Posted on 05/28/2008 6:09:31 AM PDT by Sopater
In school, we had a class on the Crusades. One of the best I ever attended.
Religion IS history. We never get beyond the pilgrims in grammar school.Teach Religion as part of Philosophy in Grammar schools.
Man has his own mind and he is entitled to his own beliefs.
Atheists? That's their problem and their mind. Believe what you want but I am entitled to the same.
Very good post.
It shows how easily lead and dumbed down people have become in allowing atheists, (evolutionists) to dominate their “thinking”. Any thinking person, KNOWS God is the Intelligent Designer. Life doesn’t just happen. The complexity of the human body alone should tell even the dumbest human being that God designed them - not “chance” over millions or is it now billions of years. The length of time being stretched still doesn’t make it so - life just happened.
Nice post. Thanks.
I find the Argument from Authority one of the weakest arguments in this debate, especially when the authorities are mostly lawyers who had no knowledge of the enormous advances in science that have taken place since they wrote.
Religion is part of history, it isn’t history. Which religion should be taught as part of Philosophy in grammar schools?
The human body did not evolve to be easily understood.
Before Darwin there was phiosophical speculation on the origins of life. After Darwin there was phiosophical speculation on the origins of life.. The difference is that after Darwin it has become settled science that new species evolve from existing ones. Darwin didn’t address the origins of life. He described a mechanism to explain the origin of new species.
This whole article is based on multiple false premises.
And it isn't part of pre-history, except in some cases to dispute that there is such a thing.
Absolutely. The only thing of value in it that I saw (besides the words of our founders which are always inspiring) was this...
“We shall show by the testimony of men learned in science and theology that there are millions of people who believe in evolution and in the stories of creation as set forth in the Bible and who find no conflict between the two.”
Even more true now than in 1925.
“The human body did not evolve to be easily understood. “
The numan body NEVER “evolved” and this is my point.
Perhaps you can tell me how the heart “evolved”?
Or how the eye “evolved”?
“it has become settled science”
Is that you, Al Gore?
Ah... “settled science”
Just like Algore - a phrase intended to SHUT UP ANYONE WHO HAS A DISSENTING POINT OF VIEW.
Very, very typical of anyone attempting to destroy the foundations of our society.
As CS Lewis states, 99% of what we “know” is based on “argument from authority”.
Do you know that the Arctic is cold? How? Have you been there, or are you basing that knowledge on “authority”?
I do take issue with John Adams, though I use his quote of “this Constitution is good for the governance of a good and religious people...it is inadequate for any other”.
I’ll let him have a pass on the “universe is infinite and eternal” as he couldn’t have know about the big bang origins. That the universe has a start is more of an argument for an eternal Cause than the eternality of the universe.
Also, I take issue with his statement that we are wicked for attempting to understand the universe. The Creator put our world in a specific place in the universe so that we COULD discover its wonders.
Benjamin Franklin
It might be judged an affront to your understandings should I go about to prove this first principle: the existence of a Deity and that He is the Creator of the universe;
More evidence that no one remembers anything taught in high school biology class. Evolution is not about how the universe was created.
I am merely pointing out a fact. There is no competing scientific theory for the origin of species. There is, however, mountains of empirical and observational evidence for the evolution of species through natural selection.
If you have an alternative scientific theory, state it. State your hypothesis and the experiments you have done that support your hypothesis so other scientists can try to replicate them.
This is their big bugaboo about Science, they think that a detailed and accurate description of reality somehow denies the creator of this reality, rather than showing that reality exists by utilization of normal and predictable forces.
For some reason they do not go after Astronomers with the same fervor. After all, they show that stars form by Gravity and Nuclear Fusion, indicating that no miraculous intervention is needed to create our Sun. Yet showing that stars and our sun can form by natural means is somehow not as severe a blow to their self love as indicating that the Human species could have arisen by natural means.
I can understand why that would bother you.
“I’ll let him have a pass on the “universe is infinite and eternal” as he couldn’t have know about the big bang origins. That the universe has a start is more of an argument for an eternal Cause than the eternality of the universe.”
The “big bang” theory was around for him to also believe in if he wished. He chose not to believe in the “big bang” theory.
I agree that there is no reason in the world to not learn about the universe and try as best we can to understand it knowing we have finite knowledge.
That's hillarious from an evo.
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.