Quote:

Phemox a dichotomy exists(whether anyone likes to admit it or not).
The disproof of evolution necessitates the proof of creation. If evolution is disproven then creation must be valid.

Unless you add lots of qualifiers as to what type of evolution and what type of creation you talk about this statement is false.

Quote:

I don't think science excludes the possibility of a God existing ... yet.

Science can not exclude the possibility of gods in general. Since science is concerned with natural events only, if there was anything super or subnatural it would be outside of the realm of science. However, specific gods can be excluded.

Quote:

if an object is complex, has a purpose and has no plausible physical cause, it implies design.

You mean like god (complex, purpose and no plausible physical cause) ?

Quote:

When life would be designed, then it doesn't make much sense to make lifeforms with flaws.

Irish_Farmer has been explaining this as the result of downward evolution. I think that's the only answer that won't get you into theological hot water.

Quote:

How? Society changes, so christians themselves are different (they do after all live in society) but our beliefs have always been based on the infallible word of God. So really, we have not.

Not changed ? So you still believe in the pope as god's spokesperson?

Quote:

I had another thought: If God wishs to give the humans an idea that he exists and what they shall do, shouldn't he influence ANYthing that is written about him?

Most apologists seem to favor the idea of a cosmic personality test. If god was to provide clear guidance then this limits a person's choice for/against religion. (Apparently that was not a problem with people back in the good old days that had their live miracles).

Last edited by Marco_Grubert; 05/09/06 01:06.