Summations Only

I apologize Percy. I thought my post was on topic, since it was in coffeehouse, and I was anwering Granny Magda who asserted scientitsts have evidence for issues. I was merely pointing out areas where the evidence is lacking, in my opinion, yet posters are denegrinated for posting such things.
As per the complaint of the OP.

My point is that the metaphysical naturalists do not allow for anything but natural. Therefore a faith in nature.
The Methodological naturalists doe allow for faith while learning what nature is and studying and learning from nature. I agree science is only able to test natural means, but it does not have to rule out supernatural means when it cannot explain such issues as I posted, such as the origin of life etc.

There is evidence of natural causes.No one has ever presented any evidence of unnatural or supernatural causes.Until you present evidence of unnatural or supernatural causes equal to the body of evidence of natural causes your position is simply another fantasy and unworthy of consideration.

My point is that metaphysical naturalists, such as Dawkins, do rule out the possibility of supernatural, and therefore must have faith in the natural. You are correct. Sorry about that.

I have never known any christianity that was not based on the idea that the whole bible was absolutely true. Christianity is based on the reality of the death, burial, and resurrection and deity of Christ. Why should anybody believe any of these things to be true? The only reasonable reason to believe any of these things to be true is because they are written in a book that is absolutely truthful and reliable. If genesis is just a collection of myths stolen from other sources and full of supernatural fantasies that the authors knew were false, there is no reason to believe Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. At that point, christianity is in a dust heap and the only people who believe the story are those who believe soley based on the emotionalism of the preacher and the desire to give meanings to their lives. These people are not concerned with giving a logical basis for their beliefs. Most christians I run into are of this stripe. They look at me puzzled for devoting so much of my time and energy to promoting the truth of the genesis creation and flood texts. They say "what does that have to do with preaching the gospel?" Nothing an atheist or scientist can ever say will sway these folks away from their faith. They believe because they need to believe. However, once the hardknocks of live come along, or someone of the christian faith they looked up to lets them down, their faith will come crashing down.The only logical way to be a christian in my opinion is to look at my way: The whole bible is true, including genesis. If this kind of thinking is only a century old, then the vast history of christianity has been practiced on shaky ground.Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.

I didn't say anything about naturalism, but was talking about "Metaphysical naturalism" which by definition rules out all but natural causes for such issues as the origin of life and the origin of the universe. People like Dawkilns who ridicules anyone believing in a supernatural being. Allthough he does it for the money, there is still no excuse for such arrogrance.

That's a very important thing to consider.If you find they are wrong about stuff that is easy to test like the fact that Evolution happened and that the Theory of Evolution can explain the diversity of life we see around us and in the historical record, and that the Biblical flood never happened as described in the Bible stories, can you believe them about their claims about stuff that's not as easy to test?Hopefully, the answer is "Nope!".But that does not mean that you must throw Christianity away, only that you throw away the caricature of Christianity that they try to market.Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

There is physical evidence of natural causes. There is statistical evidence of supernatural causes. There have been studies done on paranormal phenomena and data gathered in the studies show things happening at rates that are beyond the statistical norm. These data cannot be tested in a scientific manner , however, because the causal agents refuse to be tested in that manner.

Without a literal bible, christianity is absolutely worthless. It is merely a behavior modification program that gives its adherents hopes of pie in the sky with no basis whatsoever.

Ah, so please present the evidence of a supernatural cause.Also some evidence of the existence of a "causal agent".

Hi again shadow71, You can't thread a nut on a nail. You may think you can jam one on, but that still does not make the nail a bolt. Science is currently unable to employ supernatural, so it uses the tools available to study what it can. Yet, curiously, many scientists are people of faith, so obviously they have allowed faith in their worldview. Using nature and natural processes to study nature and natural processes, what an amazing concept. Amazingly, the evidence is that many people of faith do not rule out supernatural means while they use nature and natural processes to study nature and natural processes, but instead are focused on what nature and natural processes can tell us about nature and natural processes.Would you not agree that the more we know about nature and natural processes, then the more we know about the created world?Should scientists have to allow for a flat earth or a geocentric earth in order to make room for specific faiths when the evidence clearly shows that these concepts are falsified?Should scientists have to allow for a world wide flood and a young earth in order to make room for specific faiths when the evidence clearly shows that these concepts are falsified?Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : make room?

Yet the vast majority of Christian sects find no need of a literal Bible, particularly since the evidence is that there is isn't even such a thing as "The Bible".Edited by jar, : fix tense for appalin spallin

That would take some time. I don't keep every link that I have read. You do know that studies in psychological phenomena use statistics right? The causal agents are presumed because nothing but an agent with mentality would give different results or no results at all when given the same initial conditions. Paranormal phenomena never follow a predictable pattern, therefore they cannot be tested using the scientific method.

is or isn't?

The Methodists and Congregationalists are two protestant denominations that do not take a literally inerrant view of the Bible. The Catholics are closer to your views, but even they reject a completely inerrant Bible. They believe the world and universe are billions of years old, and that the account of the fall is figurative, not literal, though still believing that it does refer to an event at the dawn of mankind, whenever that was.--Percy