45
6
78
...
13Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018