Suppose the Resurrection was proven false, what would explain the Gospels?

Martin23233

Active member
No, publish in peer-reviewed scientific journals. You know, where people present actual scientific findings.
or try this partial list:

or check this single paper:

Please. Evolutionary theory continues to be the best-evidenced theory in all of science and nobody is "leaving" it.
LOL i'll admit it certainly has duped many luckily many scientists just can't live the lie and are leaving it:
More and more scientist abandoning evolution, that’s about as close to evolution being unsettled as one gets… but there will be more;

https://qccsa.org/evolutionists-are-leaving-evolution/

https://thenewamerican.com/over-1-000-scientists-openly-dissent-from-evolution-theory/

https://christiananswers.net/creation/people/home.html
They aren't. This is just more of the nonsense creationists have been ranting about for centuries.
LOL it's ID not quite the same buddy but you'll catch on when the new script arrives.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
or try this partial list:
Now go through and show which ones are actually about creationism/ID.
That's not a paper published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
LOL i'll admit it certainly has duped many luckily many scientists just can't live the lie and are leaving it:
More and more scientist abandoning evolution, that’s about as close to evolution being unsettled as one gets… but there will be more;
NO, they're not.
LOL it's ID not quite the same buddy but you'll catch on when the new script arrives.
ID is creationism in a cheap suit. Yes, they're the same.
 

Martin23233

Active member
"
Darwin’s (failed) Predictions – Cornelius G. Hunter – 2015
This paper evaluates 23 fundamental (false) predictions of evolutionary theory from a wide range of different categories. The paper begins with a brief introduction to the nature of scientific predictions, and typical concerns evolutionists raise against investigating predictions of evolution. The paper next presents the individual predictions in seven categories: early evolution, evolutionary causes, molecular evolution, common descent, evolutionary phylogenies, evolutionary pathways, and behavior. Finally the conclusion summarizes these various predictions, their implications for evolution’s capacity to explain phenomena, and how they bear on evolutionist’s claims about their theory.

*Introduction
Why investigate evolution’s false predictions?
Responses to common objections

*Early evolution predictions
The DNA code is not unique
The cell’s fundamental molecules are universal

*Evolutionary causes predictions
Mutations are not adaptive
Embryology and common descent
Competition is greatest between neighbors

*Molecular evolution predictions
Protein evolution
Histone proteins cannot tolerate much change
The molecular clock keeps evolutionary time

*Common descent predictions
The pentadactyl pattern and common descent
Serological tests reveal evolutionary relationships
Biology is not lineage specific
Similar species share similar genes
MicroRNA

*Evolutionary phylogenies predictions
Genomic features are not sporadically distributed
Gene and host phylogenies are congruent
Gene phylogenies are congruent
The species should form an evolutionary tree

*Evolutionary pathways predictions
Complex structures evolved from simpler structures
Structures do not evolve before there is a need for them
Functionally unconstrained DNA is not conserved
Nature does not make leaps

*Behavior
Altruism
Cell death

*Conclusions
What false predictions tell us about evolution
https://sites.google.com/site/darwinspredictions/home
 

Martin23233

Active member
Actually, that's exactly what happened. Look up "cdesign proponentsists". ID is merely creationism rebranded.
too funny you can't attack something you don't grasp... time to keep hammering the evo kabal with more data.... you need to update your scripts.... you were taught how to be ignorant to creationists but you can't keep up with ID... as exposed many times by the the gangs confusion over how to respond to ID... most just call it creationism.... and understand little. so we have time. The Pixie is still trying to ignore answering questions so The Pixie gets ignored.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
too funny you can't attack something you don't grasp... time to keep hammering the evo kabal with more data.... you need to update your scripts.... you were taught how to be ignorant to creationists but you can't keep up with ID... as exposed many times by the the gangs confusion over how to respond to ID... most just call it creationism.... and understand little. so we have time. The Pixie is still trying to ignore answering questions so The Pixie gets ignored.
Yet another post where you make no effort at all to address the point. An updated script is exactly how it we learned that ID is merely creationism rebranded. You didn't look up "cdesign proponentsists' did you?
 

Martin23233

Active member
ID is creationism in a cheap suit. Yes, they're the same.

" Stephen Hawking,- himself, an avowed atheist and opponent of intelligent design, refers to our universe as “an apparent miracle.”
but here you will hopefully grasp the differences... maybe your parlor trick posts can grasp real data instead of warped agenda?

 

Martin23233

Active member
" Anyone can shout “There is no God!” if they don’t need to ask or answer questions like “How then did human consciousness come to exist?” Or even “How did the universe come to exist?” If the village atheist wants to say that the universe has always existed (is infinite backwards in time), he is going to run into a huge logic problem: Everything that could possibly happen would already have happened, including the fact that we don’t exist. But we do exist. And human consciousness is still the The Hard Problem. "

 

Martin23233

Active member
It is fun debating with the Evos.... at least the honest ones that don't try to dodge questions or mischaracterize statements. One can see the continued patter of denial... dodging and mischaracterizing. Most have no answer for the 'mind' , consciousness, soul, and other qualities that no other creature on earth possesses.... it is fun to watch the evo-devos squirm about trying to contort opinions that show 'just so' stories about how other creatures posses such features but they fail every time....no chimp is writing any book... nor producing any music.... nor producing any art..(unless one counts Hunter Biden)..
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
" Anyone can shout “There is no God!” if they don’t need to ask or answer questions like “How then did human consciousness come to exist?” Or even “How did the universe come to exist?”
This is naive. Just because we currently can't answer these questions isnt evidence God was responsible.
If the village atheist wants to say that the universe has always existed (is infinite backwards in time), he is going to run into a huge logic problem:
Only a village creationist would come up with this old cannard that most atheists wouldn't consider.
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
It is fun debating with the Evos.... at least the honest ones that don't try to dodge questions or mischaracterize statements. One can see the continued patter of denial... dodging and mischaracterizing. Most have no answer for the 'mind' , consciousness, soul, and other qualities that no other creature on earth possesses.... it is fun to watch the evo-devos squirm about trying to contort opinions that show 'just so' stories about how other creatures posses such features but they fail every time....no chimp is writing any book... nor producing any music.... nor producing any art..(unless one counts Hunter Biden)..
Your rhetoric undermines your credibility, which is at a low point to start with.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
" Anyone can shout “There is no God!” if they don’t need to ask or answer questions like “How then did human consciousness come to exist?” Or even “How did the universe come to exist?” If the village atheist wants to say that the universe has always existed (is infinite backwards in time), he is going to run into a huge logic problem: Everything that could possibly happen would already have happened, including the fact that we don’t exist. But we do exist. And human consciousness is still the The Hard Problem. "

Have you read Chalmers' book where he presents the hard problem?

Theism does not provide a solution.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member

" Stephen Hawking,- himself, an avowed atheist and opponent of intelligent design, refers to our universe as “an apparent miracle.”
but here you will hopefully grasp the differences... maybe your parlor trick posts can grasp real data instead of warped agenda?

ID has already been proven to be creationism in a cheap suit. That ship has well and truly sailed.
 

Martin23233

Active member
ID has already been proven to be creationism in a cheap suit. That ship has well and truly sailed.
LOL you seem to not understand the difference... Sure many IDers are indeed Creationists..as it suits them well.. YEC and OEC alike .. but the truth is that ID does not (at its core) state the designer... it could be GOD... it could be some 'future' us... it could be aliens ... but all it can really do is state that intelligence it the cause through our best science ... here read up ... it helps sometimes to know that one it attempting to refute before they actually make silly statements like you do so often:



 

Martin23233

Active member
Have you read Chalmers' book where he presents the hard problem?

Theism does not provide a solution.
and nor does Evolution prove anything ( heck ..just ask The Pixie... he thinks nothing in science is proven) .. Theism at least provides a solution that life is created... evolution can't get that far as it fails every time.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
LOL you seem to not understand the difference... Sure many IDers are indeed Creationists..as it suits them well.. YEC and OEC alike .. but the truth is that ID does not (at its core) state the designer... it could be GOD... it could be some 'future' us... it could be aliens ... but all it can really do is state that intelligence it the cause through our best science ... here read up ... it helps sometimes to know that one it attempting to refute before they actually make silly statements like you do so often:



There isn't a difference. ID was just the latest attempt by creationists to put a scientific front on creationism. It failed because ID isn't scientific either.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
and nor does Evolution prove anything ( heck ..just ask The Pixie... he thinks nothing in science is proven) ..
Science doesn't do proof. The fact that you don't know that speaks volumes about how little about science you do know.
Theism at least provides a solution that life is created...
Which is completely useless until/unless it can be proven correct.
evolution can't get that far as it fails every time.
Evolution doesn't even address the origin of life, nor does it try. Blaming it for not explaining something outside its remit is laughable, like blaming chemistry for the Dodgers not leading the NL West.
 
Top