Value of the human life.

[Confused]

The question for this thread is quite simple to ask, though may not be so simple to answer.

Is there anything that can be found in scripture, the teachings of Christ or the teachings that preceded Him, that gives value to human life on earth? Is there anything to indicate that God gives value to human life?

[McCulloch]

Then I consider this sub forum is nothing better than a pulpit.

Then this is the same for a sub forum that is based on science. So it is the same thing.

No it is not the same thing. There is no special protection for any particular source of evidence required in the science and religion forum. Any kind of evidence is allowed and all evidence can be challenged.

Also the bible does not need any protection, from any discoveries from science, if it did, I would not consider the bible true.

If you really believed that, then you should feel free to debate the truth of the bible in the apologetics or the science subforums, where objective evidence and logical support are required.

[dunsapy]

No it is not the same thing. There is no special protection for any particular source of evidence required in the science and religion forum. Any kind of evidence is allowed and all evidence can be challenged.

OK
But actually , I do think science has learned and knows a lot of things. Even about the fossil record and archeology, history, biology etc. Really all the sciences.
It's just when it comes to , this subject, I think that science is determined to find a result, that has been predetermined, in their minds. I think also that is why they have had so much problem with proof in this area.
It's one thing to find bones, but it's another to put an interpretation , on those same bones. There have been fraud , there has been changes in thinking of what bones have represented. many of this ' missing link ' type of discoveries, have after scrutiny, have been shown other wise. So I think it is better to wait to see what happens.
Science really needs to show that life could start on it's own ( no creator) and that evolution can actually happen. In the real world. Or find life on some other planet.

[bernee51]

Then I consider this sub forum is nothing better than a pulpit.

Then this is the same for a sub forum that is based on science. So it is the same thing.

No it is not the same thing. There is no special protection for any particular source of evidence required in the science and religion forum. Any kind of evidence is allowed and all evidence can be challenged.

Also the bible does not need any protection, from any discoveries from science, if it did, I would not consider the bible true.

If you really believed that, then you should feel free to debate the truth of the bible in the apologetics or the science subforums, where objective evidence and logical support are required.

It would appear that Dunsapy posting why he believes the bible to be true and claiming inviolability in this sub-forum is not in the spirt of the expressed purpose of this sub-forum

The purpose is to discuss theology, doctrine and dogma.

Claiming the bible cannot be brought into question for its outrageous claims because 'here' it is not necessary to defend its authority is a IMO a dishonest, if not cowardly, tactic.

[bernee51]

No it is not the same thing. There is no special protection for any particular source of evidence required in the science and religion forum. Any kind of evidence is allowed and all evidence can be challenged.

OK
But actually , I do think science has learned and knows a lot of things. Even about the fossil record and archeology, history, biology etc. Really all the sciences.
It's just when it comes to , this subject, I think that science is determined to find a result, that has been predetermined, in their minds.

And, of course, your mind is open.

There is no 'predetermined' beliefs on your part is there?

I think also that is why they have had so much problem with proof in this area.
It's one thing to find bones, but it's another to put an interpretation , on those same bones.

Like they all got washed there - neatly - in layers - in some flood

There have been fraud ,...

Yep - the bible has been redacted, changed, selectively based on what the early church wanted it to say.

That is fraud.

...there has been changes in thinking of what bones have represented. many of this ' missing link ' type of discoveries, have after scrutiny, have been shown other wise.

That is right - science proved itslf to be in error,\.

When was the last time the bible did that.

It is NOT self falsifying therefore it is NOT worth anyhting as evidence.

So I think it is better to wait to see what happens.

Which is EXACTLY what you are not doing.

Science really needs to show that life could start on it's own ( no creator) and that evolution can actually happen. In the real world. Or find life on some other planet.

And you need to show that the ONLY option is a god - otherwise you are in fallacy and merely expressing belief in the way things are - not HOW things are.

[byofrcs]

Alfred Rehwinkel wrote abook on :
The Flood: in the Light of the Bible, Geology, and Archaeology

As for creditability, who is really credible? Just because your a scientist, does not necessarily make you credible. Because you happen to agree with most scientists, does not make you credible. ( they have been indoctrinated, by the school system to think a certain way.) And be prepared to lose all creditability, if you deviate from that.
McCulloch is going to kick my butt, for getting into science stuff again.
And the bible is considered true in this forum.

But you are misunderstanding something about truth. True does not mean true for all possible worlds i.e. the forum rules did not specify that the Bible was completely full of necessarily true propositions it only said that,

basic assumption that the Bible can be used as a primary reference without the need to defend its authority. Responses to topics with "but first you have to prove that the Bible is true" is not allowed here.

(my bold) and so this is saying that the Bible is canonical. In the world of fiction e.g. Star Trek then the concept of what is canonical is very important to establishing what is true because it effectively means that what is written is true for that world e.g. it is True in the Stat Trek universe that there are Tribbles. This does not necessarily mean that this is true in the real universe or in the Stargate universe. I cannot ask that someone prove that the Tribbles are true because what a canonical work says is true.


Anyway moving on.....

He wrote a book but plate tectonics had only just started. I'm sorry but the poor guy got obsoleted. It happens.

That you try and cast doubts on the rest of the world because you seem attached to this dead-end author is your problem.

That you now try and say that everyone else is not creditable suggests you are trying to resolve a cognitive dissonance.

It is easy to resolve - bin Rehwinkel and adopt modern geology which has plate tectonics in it.

If you think that plate tectonics is wrong then you are a minority because as a theory it is well supported.

[dunsapy]

He wrote a book but plate tectonics had only just started. I'm sorry but the poor guy got obsoleted. It happens.

That you try and cast doubts on the rest of the world because you seem attached to this dead-end author is your problem.

That you now try and say that everyone else is not creditable suggests you are trying to resolve a cognitive dissonance.

It is easy to resolve - bin Rehwinkel and adopt modern geology which has plate tectonics in it.

If you think that plate tectonics is wrong then you are a minority because as a theory it is well supported.

We have a system that Satan is the ruler of. His purpose is to mislead. Anyone that , supports creation including scientists, are not going to have it easy. Because the majority follow the dogma. If the majority were right, then why can they not prove, that life started on it's own, or any real evidence ( in the real world) of evolution. You would think that this proof would be all over the place. Or at least intelligence could replicate mere chance.
As for plate tectonics, 50 years from now they may make corrections to what they know now. Because if it was out of date 50 years ago , what is known now could be out of date 50 years from now.
If you watch or listen to scientist on this global warming crisis we have, they are constantly say they didn't realize this or, that was a real surprise to us. These are not people that have a handle , on what really going on. They will look back 50 years from now ( if everything is still going), and have a much better idea of what was going on now. These are the same people that went to Mars to look for life.
50 or so years ago science did not know anything about DNA. So anyone that listened to science then , was following the blind. What other surprises are in store for science?
It's not that science is not learning, and improving, and gathering more information all the time, it's just that there is no final answer, or understanding of what this world is all about.
The bible on the other hand when it was written, the words were frozen at that time. And yet it is relevant for our day. It know about our time. prophecies come true. It can be relied on. Science is not like that. Theories are not facts, or a sure thing. If science finds out that life cannot start on it's own, then the whole evolution thing is nothing more than fantasy stories. With DNA that gives usable instructions, to make a life , science is going to have to show with out interfering ( no lab experiment) that the dust of the ground can do that. I think a Harley showing up in my driveway by itself, a 1000 time over, before a dust mite , just happens.
Abiogenesis is a step closer to creation than other theories, science has no choice, it has to go in this direction. But I see science fighting it the whole way, until there is nothing left to do but admit it. They will have to hit rock bottom, first. ( oops sorry for the bad joke)

[bernee51]

We have a system that Satan is the ruler of.

No – there is no ‘system’ there is the physiological, the biological, the noological and the spiritual – it is dynamic and evolving.

His purpose is to mislead.

We are deluded by the belief in a sense of separate self.

Anyone that , supports creation including scientists, are not going to have it easy. Because the majority follow the dogma. If the majority were right, then why can they not prove, that life started on it's own, or any real evidence ( in the real world) of evolution. You would think that this proof would be all over the place. Or at least intelligence could replicate mere chance.
As for plate tectonics, 50 years from now they may make corrections to what they know now. Because if it was out of date 50 years ago , what is known now could be out of date 50 years from now.
If you watch or listen to scientist on this global warming crisis we have, they are constantly say they didn't realize this or, that was a real surprise to us. These are not people that have a handle , on what really going on. They will look back 50 years from now ( if everything is still going), and have a much better idea of what was going on now. These are the same people that went to Mars to look for life.
50 or so years ago science did not know anything about DNA. So anyone that listened to science then , was following the blind. What other surprises are in store for science?

And you have no understanding of the nature of science or you are deliberately and dishonestly misrepresenting it.

It's not that science is not learning, and improving, and gathering more information all the time, it's just that there is no final answer, or understanding of what this world is all about.

That is correct – truth is a pathless land. Truth is not a destination it is a journey.

The bible on the other hand when it was written, the words were frozen at that time. And yet it is relevant for our day.

Just as the Vedas, the Bhagavad Gita, the writings of Confucius, the Dhammapada, Plato’s Republic, the writings of Epicurus, Plotinus and many others are relevant to out times.

It know about our time. prophecies come true.

Bulls**t.

Theories are not facts, or a sure thing.

Like your theory that god created the universe.

Which I note you have not defended in the thread I started. Could it be that you do not feel safe outside of your comfort zone of this sub-forum where mythical writings cannot be challenged.

. I think a Harley showing up in my driveway by itself, a 1000 time over, before a dust mite , just happens.

Blah blah blah.

Enough of these ridiculous scenarios of Harley’s appearing in your driveway.

Abiogenesis is a step closer to creation than other theories, science has no choice, it has to go in this direction. But I see science fighting it the whole way, until there is nothing left to do but admit it. They will have to hit rock bottom, first. ( oops sorry for the bad joke)

Exactly – a bad (sad) joke.

[dunsapy]

Enough of these ridiculous scenarios of Harley’s appearing in your driveway.

Well it's got to be a lot easier than, a cat appearing.

[bernee51]

Enough of these ridiculous scenarios of Harley’s appearing in your driveway.

Well it's got to be a lot easier than, a cat appearing.

Perhaps the cat can support the theory that god created the universe - I have not seen support coming form anywhere else.

Or perhaps god, like Biker, rides a softtail.

[dunsapy]

Perhaps the cat can support the theory that god created the universe - I have not seen support coming form anywhere else.

Or perhaps god, like Biker, rides a softtail.

Yah maybe.

the creation itself is the proof, of a creator.
Just like a Harley softtail, is proof of a creator.