Evidence for God from Science

Haha, thanks, Phil. If you're going to insist on a title, I'll accept "Your Excellency," unless you really prefer religious titles, in which case, yes, I can settle on "Your Holiness" or perhaps Magnificis Servus. Outside of that, Jac (or just Chris) is fine.

Who said anything about trust? The idea was to give Iran a chance to join the grown-up table to see if they could handle it. Seems they couldn't. And everyone already knew that except you liberal buffoons. So instead you want to help boost the economy of a terrorist sponsoring organization. You lit...

So, yeah, see the headline. Most of y'all probably know that I'm a hospital chaplain. Now add this. I was officially appointed to be the pastor by my DS (district superintendent) about 8pm on January 22. There will be an installation service on March 5. We're a small church, but really, really diver...

Reading theological tomes and ponder the meaning of existence, of course. :eugeek: :shock: :P Seriously, though, I don't get a lot of adult play time. Kinds are seven and three (almost four), so I do a lot of direct entertaining (in your terms). I actually don't referee as much, be that good or bad....

The snake was talking to both adam and eve since he was with her. You can't draw that conclusion. "With" doesn't necessarily mean "in the physical proximity of." The word can certainly mean that, but it also has the idea fellowship or companionship in general. Cf Gen 3:12. And t...

Actually, Adam "is responsible for the sin in the world," not Eve.

I expect, then, if you use this as a model you can see how the same type of reasoning applies to the sin of envy. Nope. How does envy harm oneself? On the contrary, it pushes the person to pursue that certain desire (not necessarily in a bad way... Desire somewhat has a negative connotation). Like,...

The short answer to both is that both are contrary to reason. That is, both take something natural and good (desire for a specific good, namely, food; and a desire for general goods) and corrupt them so that the quest itself is contrary to our nature. Here's the longer answer: Food has a specific pu...

Less of a discussion but I'd start with a question. Suppose his arguments hold water. It seems to me that, at most, he's attacking biblical inerrancy. And more precisely, he's attacking a particular understanding of biblical inerrancy. So how does it follow that if certain events in Scripture did no...

. . . board.

I missed you.

I broadly agree with what you're saying, but with one caveat. You are absolutely right that everything we say about God is analogous. But some things are more analogous than others, which I think you agree with and recognize when you speak of a sort of secod order procession. So it's true, for insta...

The same way Jesus did anything that humans do (e.g., grow, speak, think discursively, learn, sleep, suffer, etc.): by His humanity.

We do need to press this further. in order to engage with people who do not believe the truth is knowable through scripture or other divine inspiration, then only scientific discussion will do. This is the point I repeatedly make. You are saying that for people for whom Scripture isn't sufficient, w...

Firstly, I do not make the claim that only science conveys truth. Of course you did. Here are your own words: Some people do not accept biblical authority at all (and even those who do accept it have different ways of interpreting it anyway), so their engagement with your convictions can only be on...

I did interact with this point too. I said that epistemic scientific reductionism was an appropriate method of enquiry for a discussion attempting to derive evidence of God from Science. And this, and nothing else, is my irritation with you. My point is that scientism (i.e., epistimic scientific re...