Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: general_re; PatrickHenry; BMCDA; CCWoody; Diamond; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Nebullis; cornelis
I said that FReeper Patrick Henry IMPLIED that no Creator exists. I stand by that.

***

Look again at PH's remark, in context. His reference to "others" was a reference to non-creationists (i.e., to people unlike me). So, he was saying that non-creationists see what exists.

Please hold that thought for a minute--and notice that PH turned around immediately and maintained that creationists "see" what they want to see. (This is an idea of believing, but he called it a seeing.)

I submit that PH intended to use that very statement (about creationists seeing what they want to see) to disparage creationists as less than fully rational. PH's previous remark was a set-up for this disparagement. He was faintly but definitely bragging about the "objectivity," about the perspicacity (?), of the non-creationists so that he could insinuate that we creationists are somehow less noble than "real scientists" (and perhaps even somehow feeble-minded).

Why am I alert for this disparagement? It's because it is the standard stupid "argument" which non-creationists (like Asimov, the poor fool!) have always offered. It's not a valid argument, of course; it is merely snotty junk from people who trust their intellect when they shouldn't.

A lot of "real scientists" are not as good at their discipline of science as they think they are. They need to be more concerned about being correct.

***

In short, PH's remark that non-creationists see what is was intended to insinuate that creationists see what isn't. But this insinuation is actually dishonest. The non-creationists indulge in this sort of dishonesty only because the non-creationists are foolish enough to assume that they are correct in their apprehension of reality. (And they aren't!)

Well, I am turning the tables. I submit that we creationists are more intellectually honest than the non-creationists. We are more rational than the non-creationists. We recognize that reasonableness sometimes demands a faculty for seeing things which are, for various wonderful reasons, invisible.

My bottom-line point is that antichristian scientists are not at all reasonable. (This is why I specifically dared to point out that avowed atheists are complete fools. They don't have an intellectual leg to stand on--but the poor fools manifestly don't care about that.)

Anyway, the God Whom I know, the God of the Bible, flatly declares that He is NOT interested in having everyone in His creation come to know Him. Romans 1:16-23 is crystal clear in this regard.

Think about that. You will see what I mean one of these Days.

57 posted on 03/04/2003 11:01:39 PM PST by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]


To: the_doc
Look again at PH's remark, in context. His reference to "others" was a reference to non-creationists (i.e., to people unlike me). So, he was saying that non-creationists see what exists.

In context, "others" is compared to "you". "Others" pretty clearly means "everyone but you".

58 posted on 03/04/2003 11:33:03 PM PST by general_re (Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson