[youngben]

2 centuries ago, if you asked man what thunder and lightning were, he'd have said that they were the manifestations of an angry god. Then one day man discovered that lightning was electric ions interacting with each other in the sky. With this new knowledge, the theory of god manifesting himself was quietly shelved by the theists. This is but an example of numerous such incidents.

Your arguement doesn't hold water atlian,God never explained to man what lightening is and how to make it.He gave man the brains for that purpose.Where it is writen God spoke in flashes of lightening,still doesn't make every act of lightening a manifestation of God's anger.if the people chose to believe it that way then their brains weren't stimulated enough

Apologies, I have to quote the whole thread for the flow

We come back again to the reason why these arguments will always be cyclical and will never make sense, because of christianity's selective ways of determining whats true or not without a definite rational criteria

If right now as put above we accept that lightening is indeed caused by ion exchange, and God did not tell us this, which is very well put by the way, he gave us brains to do that. Why then should we now doubt the same "stimulated brains" when they advance a theory like the "big bang" or any other, really did mans brain stop stimulating after explaining lightening???

You see in one instance you embrace the fact that God gave us the brains to figure things out as man, then in the same breath you attack the "product" of our brain, clearly showing that your decisions are not rational (of course again am not implying opposition is not welcome, but christians dont leave room for discourse arguments in some topics), they are emotional and controlled by fear (views and decisions).

So as long as this is the way arguments will be handled then there will never be any headway in terms of compromise

[rayfisher]

The relationship between the Bible and modern astronomy has been very complicated and often turbulent. For most of the last two thousand years, any research on astronomy had to follow the biblical interpretation of the Church, as the case of Galileo in the seventeenth century illustrated. Accordingly, many scientists would argue that, for modern astronomy to be born, biblical cosmology had to die.

[ndigila]

If evolution and the big bang are true, does that mean that belief in supernatural is illogical/inconsistent with human nature?

[grip_daddy]

Originally Posted by ndigila

If evolution and the big bang are true, does that mean that belief in supernatural is illogical/inconsistent with human nature?

If that is true, then still there lies the possibility of variant forms of intelligences inhibiting other spaces.

Organizations such as NASA are spending billions of dollars annually to try and interact with such possible intelligences.

Such intelligences could be operating under laws and technologies we as humans have not discovered. Maybe aspects of teleportation or translocation by ways closely related to appearance disappearance phenomena are possible with the imagined terrestrial intelligences.

Because of that possibility, belief of supernatural cannot be washed away by any. So it is practically safe for all to believe in the existence of supernatural, and here Christians have a head start.

[ndigila]

Originally Posted by youngben

If right now as put above we accept that lightening is indeed caused by ion exchange, and God did not tell us this, which is very well put by the way, he gave us brains to do that. Why then should we now doubt the same "stimulated brains" when they advance a theory like the "big bang" or any other, really did mans brain stop stimulating after explaining lightening???

I don't see a cyclical argument there. The Big Bang and God can't coexist (unless God is the source of the Big Bang). A Theist in general would be hard pressed to believe that his Deity gave man the stimulated brain to disprove his existence.

[Type R]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Because of that possibility, belief of supernatural cannot be washed away by any. So it is practically safe for all to believe in the existence of supernatural, and here Christians have a head start.

I often wonder, how would two beings in different media communicate with each other? It is by definition impossible. There simply is no point of contact - touch, smell, sight, taste, hearing. A "spirit" would leave no evidence of nothing upon matter.

[grip_daddy]

Youngben this is in response to the reasons doubting of big bang theory is legitimate:

Man has a wider capacity to think and be mentally stimulated. Just look at the science fiction movies and novels. This capacity inheret in man has made it possible for all manner of theories to exist, some of which are taken as scientific truth but later discarded as false and incomplete.

The rejection of big bang does not lie in the arguement that it is not mentally stimulated, but because just as any other theory, it can be true or false. Christians consider it false because it doesn't provide adequate answers to the unknown of the begining, neither some hard questions that affect humanity.

It is mentally, socially and spiritually satisfying to believe in a Creator God who originated life for His own glory and interests. The loope holes in big bang provide us with reasons to reject it.

[grip_daddy]

Originally Posted by Type R

I often wonder, how would two beings in different media communicate with each other? It is by definition impossible. There simply is no point of contact - touch, smell, sight, taste, hearing. A "spirit" would leave no evidence of nothing upon matter.

I believe it is possible. The only difference is that the spirit has a higher form and means of interacting with matter without matter realizing. For example, the interaction of man with intelligent machines are smelt, seen, heard, etc by man. The conscience relationship is known by man. Just as the machines will not have the conscience knowledge of man, so man will not necessarily have the conscience knowledge of spirits.

[rayfisher]

3. He suspends the earth on nothing’ (Job 26.7b)
This verse has puzzled scientists and astrologers alike for somone at that specific age to have known the earth was suspended on nothing one had to be out in the space.

Yes this verse speaks volume,did you know that the book of job is among the oldest in the bible.So how did job know that the earth was suspended upon nothing?

[ndigila]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

If that is true, then still there lies the possibility of variant forms of intelligences inhibiting other spaces.

Organizations such as NASA are spending billions of dollars annually to try and interact with such possible intelligences.

Such intelligences could be operating under laws and technologies we as humans have not discovered. Maybe aspects of teleportation or translocation by ways closely related to appearance disappearance phenomena are possible with the imagined terrestrial intelligences.

Because of that possibility, belief of supernatural cannot be washed away by any. So it is practically safe for all to believe in the existence of supernatural, and here Christians have a head start.

That's an excellent thesis. But you didn't answer my question.

If evolution and the big bang are true, does that mean that belief in supernatural is illogical/inconsistent with human nature?