In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@borijan.org> wrote in
<ksTXb.8401125$Id.1392054@news.easynews.com>:
"Virgil" <virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:virgil-6F0290.13311515022004@news.nntpservers.com...
In article <M1OXb.311341$9p3.56248@news.easynews.com>,
"jabriol" <jabriol@borijan.org> wrote:
"Virgil" <virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:virgil-B17644.02070915022004@news.nntpservers.com...
In article <gUFXb.8356015$Id.1385251@news.easynews.com>,
"jabriol" <jabriol@borijan.org> wrote:
real scientist do not exclude the existence of a god.
Nor include it, at least in their scientific thinking.
You can't exclude something you don't think about eh?
Since science can do nothing, at least at present, to either confirm
or
deny the existence of a god, issues of theology should not be treated
as
if science could resolve them.
who exactly is asking science to do so?
Creationists appear to be asking science to verify their theology.
I am not a creationist.. but science has verified many things written in the
bible unless you consider archeology a non-science
Scientists from a wide range of disciplines have discovered that the
Creation story and the Flood story are not historically accurate.
As far as I am aware, archaeologists have confirmed that:
1. Humans were never centered in Babylon and the division of languages
did not happen as told in Genesis.
2. There was no slavery in Egypt for a large population of Hebrews,
3. There was no Exodus.
4. There was no conquest of Canaan as described in the Bible.
5. Jericho was abandoned by the time it was supposedly conquered by
Joshua.
6. There is no evidence that the united Kingdom existed as described in
the Bible.
7. There is some confirmation for the post-Captivity stories.
8. There is no archaeological evidence to support any claims about
Jesus.
In fact they are attempting to deny science in areas in which science
can resolve issues.
can science resolve simple issues? maybe it can... but not by much..
What alternative do you offer?
.
