Reply to Re: Bible Study
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
...why should we believe science - as I have said in the past -
what about Carbon Dating. How do we know that these scientists actually have dated things correctly. Yet they proudly state when an item was alive, what era it came from and so on as a "proven fact"! To do that, they are guessing what the atmosphere was like between now and then, they are assuming the ratios that they measure are static, but, in actuality, these could have fluctuated significantly over relatively short periods of time (that they are totally unaware of) and that could throw their calculations off by years yet they state it as fact with no first hand knowledge or (for me) a viable method of proving its accuracy beyond any doubt, with the exception of BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Think I have more faith in God than in Man over this! here
Things in religions that can be confirmed by science are the only ones that should be thought as the "absolute truth".
In instances like these scientists base their "proof" on what they agree is proof not that which they have seen with their own eyes... they haven't proven it to me yet and can't because they weren't there then, there fore anything they say is basically conjecture and none is proven FACT nor can it ever be!
what about Carbon Dating. How do we know that these scientists actually have dated things correctly. Yet they proudly state when an item was alive, what era it came from and so on as a "proven fact"! To do that, they are guessing what the atmosphere was like between now and then, they are assuming the ratios that they measure are static, but, in actuality, these could have fluctuated significantly over relatively short periods of time (that they are totally unaware of) and that could throw their calculations off by years yet they state it as fact with no first hand knowledge or (for me) a viable method of proving its accuracy beyond any doubt, with the exception of BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Think I have more faith in God than in Man over this! here
Things in religions that can be confirmed by science are the only ones that should be thought as the "absolute truth".
In instances like these scientists base their "proof" on what they agree is proof not that which they have seen with their own eyes... they haven't proven it to me yet and can't because they weren't there then, there fore anything they say is basically conjecture and none is proven FACT nor can it ever be!
