Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: elfman2; metmom

Abiogenesis is simply a much more convincing explanation for some to accept absent evidence of the divine.

Abiogenesis is merely ‘sheep’s intestine’s’ divination revamped and modernized for today’s so-called ‘enlightened’
progressives. When man turns back to the ancient view that ‘nature’ somehow ‘made everything,’ it’s not long before man begins seeking ways of interacting with “The Force’ that supposedly animates everything.

Abiogenesis and Darwinism (by any name)-—are merely theoretical adjuncts of naturalism, which is monism (everything is ‘one’ with nature, matter, The Force, whatever), which, like a coin has two sides: materialism and pantheism. It’s all nature worship.


14 posted on 05/02/2009 11:57:26 AM PDT by spirited irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: spirited irish
I have no idea whether a belief in idealism (“such as a force”) or naturalism came first so I wouldn't guess which would be "turning back" the most. I find neither convincing. Atheism requires neither in order to explain life.

"Darwinism" is a fantasy word, whatever radical opponents of evolution say it is, much like my son’s made up superhero "Traigler". At least he’s not misrepresenting other superheros when he invents his. But he’s just 4 and not so insecure and bitter.

Try to find strength in your own ideology rather than misrepresenting those of others Irish.

18 posted on 05/02/2009 1:24:15 PM PDT by elfman2 (TheRightReasons.net - Reasoning CONSERVATIVES without the kooks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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