[_ Old Earth _] The Christianity In Science

Rollo Tamasi

Warrior for Christ
Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
15,017
Reaction score
4,990
I am new to this forum.
I have been reading over threads and all I see is people banging heads with each other.
No one wins, everyone gets frustrated with each other, and everyone thinks they are right.

In my opinion, since this is a Christian Forum, the topics discussed should somehow be Christ-centered.
I find it difficult to get in on a debate that doesn't resemble any form of Christianity.
Now some of you may tell me to just get lost, go back to your Lounge, and leave us alone.
Maybe that's what I should do.

...Or maybe not...
 
How's this Rollo Tamasi ?

Another mindless YouTube video.


choir.gif

.
 
Here's another one that's pretty cool. I wish I could post these in the Lounge.

 
one can only see proof of god if one already believes that God exists. not that I wouldn't like these videos. I think I have seen one of them.
 
one can only see proof of god if one already believes that God exists. not that I wouldn't like these videos. I think I have seen one of them.

There's a lot of information on YouTube jasonc . It's not what it was 10 years ago.

Watch my videos!!!
2prxno2.gif
 
I am new to this forum.
I have been reading over threads and all I see is people banging heads with each other.
No one wins, everyone gets frustrated with each other, and everyone thinks they are right.

In my opinion, since this is a Christian Forum, the topics discussed should somehow be Christ-centered.
I find it difficult to get in on a debate that doesn't resemble any form of Christianity.

:clap
 
I am new to this forum.
I have been reading over threads and all I see is people banging heads with each other.
No one wins, everyone gets frustrated with each other, and everyone thinks they are right.

Something I've observed during my time here Rollo is that "winning" seems to be a goal shared by many other forums on the board that leads to "everyone getting frustrated with each other". "Give other members the respect you would have them give to yourself." is by far the rule most broken. We say we "surrender" ourselves, our sinful nature to Christ but defend our pride at the price of another.

Romans 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
Romans 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

I praise Jesus Christ that He is faithful while I am not.
Where is our comfort?

Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
 
I am new to this forum.
New to the subforum, right allenwynne? I remember you from the Apologetics and Theology subforum.

I have been reading over threads and all I see is people banging heads with each other.
If we stuck to the issues rather than making things personal it would go a long way. Like instead of responding with opinions about my faith, people present evidence to perhaps counter my claims. Being told that your arguments are "weak," and that they are "not worth answering," is not conducive to civil conversation.

No one wins, everyone gets frustrated with each other, and everyone thinks they are right.
No one wins in any of the debates on this website, that's not the purpose for the discussion. If anyone is interested in claiming victory then I believe that to be foolish endeavor.

In my opinion, since this is a Christian Forum, the topics discussed should somehow be Christ-centered.
I find it difficult to get in on a debate that doesn't resemble any form of Christianity.
I don't have any problem with Christ-centered living, but I think when we bring our religious convictions to the table it can affect our objectivity to the evidence.

For instance, all scientists practice methodological naturalism, in that they assume that every action has a natural cause.They don't look to the moon and wonder, Hmm that's pretty cool how God just moves that with his finger. Rather, they look for other causes, which is how the great scientist and Christian Isaac Newton discovered gravity (well not from pondering on the moon, but you get my point).

I also wrote a post recently about Religious Beliefs and Objectivity, which is distinctly related to this very conversation in that we can confuse our devotion to Christ with the truth of certain nonessential issues, such as Creationism vs Evolution. If we answer the question of "how does this bring glory to God," prior to, "what does the truth of the natural world tell us," then we basically are just going off of our own understanding on what brings God the most glory. Rather than looking to the natural world, as the Bible tells us to, to see how God works.
See the post here: http://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/religious-belief-and-objectivity.56381/

The reality of the matter is that we disagree on what the Bible says concerning our origins, and our disagreement isn't just from the Bible, but also the evidence from the natural world which supports this perspective. We haven't been duped, or lied to. There isn't some grand conspiracy, or great deception from God or the devil planting fossils here and there. Evolution is a fact, and it appears that the primary reason for it's rejection in most cases is religious belief.

View attachment 5435

As you can see, while there is some percentage of of every group that believes in evolution. Lower percentages seem to correspond with more conservative belief systems.
 
Thank you for the information .
You are courteous and honest.
I love you in Christ, most sincerely.
 
Check it out Rollo Tamasi

Science before there was science.

That's a great video.
Thank you.
I have heard of some of these things before many years ago, but now we have you tube and everything is at our fingertips if we choose to research it.

Most of us will never know or understand all that science discovers everyday.
But the Word of God is always there for all of us.
 
I would caution at using youtube as a primary source of information. This is simply because the vast majority of youtube videos do not provide sources by which you can fact check their information.

I could potentially make a video and talk about how Dinosaurs were actually mammals and make up some strange source, and I could probably get a few people to believe me. The point is that when people are open to making any kind of assertion they want within a video that does not have sources, it leave the listener in a disadvantage as they do not know if the observations on which the person is drawing their conclusion is correct.

Hence we often deride Creationists for using youtube so much.
 
I would caution at using youtube as a primary source of information. This is simply because the vast majority of youtube videos do not provide sources by which you can fact check their information.

I could potentially make a video and talk about how Dinosaurs were actually mammals and make up some strange source, and I could probably get a few people to believe me. The point is that when people are open to making any kind of assertion they want within a video that does not have sources, it leave the listener in a disadvantage as they do not know if the observations on which the person is drawing their conclusion is correct.

Hence we often deride Creationists for using youtube so much.

So which of the videos I posted is false?
 
I would caution at using youtube as a primary source of information. This is simply because the vast majority of youtube videos do not provide sources by which you can fact check their information.

I could potentially make a video and talk about how Dinosaurs were actually mammals and make up some strange source, and I could probably get a few people to believe me. The point is that when people are open to making any kind of assertion they want within a video that does not have sources, it leave the listener in a disadvantage as they do not know if the observations on which the person is drawing their conclusion is correct.

Hence we often deride Creationists for using youtube so much.

There's no excuse what-so-ever to deride anyone. None. And there's certainly no reason to think this site supports or condones such behavior. It to the contrary. It would be wise to cease doing so. :hips
 
There's no excuse what-so-ever to deride anyone. None. And there's certainly no reason to think this site supports or condones such behavior. It to the contrary. It would be wise to cease doing so. :hips
Perhaps the word "deride," was too strong. I merely meant to state that we are critical of the usage of youtube videos as sources for the aforementioned reasons.

There are perhaps some instances where it could be helpful, such as a video that I posted that showed the inside of a Giraffes neck to locate the nerve. This is a direct source as it walks the audience through the actual evidence, rather than just making an assertion about it.
 
Too strong or otherwise the message came across quite clearly.
Opposition to another's views whether through video or post will be allowed on this site as long as the behavior in doing so is within the parameters governing this particular forum and that was why the ToS was appended to disallow members from "owning" threads or imposing rules outside those specified for the use of this site. Civil opposition to creationism or evolution will not be muzzled.
 
Too strong or otherwise the message came across quite clearly.
Opposition to another's views whether through video or post will be allowed on this site as long as the behavior in doing so is within the parameters governing this particular forum and that was why the ToS was appended to disallow members from "owning" threads or imposing rules outside those specified for the use of this site. Civil opposition to creationism or evolution will not be muzzled.
Sounds good to me.
 
Back
Top