Posted on 12/20/2005 7:54:38 AM PST by snarks_when_bored
Although Marx and Darwin may not have shared views directly, they do hold common ground inasmuch as both tended toward disuse of theistic considerations. The former employed force of law to make his point. The latter did not. That's presently up to those disciples of his who prefer to take naturalism to its logical conclusion, like Judge Jones. Darwin would most likely be considered a theistic evolutionist, hence Judge Jones would not want him in the science classroom. Neither would Marx.
I'm trying to say that religiously, I do believe in Christ, and I think the use of Marx, Stalin, etc in the same sentence is a bit insulting. Marx and Stalin created a belief system that was used to enslave and kill millions. Christ came to save everyone. To some extent, Marx and Stalin knew what they were doing, so did Hitler. The Pharisees were misunderstood and feared their power, they too are like Hitler and Stalin, but for different reasons. The others, even Jesus had said they did not know what they were doing. He forgave those who betrayed him and those who sent him to the cross because they did not know what they were doing. So yeah, I guess I thought that they were saying that Stalin and Marx were the ones crucifying Christ, thats where the insult came from.
Fossil's *are* rocks. What's your point?
It does have a problem with natural selection in that it isn't fast enough for the available time.
Actually, you're close.
Natural selection is an organizing principle.
It simply isn't fast enough for the available time due to its randomness.
"Natural selection is an organizing principle.
It simply isn't fast enough for the available time due to its randomness."
Natural selection is not random.
Okay, lets rephrase this, this fossil was found in a rock layer dating back 100,000,000 years, so this piece of rock is 100,000,000 years. Is that better, honeykins?
/sarc intended
Should it be my problem when it is you who are contradicting yourself?
To reiterate, evolution and religion are not incompatible. Evolution may be incompatible with some religious views and beliefs, however. That is not the same thing.
"Fossil's *are* rocks."
Indeed, they are.
The mutation is random....therefore, the selection is premised on randomness.
...And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM:
and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children
of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. (Exodus 3:14)
I AM is the name God gives to Moses. My construct
of God comes from the Holy Scripture. If you worship
idols (China House), then you are a Pagan and the
issue of Intelligent Design does not concern you.
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them,(china houses)
nor serve them (idols): for I the LORD thy God [am] a
jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them
that hate me; (Exodus 20:5)
ONE GOD. ONE WAY. YAHWEY OR NO WAY!
You've made that point several times. Care to provide a link?
misanthrope. Duplicitous and opportunistic
......................................
His letters/life/ideology prove it. And his supporters - Stalin, Hitler, Marx plus EVOS here - too.
"The mutation is random....therefore, the selection is premised on randomness."
The selection is NOT random though. Natural selection cannot be a random process. You are only including one part of the process. Natural selection is a TWO step process.
"You never found where the existence of atoms is scientifically proven, either. That's because science doesn't deal in "proof", it deals with the theories that best fit all the available evidence."
I thought science dealt with proof and the reason for experiements are to prove a theory.
My point was that neither crowd can prove creation from nothing. You can't prove either way but what I find interesting is that you can't present ID as an alternative theory. Do we discount the many scientists who believe in ID and have evidence to support their theory? Since we are to continue to develop theories for the origin of the universe wouldn't it be right to present ID as another theory?
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.