HugATree

Do you not see what you're saying? You're abandoning the nature of truth. I'm not abandoning the "nature of truth", science is a reliable method when it comes to understanding this truth; new evidence is taken into account and studied. Given its acceptence of new discoveries, theres going to be nothing better than it when it comes to explaining the universe.

Thats kind of the point; if it didn't change it wouldn't be science, just some primitive explanations hundreds of years later that no longer matches the evidence.

Foreknowledge is knowledge of future events. If the future is already known there is no altering the future, the choices are already predetermined with the illusion of free will. Yea, burning in hell because you followed the wrong teachings is a real win.

How does it differ from destiny:- an event (or a course of events) that will inevitably happen in the future?

You're mixing two different ideas. Just because God knows what's going to happen, doesn't DISCOUNT the idea that you are still choosing. He might know what choices you are going to make, but you are still making the choices. His knowledge doesn't determine destiny, it's only the knowledge of what will happen. Which means exactly that, predetermined destiny with the illusion of freewill; you're describing the knowledge of the future while at the same time saying people can still change the future.

How do you tell if they were made about Jesus? Matthew claimed Isaiah 7:14 predicted Jesus, reading Isaiah that doesn't make sense because you find out it was a sign to Ahaz. Matthew did what many accuse non-believers of doing, taking a verse out of context.

Mind showing us this proof, and not circular reasoning? Where are their names and own recorded accounts? Not all of them applied to Jesus, in the NT the apostles would retro-fit them. Isaiah 7:14 was to Ahaz, what good would Jesus do when Ahaz had been dead for hundreds of years?

That's what I'm saying. He could be responsible for causing life and evolution, but Intelligent Design goes beyond that. ID has offered nothing testable, its just criticism of evolution.

The same way there is no tooth fairy, kind of depressing the teeth just decay away? I don't know about you but I don't float around much. I don't agree with Gothka, but your point doesn't make sense at all. The tooth fairy doesn't stop tooth decay or give purpose to the teeth... How do you know the teeth don't stop decaying once it goes to fairy land?

But your point is wrong. Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. Therefore, she was the Virgin Mary. My point is using the claim "the evidence disproves Hinduism and Buddhism", then the same applies to others including Christianity.

The same way there is no tooth fairy, kind of depressing the teeth just decay away? I don't know about you but I don't float around much.

Because they have things proving them wrong. Even Catholic religion has been proved wrong by it's own bible, seeing how could virgin Mary be a virgin if Jesus had brothers? This is like saying the age of the earth and the first human remains proves christianity wrong. People just explain/make excuses to make it consistent. The Virgin Mary bit is related to Jesus' Virgin Birth not the fact that Mary never had hot monkey sex... Never said anything about it. I'm was addressing the claim Hinduism and Buddhism has been proven wrong, using the same logic so has Christianity.

Because they have things proving them wrong. Even Catholic religion has been proved wrong by it's own bible, seeing how could virgin Mary be a virgin if Jesus had brothers? This is like saying the age of the earth and the first human remains proves christianity wrong. People just explain/make excuses to make it consistent.

True? You can't even test this theory. This is an excuse, not an explanation. Just one kilogram of amino acid arginine has 2.85 x 10^24 molecules, a fraction of what an early earth has. In an early earth peptide ligases could be produced in under a year and a cytochrome C sequence in around a million years.

What are you talking about? How does any of what you just said relate to evolution? It doesn't, which is odd as you claim to know what evolution is. Ignorant? Try reading the first amendment. The term was used in the letter from Thomas Jefferson, but the Constitution still contains the concept.

Great logic, people are starving so lets blame the scientists; everyone knows scientists only do their job to stop money going to 3rd world countries. Nice train of thought... :? Do you realize how many scientists research global warming? There is at least one too many...one scientist's funds can be used to save the starving people in Africa. (Hopefully through any way BUT the United Nations). I realize scientists need to do their jobs and support families. I'm not saying stop funding to science altogether...but they could be researching important such as making better breeds of plants or finding out how to transport/preserve food or learning how to conserve oil just to name a few. So why blame the ones researching weather and climate? Their field doesn't cover engineering plants; scientists aren't trained in every scientific field, and would make little sense and more problems to stick someone not trained in the field to come up with results.

Great logic, people are starving so lets blame the scientists; everyone knows scientists only do their job to stop money going to 3rd world countries.

You dont know nothing lol. All stars (even our sun) will run out of Hydrogen and then it collaspes on itself (somethnig like that) and it makes so much pressure and heat that it goes boom. (It's something like that, I forgot it since my Astromy class) But that'll take a lot of years. Thinking the size of our sun, and the sizes of hydrogen atoms. Nope, our sun will swell up once it runs out of hydrogen at its center, but no supernova explosion. Speaking of not knowing anything, do yourself a favour and look up what a supernova is. Taking a trip down memory lane isn't a reliable source of information.

Our sun won't turn into a supernova, ever.

The sun doesn't have enough mass to go supernova, any way I can't see humans still being here 1 billion years from now let alone when the sun dies.

So why are there millions of children waiting to be adopted?

Just what everyone needs, a theocracy.

Christianity is a religion, just as the countless others; if you want to call it a relationship with the bible god go head, its still a religion.

If you believe in god how can you say he didn't deserve to die that way? The bible god made it so.

"If we are going to teach 'creation science' as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction." - Judith Hayes "There once was a time when all people believed in God and the church ruled. This time was called the Dark Ages." - Richard Lederer "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." - Albert Einstein "In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry, and is generally considered to have been a bad move." - Douglas Adams "Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?." - Douglas Adams