Posted on 08/02/2005 4:16:26 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
As late as Einstein in the 20's non religionists clung to the theory that there was no creation event, the Universe was static.
The Bible is neither a history book nor a science text so as much as you'd like to make the devil in the details the essence of your reply, it fails.
So you can have your baloney and eat it too, I like turkey.
And what created God?
Or is it turtles all the way down, then?
If you answer that God didn't need to be created, then you've just torpedoed your initial assumption that nature needed a creator to exist (since you've now admitted that things *can* exist without a creator.
correction: their should be they're.
Cute - what are your thoughts of eternity vs. time? the PhDs would indicate an ability to express yourself with a reasoned train of thought instead of quips - I don't have those lofty degrees, but I can detect a lazy/u informed evasion when I see it. I've heard the Big Bang theories that everything was compreesed to the size of an atom, when time/matter/energy did not exist, to be suddenly spewed out, creating time/energy/mass. Perhaps the term "before time" might seem simplistic to one so lofty as you, but the concept of it can't be that hard to grasp if there was nothing before the Big Bang, then that state must have preceeded it. Then the theories that figure everything will stop expanding, only to recompress and then regenerate in a new Big Bang also indicates that there was a "before".
If you want to snicker, at least take the time to justify it - that shouldn't be too much of an effort compared to the work that went into the degrees. (And I'm not making light of the effort of the degrees - I got a Bachelors in Education going to night classes and I know how time-consuming and strenuous it can be - my hat's off to you for your accomplishments in that area.)
Doesn't it though. Made me break my rule of staying out of these discussions. :)
Please, remember the lurkers. Most people who are interested in this argument aren't going to post because it gets a little bit heated ... heck, I didn't post for a long time in these threads for that very reason, and I got swept up in the current right away.
I'm ALWAYS looking for more books to add to my reserve list at the library ... of course, it's like my Netflix queue, I'm never sure what will actually become available at any point. I'll reserve a book, and forget about it until it's in months later ...
Alas, it has already been spun.
Feel free to use my logic 'against me' any time you wish. I stand by everything I've said on this thread.
btw, your mixing of issues was not because you were responding to different issues I brought up. You were mixing them within themselves, and that was what created the problems.
I admit only God can create. He always was. Hard to comprehend, though, to my small mind.
Maybe I'll get there eventually!
As for creationists and evolutionists : A POX ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES.
This 'joke' of yours (in response to the post it was a reply to) is both ignorant of what Christiantiy is, and what its followers have in the past, and now believe. You are ignorant of Christianity because you have naively swallowed what you have been taught in school about Christians by leftist historians and text writers.You have some serious mental problems if you can conclude that from a joke about blood letting. I was joking about the prior state of medical "knowledge." I mentioned neither Christian, Christianity, or Christian beliefs.
And it is arrogant in it's mocking of those who differ with you, intellectually and logically, and not because you are not a man of faith......you are.........you have great faith if you believe in the impossibility of evolution. But you are afraid of those who challenge your particular belief system, so you mock them.Ha ha ha. This is the standard "everyone has faith" b.s. I have no problem is someone wants to challenge evolution with science. No problem. But since challenging science with religion is pitiful. It makes a mockery of science, and humanity's quest for knowledge. Some appear content to wallow in the ignorance of superstition for fear of having to contemplate life without their emotional security blanket. So if you infer any mockery from my posts, I can only say they are a mirror of that which you put out there.
I stand by my post that it is you evolutionary zealots who are the ignorant and arrogant.You are quite brave, standing by an opinion. You should get a medal... (That's more of that mockery.)
More grade school journalism. They could have started with Anaximander in the 6th century BC, or with Lamarck in the modern era.
Interesting post.
Just a thought, though. When Heinrich Schliemann discovered Troy (the Troy of the Iliad) there was virtually no one who believed that Troy existed ever. Schliemann believed it. He was basically alone. He believed that the Iliad had mostly fact.
Nowadays, most archaeologists accept the fact that, he did, in fact uncover Troy somewhere in Turkey. It's a pretty amazing accomplishment if you think about it. Also interestingly, he had to dig down through eight cities on top of each other before he found the "real Troy". And the scientific community of his day didn't even know a city had ever been there.
So...the point being. I don't think we know as much about the world as we think we do. I'm not commenting on your particular post, incidentally. I'm just interjecting a cautionary idea into our thinking about antiquity.
At the end of the day....it turned out that the mythological Iliad was more accurate than the science of Schliemann's day. It may turn out that Exodus, though dismissed by most as mythology or pure fabrication, is factual.
Oh, I read much more on these evo/id threads than I actually post ... I actually enjoy the arguments on both sides.
Feel free to use my logic 'against me' any time you wish. I stand by everything I've said on this thread.
I try to keep it on a thread by thread basis ... of course, if you start posting on a different thread that you suddenly are all for the theory of evolution, I'd have to ask you why. :)
btw, your mixing of issues was not because you were responding to different issues I brought up. You were mixing them within themselves, and that was what created the problems.
Okay, thanks for pointing out the confusion.
This is probably a boring post for most of you readers, I'll try to be more argumentative next time.
Since the debate about origins cannot be solved with certainty, you may have a point about leaving that discussion out of science in primary schools and take it up in philosophy classes. Because when all is said and done it is a philosophical question. Both EV and ID start with a philosophical premise. I think that delving into Quantum Physics brings one to the possibility that matter is not as real as we suppose.
It appears to be VHS only ... maybe my library sytem has it ...
(I love using Amazon to look up book/movie information ... I hate giving them my money.)
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.