Quote (TiStuff @ 22 Mar 2022 10:05)
thats rather convenient dont you think. to make the demand that the bible must be excluded? when and where do you draw the line excluding things instead of contesting with them?
perhaps we need a starting point? lets start with this remark you made.
"... I see no difference between a human and a moose or a human and a bacteria..."
i suppose one could take this view if one believed in evolution "macro" aka "monkey to man" aka "goo to the zoo to you"
that the whole thing/place is one big giant random accident?
is this what you believe?
First, I prefer to exclude the Bible because it's a dead end for me (has resulted in confusion, conjecture and pseudoscience). I am not completely unwilling to read the bible though I think it's fair to say "Show me evidence #2 unrelated to #1 (a book)".
Second, in reply to the 'monkey to man': Genetically speaking, Darwinism appears to be correct as it complies with the scientific method. Every living thing shares core DNA and this lineage can be traced back to the Greatest Common Ancestor. This implies we co-evolved with every other organism alive today and is apprent in our physical makeup (symmetry, organ placement and behavior). Does this qualify as proof in my eyes? No because there is still much to learn of chemistry and genetics. However as it agrees with scientific method it stands to reason that any other theory must meet or exceed the same criteria (time investigating and the provided results of engineers and scientists). I have yet to observe a single "religious scientist" that follows the same scrutiny as the rest of accepted science. So in the context of Darwinism, your bible is not evidence for anything because it does not follow the same scrutiny nor does it cite quantifiable facts the same as an academic paper driven by the scientific method (Theory, Experiment, Observe, Conclude, Repeat, Theory, Experiment etc.). Science (learning) is not a conclusive art rather it is a life long process subject to constant updates in what we know and what we think we know. Obviously this is a complete contrast to people who "know" God exists and "know" what happens after we die. By any other measure, the knowledge of the above sentence is generally agreed by academics to be beyond our capabilities of measurement and so falls in the category of conjecture and/or pseudoscience.