@bigdoggproblem said
See, that hurts to hear. I thought I had made it a point that both science and religion had their place.

Watch Lennox, my only complaint about the lecture, and then question and answers was whoever was in control of the cameras kept breaking away to the audience, they were focusing on some of the more attractive ladies listening off and on. More than likely since it was a college setting some students were not focusing on the lecture as much as others were. 🙂

@kellyjay said
I agreed with that, I'm saying that they are not looking into two different worlds, not two different realities.

I never said they were looking at two different realities. I said that the right tool should be used for the right job.

@kellyjay said
Watch Lennox, my only complaint about the lecture, and then question and answers was whoever was in control of the cameras kept breaking away to the audience, they were focusing on some of the more attractive ladies listening off and on. More than likely since it was a college setting some students were not focusing on the lecture as much as others were. 🙂

Sorry, but no. I'm not going to watch a video.

I want to engage with people here, not on YouTube.

@bigdoggproblem said
I never said they were looking at two different realities. I said that the right tool should be used for the right job.

100% in agreement with you!

@bigdoggproblem said
Sorry, but no. I'm not going to watch a video.

I want to engage with people here, not on YouTube.

Your choice, I found him thought provoking. Like science and faith, engaging with people is one thing, listening to a lecture is another they both can have something to offer. 🙂

@kellyjay said
There isn't an anti-science in Christianity, many of the foundational people of the sciences were men of faith. The anti- this or that crowd refuses to acknowledge that both have something to offer towards truth, there isn't two truths or realities, but one.

I guess I should correct my phrase to read, When science disagrees with Bible literalists it is then that anti-science Christianity comes into play. I would agree that a number of men of faith have contributed much to science, including some very good work on evolution.
Speaking of one truth, have you researched the actual historicity of Moses and Exodus ? Even Judaic scholars regard Exodus as "God inspired" , not historically accurate. Considering that Moses is their "main guy" and the book is a part of the Torah that says Judaic scholars are interested in truth. Are you interested in truth ?

@caissad4 said
I guess I should correct my phrase to read, When science disagrees with Bible literalists it is then that anti-science Christianity comes into play. I would agree that a number of men of faith have contributed much to science, including some very good work on evolution.
Speaking of one truth, have you researched the actual historicity of Moses and Exodus ? Even Judaic scho ...[text shortened]... a part of the Torah that says Judaic scholars are interested in truth. Are you interested in truth ?

You think disagreement on conclusions represent being anti science, wouldn’t that make everyone in science who disagrees with someone else’s conclusions all anti science?

@caissad4 said
I guess I should correct my phrase to read, When science disagrees with Bible literalists it is then that anti-science Christianity comes into play. I would agree that a number of men of faith have contributed much to science, including some very good work on evolution.
Speaking of one truth, have you researched the actual historicity of Moses and Exodus ? Even Judaic scho ...[text shortened]... a part of the Torah that says Judaic scholars are interested in truth. Are you interested in truth ?

I have looked into validation of OT and NT text and I believe the case for both are very strong, but I have not read what you brought up. If you have a link I will read it.

@kellyjay said
I have looked into validation of OT and NT text and I believe the case for both are very strong, but I have not read what you brought up. If you have a link I will read it.

If any of your "validation" includes accepting Noah and the Flood as historical, you are liar and a deliberate spreader of propaganda. Speak truth, stop the double talk.

@caissad4 said
If any of your "validation" includes accepting Noah and the Flood as historical, you are liar and a deliberate spreader of propaganda. Speak truth, stop the double talk.

You know I think we can just part ways, if you are going to start accusing me of things before I even see your link, I'm not going to worry about your link, or you.

@kellyjay said
You know I think we can just part ways, if you are going to start accusing me of things before I even see your link, I'm not going to worry about your link, or you.

Another truth seeking pretender runs away.
I see the way you are.

@caissad4 said
Another truth seeking pretender runs away.
I see the way you are.

I see you are a true believer.

@eladar said
I see you are a true believer.

I seek truth.
If discovering truth reveals something different than my beliefs then my beliefs will change.

@caissad4 said
I seek truth.
If discovering truth reveals something different than my beliefs then my beliefs will change.

All true believers seek truth as they see it.

@caissad4 said
Another truth seeking pretender runs away.
I see the way you are.

🙂 No, you see the way you want those who disagree you to be.
It has nothing to do with truth, its your rudeness.