Mike Lisanke’s Reviews > God, the Science, the Evidence > Status Update
Mike Lisanke
is on page 414 of 562
None of those (who didn't read reviews) would Assume a book on how Science confirms the existence of God would Expect a defense of the Bible for science accuracy Or the life/history of Jesus Christ as an actual person (P.S. I did read a great defense of the Accuracy of the New Testaments of the Bible which was good because That's what the author explained it was about... not a run-on-book about anything to prove God.
— Oct 25, 2025 08:14PM
Like flag
Mike’s Previous Updates
Mike Lisanke
is on page 535 of 562
If someone believes in God, why can they Not believe it acted to create a Materialistic World? Why is supernatural Needed after first creation? Why is Intervention with God necessary after 1st creation (aside from what religions say Is necessary). IMO it's obvious God does Not need its creations Worship. Unless its some sort of conservation of worship sort of thing???
— Oct 25, 2025 08:58PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 527 of 562
Religion is bad Because it always causes/caused war? What doesn't cause war? Also, religion is Not God. Religions are a practice of Dogma and Rites to Worship God (or interact) and it's by definition Political/Societal and that causes All of the Problems. The question is, how much does a God require Our Interactions with that God. If an Intelligent Designer Created a Universe that eventual created me, Great!
— Oct 25, 2025 08:54PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 522 of 562
I find a lot of problems with the Omniscience of God. Or (in science) the 3D Space-time concept of the Universe (it exists and always has and always will and the block of space-time can be traversed but won't change hence No Free Will). It may be subjective but I feel I have free will... just how much is up to God. QED
— Oct 25, 2025 08:49PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 515 of 562
This chapter does nothing to relate Science and God. Thinking about God and the creation of the Universe and Everything (e.g. Life) is No Proving the existence of God. In fact, the Godel Incompleteness argument destroys the concept of using logic to prove the existence of a purpose for the Universe and a God who had that purpose Before it existed.
— Oct 25, 2025 08:44PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 505 of 562
I did Expect many more arguments from the Intelligent Design camp which were to a degree covered in the section on biologic complexity... but that group argues for an Intelligent Design of (all/part) of Nature. Many (IMO) will share this idea
— Oct 25, 2025 08:40PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 494 of 562
what was this chapter? reflection on why the author would write this book
— Oct 25, 2025 08:28PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 486 of 562
Subjective testimony about a miracle is proof of nothing. So, again, this is a big fail for the author supposed to be writing a book about Science and God. But it's obvious the author is OK with Opinion being a big part of Science. Where does this come from? Poor education?
— Oct 25, 2025 08:26PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 446 of 562
Reading about the Jewish people and Israel is IMO pointless.
— Oct 25, 2025 08:16PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 380 of 562
The concept of questioning an allegory as if it's a science theory is Stupid. First one has to interpret the meaning in the context of science But (of course) the author assumes that can be done with a proven stack of Lamba CDM theories. He can't... we don't believe they're correct and we don't believe they're evidence of God and even if you used them to "Prove" the bible has No "Errors" what does that prove?
— Oct 25, 2025 08:09PM
Mike Lisanke
is on page 333 of 562
A whole chapter on Gedel's proof the uncertain is in any logic problem based on assumed truths Has Nothing to do with the Existence of God BUT is does tell us (readers and authors) we should not simply say a Theorem was proven on a certain date. QED (more of the author wasting the readers time!).
— Oct 25, 2025 07:45PM
