What about them? I don't understand the question? You saw I paired the last time you asked w/the below?
If having one's life positively changed due to Christianity is evidence of Christianity, How is having one's live positively changed due to Islam or Buddhism not evidence for those belief systems?
I mean it's easier for me to accept a grace/faith approach as in, you believe in Christ as Savior, you're in.
If it is a works-based religion, it is hard for me to accept that there is anything I can DO to be saved. Some people think it's a be more good than bad type thing or perform these certain rituals however many times and do this and that and you're in, but don't do this or your bad outweighs your good etc etc... So do you gain and lose your salvation possibly many times in a single day?
Christianity focuses on Christ and what He did for us, works-based religions are more self-focused. Christianity is about accepting Christ and helping others. If you look at society, if a person is mostly self-focused there can be perpetual negative consequences coming directly from that, little peace etc. A grace/faith...focus on others approach makes more sense to me than a self-focus approach.
Didn't Jesus say that a man's faith is justified by the works that he does and not his faith alone?
James 2:24; Rom. 3:20, Matt. 5:16, James 2:22
But how can it be seen as beneficial? If 2 aren't available (in most species) then won't extinction occur?
Yes, but obviously the genetic diversity added by sexual reproduction outweighed the disadvantage of the possibility of not finding a mate. Though, in almost all species, there is an abundance of possible mates, but only those most fit or appealing tend to mate, which is natural selection.
Do I "know" no. Are you talking about creating the earth or how long it was hanging around before God created life?
I believe He could have created it in one basic day, sure. But aren't we talking about how long it could have been created before He created life? There is no specific statement there about that.
Why believe that it was sitting around for billions of years before he put life on it or before he put humans on it? What biblical passage supports this idea?
Could be a day as we know it but also there is also scripture that says a day w/the Lord is as 1000 years.
This doesn't mean that it was actually sitting around for that long.
You said earlier that amino chains were formed after the big bang. Would you say you have faith that what you have learned about this is true?
No. Various observations tell us what did exist right after the big bang, which elements, etc. It would not have been possible for amino acids to form until the necessary elements had formed. This means it happened after the big bang. Not faith, reason.
You see my point that scientists have theorized things that you have learned from them and now you accept those things as true? I'm sure you know that no scientists were there watching the first amino chains being formed right?
The problem with your statement: People don't need to directly see something to know that it happened. If this were true then forensic people or CSI would never be able to prove anything.
If I see footprints leading in the mud, do I need to see the person as they make them to assume that a person made these footprints? No. If I see various facts which provide understandings of what happened millions or billions of years ago, do I need to observe these things as they happened to know things about them? No.
Plus, did you know that light travels at a certain speed? It takes a certain amount of time for light across the universe to reach us here on earth. This means that some light traveling to us here on earth is billions of years old, some of it is actually as old as the universe. This means that what we see at the farthest reaches of the universe ARE the lights created during or right after the big bang.
We both have faith
I really don't. It would depend on how you define "faith", for instance some definitions have it as simply "belief", but I do NOT believe in things that I can't prove to be true or have no evidence are true, even a little evidence.