Evidence for God from Science

Kurieuo Angels appearing in physical form does not actually mean that they are in physical form. It can only infer that they appeared as physical for we know that first and foremost they are spiritual beings. To create a doctrine from this is a stretch born from assumption. -Just saying Also, a phys...

seveneyes, There is a mystery to the nature of the universe and there is a reason that science and the bible seem at odds concerning the timeline, however, God did create the universe and our linear view of time does not hold a candle to what the reality actually is. They are not at odds. Could you...

ANSWER: You know, I do not think that Church will hurt the child at all. The bible is not damaging to children whatsoever. I would say definitely allow church at any age, but you yourself need to find truthful and non contradictory ways to speak to your child on faith issues. One perhaps being that...

Let this be rest for your soul: The doctrine of physical resurrection on the last day that does NOT sit well in your heart because it goes against all of your deepest hopes about life and life after death is in fact NOT the case. The case is that "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has ...

Byblos. No single eyewitness of such things written in the bible ever announced a last day physical resurrection, ever. The teachings over 2,000 years that you speak of came through men who by their carnal logic created a doctrine that did not fit with the scripture. They did the same thing with the...

This is how the bible starts: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the...

One thing that I don't understand and I have never heard spoken about is how the heck a chance, non-intelligent function like adaptation know what adaptations to make. Sure mating with a stronger or faster mate would make stronger offspring, but other adaptations like fish coming out of water. What ...

I had a powerful encounter with God and know for a fact that God created the universe. What I don't quite know is how all of it ties in together with what is seen in science. I know that the link is there, but cant be sure at this moment of what precisely it is. So, while the atheistic doctrine of e...

Seven please correct me if I'm wrong but dont the gnostic books have a poorer historicity than the rest of the new testament? I have also heard this being mentioned by various new testament scholars. I am no expert by any stretch. I just heard that the books were written by other apostles or follow...

See, here's what I'm trying to say: The two views in question are this: That through chance things got to where they are today. That through God things got to where they are today. What has to be proven is not the theory, but the mechanism. Again, science is not about proving things, because provin...

That's nice, but until everything comes together and science legitimately proves God as you think it will, it's not valid to use that in science. That's be like a string theorist writing a paper saying "my presuppositions will be proved pretty soon, so just pretend it works until then." H...

If God is true, it will come to light through quantum physics although it may take a while. God is the author and is absolutely findable through honest study and research. Laws of causality and learning that we are in a finite universe where matter and time both came into existence at some point dir...

What I see from chance evolutionists is this: You cant prove God because science does not have the capability and we will not accept anything except science as proof. As for your irreducible complexity or purpose theories, we can still see a POSSIBILITY that it is not by design, no matter how unlike...

Ivellious, you wrote too much for me to want to respond to all of it. Of course I disagree with most everything that you wrote. Specifically that I must prove God. We have agreed that science cannot prove or disprove God, but that doesn't make either true or false. Anything that I say that points to...

Cool Canuck. Great post. I did assume that a no-design person would not accept what I wrote, but I also did think that was great food for thought in answer to his question. Maybe I am just dense...lol. Simple and complex both work perfectly when coming from the truth. He may deny my stance, but he c...