Search results

From my view this is not quantum coherence. It is an observed phenomenon in the realm of possibilities. I believe this phenomenon is at present only well documented on the Quantum scale. Even on the quantum scale this at present is only reasonably consistent an observer phenomenon.

Presuppositions of ancient theism often precludes other choices, even other theist choices. I have watched some of the programs, and I do not believe his goal was to disprove the existence of God. The program explores alternatives not absolutes.

. . . and of course, chaos theory rules within the constraints.

An important point of a more contemporary view of math and science is that true 'randomness' is not observed in nature, except possibly in certain Quantum events. The pattern of variability of events, as in gene mutations shows a distinctive 'fractal pattern as in chaos theory,' and it is...

Bad point! Very, very false. The Natural Laws, natural chemistry, and natural environments have been been demonstrated by science to be able to create complex order.

The claim God is not necessary is a philosophical claim by the atheist/agnostic scientists. The objection to the claims of some, mostly non-scientists, that there is scientific evidence for ID is a scientific claim based on Methodological Naturalism

Yes, science is 'deeply interconnected and interrelated everything is,' because of the history of science is reflected in the interconnectiveness of Natural Laws and the nature of our physical existence. Science also has learned we cannot go beyond that. The reference I gave documented the...

Nature, Natural as in Natural Laws is not a problem in science by definition. They are simply words that describe what is objectively falsifiable in the Physical Existence. Actually every time a theory or hypothesis is objectively falsified it is tested as to whether it fits the natural scheme...

From an outside perspective I am indifferent it how on write or pronounces God. It is simply a three letter word defined as what people believe as the ultimate, omnipotent, omnipresent 'Source' some call God(s). I do not believe it helps to avoid the problem by using 'Hashem,' because the...

The problem here is that the accounts of Genesis are considered historically and scientifically factual by the authors of the gospels, Paul and the majority of the church fathers as the foundation of the doctrines and dogmas of traditional Christianity, and embraced as factual by at least half...

The fact that the scripture itself justifies 'Original Sin.' I believe, scripture and Jewish tradition and beliefs says no.

The point is Augustine considered Genesis literal and described it so in the 'City of God.'

From the historical Jewish view this is not 'quite clear,' and again this does not explain the belief that 'these acts by Adam and Eve as a stain of Sin carried by all future human generations.'

I have no problem with the use of 'liberals' and 'conservatives' that divide both religion and politics in America. This is not stereotyping, because it is the reality of a deep chasm between the two Christianities. You may use other words, but the distinction remains a growing wall of 'no...

This does not explain 'Original Sin' in that these acts by Adam and Eve as a stain of Sin carried by all future human generations.

I believe that Whitehead' proposal is more involved, and included both together. Nonetheless both were rejected by Einstein, and they are untenable based on the evidence. Your misinterpreting my posts as 'attacks' on you. I am attacking the ID philosophy, and objecting that other...

Yes, this is Dawkins view. My view is that ID or intention cannot be falsified by science, because science is neutral to claims of 'intention.' The proposal of 'Intelligent Design (ID)' is a non sequitur as far as being able to falsify the concept as a scientific theory. A large part of ID...

Let's deal next with Alexander of Hippo whom liberal interpreters of the Bible hail as believing in the Bible as they do. Not so fast . . .

True as the sky is Carolina blue on a clear day at noon on the 4th of July! So what?!?!?! This whole line of reasoning goes nowhere. It is best to present your arguments and references as best as you can, and do not trash people as to whether they know anything. The argument depends on...

True! Even today some believe if you do not believe in the one true God you do not believe in God regardless of what you believe in.