Posted on 10/10/2009 11:10:58 AM PDT by bogusname
Evolutionists have maintained that the fossil record supports a long-ages history for earth, but material extracted from dinosaur bones is providing an interesting challenge to that theory. The recent discoveries of soft dinosaur tissues, defined cell matrices, elastic blood vessels, and clearly observable cell microstructures such as cell nuclei have been a source of both shock and excitement to the paleontology community.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
“And yet you have yet to provide a quote or a citation to this effect.”
Is it really necessary to prove that there are fundamentalists that literally believe the Bible is true and that eternal damnation is achievable through lack of belief in it’s literal nature?
They’ve told me directly on previous threads, unfortunately I am unable to search the references at this time.
I am amused that you deny the “fire-and-brimstone” sect of Christianity exists at all, however, and that “creation science” is consistent with it.
If you're going to paint with that brush, yes, indeed, you must prove that the brush exists.
“If you’re going to paint with that brush, yes, indeed, you must prove that the brush exists.”
So do I need only prove that there are folks out there that believe that if you do not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible you are going to hell?
I just want to be clear on what it would take to convince you of what you already know to be true. We are simply scoring debating points here now, I realize, so I’m playing along.
And, even if you DO come up with a couple of folks that believe that way, it doesn’t mean that the denial of salvation is the basis of creation science,
nor does it in some way invalidate the premises of creation science if such folks do exist.
It’s a side issue, a strawman.
“And, even if you DO come up with a couple of folks that believe that way, it doesn’t mean that the denial of salvation is the basis of creation science,”
Ok, so should I even bother proving that “fire-and-brimstone” Christians exist, or will you at least concede that point?
Shall we discuss why “Creation Science” exists at all then?
You were the one that was insisting that creation science is invalid because a limited subset (of which you haven’t provided example) claims damnation based on disbelief of Genesis.
All I’m telling you is that, IF those people exist, THAT PART of their assertion is in error.
I’m not even sure why you were trying to use that as a “disproval” of creation science.
“nor does it in some way invalidate the premises of creation science if such folks do exist.”
Just searching around.....Would a group that stated this (below) be a valid example of “creation science”?
“Those who reject Him, however, or who neglect to believe on Him, thereby continue in their state of rebellion and must ultimately be consigned to the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
“All I’m telling you is that, IF those people exist, THAT PART of their assertion is in error.”
If that part is in error, something as fundamental as that, why would you believe anything they published?
All that states is the belief in Christ and the gift of salvation.
Not sure where you think you’re going with the “creation science” angle, unless you’re just trying to condemn Christianity as a whole.
Oh, you go ahead and feel free to “reject” anything you like.
I’m not going to go ANYWHERE except to address that your assertion that “creationists are condemning you” is a simple strawman.
What’s “poorly written” about the article?
This is from the organization from which the article that is the subject of the thread is posted.
They state in the third to last “fundamental tenet” that:
“Those who reject Him, however, or who neglect to believe on Him, thereby continue in their state of rebellion and must ultimately be consigned to the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
This is the “Institute for Creation Research” fundamental tenet - in other words, “If you don’t believe in creation or “creation science” you are going to hell.
“Not sure where you think you’re going with the “creation science” angle, unless you’re just trying to condemn Christianity as a whole.”
“Creation Science” is a fraud, and has nothing to do with faith or Christianity, or science.
If you don’t believe in what they peddle - BS science, you are going to hell, and from what you have told me, that includes you.
“I’m not going to go ANYWHERE except to address that your assertion that “creationists are condemning you” is a simple strawman.”
Read my previous post. It is not a stawman, it is a fundamental tenet of the “Institute for Creation Research”.
Enjoy the fires of hell that are awaiting you, my friend!
"In other words, I don't care that I can't find my point on their site, I'm going to tell you what they mean, and beat the hell out of that strawman I just created."
“I’m not going to go ANYWHERE except to address that your assertion that “creationists are condemning you” is a simple strawman.”
I must correct you.....it may seem like a small point but it is a big one - I said “Creation Science” condemns you, not “creationists”.
Creationism is a reasonable and entirely consistent point of Faith.
“Creation Science” is a lie that seeks to condemn those who do not believe in their lie.
“”In other words, I don’t care that I can’t find my point on their site, I’m going to tell you what they mean, and beat the hell out of that strawman I just created.””
No, my point was fully proven. If you cannot even accept what the organization says about itself then so be it.
I am sorry for embarrassing you with the words uttered by such an august “creation science” organization, but there was no way around it.
Good day my friend, and I mean it with the utmost friendly intention when I say: “I’ll see you in hell”
[[How is it that you and the rest of the evos who pull this nonsense, have determined that every creationist has to believe that those who believe in evolution are going to hell and that if they say they don’t, that they’re liars?]]
Because while they are yelling at true Christians that we don’t have a ‘right to determine what it means to be a Christian’, they turn around and determine how Christians are suppsoed to beleive- Hypocrisy x 1000
[[“Those who reject Him, however, or who neglect to believe on Him, thereby continue in their state of rebellion and must ultimately be consigned to the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”]]
Pe usual, the evos read what they want to into God’s word and statements by those who beleive in God’s word- nowhere in that statement does it state that a person is goign to hell if they mistakenly beleive in evolution- what it DOES state is that those who refuse to beleive in Christ are goign to hell- So, in essence, we have someone fraudulently misrepresentign what ICR is stating, and turnign around and calling ICR and creation science ‘fraud’- again- hypocrisy x 1000
It's all part of the definition war. Evos claim that because they own science, as it were, they have the right to define what and who is and is not a scientist, claiming that non-scientists don't have that right.
Then they turn around and demand the right to define non-scientific terms, rather than let those who name the name of Christ define what qualifies one to be a Christian.
If they have the right to those definitions and demand that we accept them, then by the same standard, which should be equitably applied, Christians should have the right to define what is Christianity and they should have to accept that.
Spot on about the hypocrisy. They want to have their cake and eat it too.
“what it DOES state is that those who refuse to beleive in Christ are goign to hell- So, in essence, we have someone fraudulently misrepresentign what ICR is stating, and turnign around and calling ICR and creation science ‘fraud’- again- hypocrisy x 1000”
No, my misguided friend. I posted a link to the full tenets of the ICR. You can read the whole thing and take everything they say in the context that they intended it.
They are absolutely saying that if you do not believe in creationism, literal Genesis, or the “science” that they present that you are going to hell.
So try on that hypocrisy banner for size, I think you’ll find it’s a perfect fit.
If you wish, why don’t you contact ICR and ask them? I understand that they mean what they say, I understand the context in which they say it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.