Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Churches urged to back evolution
British Broadcasting Corporation ^ | 20 February 2006 | Paul Rincon

Posted on 02/20/2006 5:33:50 AM PST by ToryHeartland

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 2,341 next last
To: When_Penguins_Attack
I got stuck on Thomas Watson in the head (who was a 16th century Puritan preacher with no relation to either of these guys).

I thought he was Chairman of IBM

161 posted on 02/20/2006 9:41:31 AM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: ToryHeartland

I have stated here before, and see no reason to change my mind, that the main problem that Creationists have with Evolution is they see it interfering with the "special" relationship Man has with God (Man is just another animal). This makes them feel insecure and so they attack Evolution and with it most of the "hard" sciences since they are all interconnected and support each other.

They feel threatened - it doesn't have to be that way.


162 posted on 02/20/2006 9:41:34 AM PST by furball4paws (Awful Offal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Boiler Plate
Darwin rejected the idea of creation because of his own personal beliefs and sought an explanation that did not include a supernatural being.

So your contention is that evolution is based solely on an attempt to explain origins without a creator. Can you support this claim with evidence?
163 posted on 02/20/2006 9:44:28 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

You again ...

I suppose according to you, GOd is a liar too!

The truth is your the rabid liar that twists things. Hey, there's hope for you too! Even rapid liars can be acceptable to Him, if you repent.

Such open defiance of God!

I believe in God. His book reveals Him to me. As He eloquently puts it:

Rom.1:20

[20] For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

All you have to do is OPEN YOUR EYES!

The evidence speaks for itself.


164 posted on 02/20/2006 9:44:44 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people believe in Intelligent Design (God))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81
If I do, would you mind if I referenced your post here?

MY post?

It's mostly GOD's Word!!

(Go ahead!!)

165 posted on 02/20/2006 9:45:28 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
don't get the impression that the entire conservative movement in the US (and thus the Republican party) is entirely bonkers

I hope I didn't imply that was my impression, very far from it. The conservative movement in the UK (which is not confined to the Conservative and Unionist Party) may not seem of particular importance to some Americans, but I'd argue we do matter--at least when in power (we've been lousy in oppostion in recent years, but that's another story). I would happily argue that the premiership of Margaret Thatcher helped President Reagan win the Cold War, for example, and that we have done much to reverse the damage to the UK wrought by socialists (if only we could stop the rot in continental Europe as well--but that's yet another story). In short, I would hope that conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic recognised our common values and objectives.

166 posted on 02/20/2006 9:47:45 AM PST by ToryHeartland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
He claims that those who accept evolution deliberately interpret the evidence to fit their beliefs.

Not quite what I said (do we ping here?), but the essence of the charge is true, and that whether you are a fiery fundmentalist or a god-hating atheist, or somewhere in between. Claiming "objectivity" in an issue like this is a fool's claim. If you sincerely believe that if I "accept" the concept of an eternal judge then I am not motivated to find a way to build a world where "science" gets me out from the idea of that type of world then all I can say is that you are incredibly naive and have not much experience with people. People are irrational, unobjective, emotional, and prone to the grossest distortions and misrepresentations of data that can be imagined. That doesn't change just because you have a bunch of analytical instruments in your place of work, compared to those who labor on spreadsheets, or with a pick and shovel. "Peer review" is no more of a safeguard against this than some group of clerics are immune from silly declarations about Ptolmy or the date of the original creation.

The point is that no one is objective, not that one group or the other is deliberately dishonest. The dishonesty comes in the proclamation that one is "objective." That is a load of crap. Objectivity is by definition impossible, but doubly so on an issue like this.

167 posted on 02/20/2006 9:50:54 AM PST by When_Penguins_Attack (Smashing Windows, Breaking down Gates. Proud Mepis User!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
The Bible was written by a bunch of Bronze age, sandal wearing goat herders ...

And is being discuused by...

...a bunch of silicon age, Berkinstock wearing SUV drivers.


So what??

168 posted on 02/20/2006 9:51:05 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: nmh
The truth is your the rabid liar that twists things.

What did I twist? I directly referenced your own posts. First you said that Antony Flew rejected evolution in respons to an article that rather clearly stated that he did not, then later you denied saying anything about Antony Flew at all, because you didn't want to admit that you'd made a mistake.

You're a liar. There's no way to escape that fact. Now, given that you're a known liar, why should I believe anything that you say?

Such open defiance of God!

I said nothing of God, yet you attribute claims regarding God to me. But then, you're a liar, so that's not surprising.

All you have to do is OPEN YOUR EYES!

The evidence speaks for itself.


Says a known liar who has denied making his own statements. Why should anything you say be believed?
169 posted on 02/20/2006 9:51:07 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Thanks for the ping!


170 posted on 02/20/2006 9:52:14 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

Knock it off!


171 posted on 02/20/2006 9:54:53 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: VOA
"The Question of God", written by a Harvard psychiatrist (Nicolai? Nicolosi?) that used used the character study of Freud and C.S. Lewis to show the tension between the two camps.

Many thanks for the reference, sounds of interest. Google came up with the full name, Dr. Armand Nicholi. Now, if my local library can come up with the text itself...I'll let you know

172 posted on 02/20/2006 9:56:02 AM PST by ToryHeartland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
I've had enough of your abuse!

I have reported you to the moderators.

You have tried to impugn my character enough. It is YOU who totally lacks character and truth. You repeatedly twist what I have stated. You have taken my replies out of context to suit your rabid evolutionist agenda.

ALL prominent evolutionists are atheists. Lesser known evolutionists just try to hop on the coattails of the prominent ones.
173 posted on 02/20/2006 9:57:38 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people believe in Intelligent Design (God))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: nmh

I do NOT disbelieve in God. I just dont see him in the ramblings of the primitive people who penned the words.


174 posted on 02/20/2006 9:58:33 AM PST by Vaquero (time again for the Crusades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator
Thank you!

Please read my private e-mail to you as well.

This individual is TOTALLY out of line.
175 posted on 02/20/2006 9:58:46 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people believe in Intelligent Design (God))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Imagine you're a Scientologist trying to convice me that Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. really is the answer.

That you assert it is so isn't necessarily compelling.

176 posted on 02/20/2006 10:01:19 AM PST by Oztrich Boy (Seriousness lends force to bad arguments. - P J O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm

I think I'll go get lunch. Anyone want to join me?


177 posted on 02/20/2006 10:02:09 AM PST by furball4paws (Awful Offal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws

Low expectations (both of the school system and it's students) are poison to our civilization.


178 posted on 02/20/2006 10:02:12 AM PST by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan
Yet at one point, all the 'viable scientists' agreed the Earth was flat.

Yeah, too bad they didn't listen to the priests and shamans or even to the common people who all knew that the earth wasn't flat but an oblate spheroid that orbited the sun and not the other way around. Oh, those silly scientists...

Science has shown itself to be fallible in the past. It would be the height of arrogance to think it will never be found so again. Refusing to challenge the concepts of science rather defeats the purpose of science itself.

And no one here claims that science is infallible but just because we don't know everything doesn't mean we don't know anything.
If we were to follow your advice we should not only teach astronomy but also astrology, Velikovsky's catastrophism or von Daeniken's nonsense.
And rest assured that the concepts of science get challenged all the time however, this doesn't mean that all positions deserve equal standing because if we gave every crackpot the same attention there'd be no time to do any serious research anymore.
As far as creationism is concerned (especially the YE variety), it has been shown to be untenable as science long before Darwin.

Like everyone else, your opinions are based on your perceptions. If you wish to be a product of primordial ooze, be my guest.

OK, I see this quite often but I still don't understand where you get the idea that we wish to be a product of primordial ooze?

Just because we defend a scientific theory doesn't mean we wish to be a product of primordial ooze as you put it. This is not a matter of what we want or don't want to be true but following the evidence no matter where it leads and how unpleasant it may be to some people.
To simply accept what one wants to be true is rather a trait I've observed in creationists (I'm no kin to monkeys, I chose to believe I'm specially created, etc.).

Now as far as I'm concerned, I couldn't care less whether I'm the descendant of some billion year old primordial ooze or two supernaturally animated lumps of clay from only a couple of millennia ago.
Whatever happens to be the case doesn't affect my self-image in the least and I don't see why it should.

179 posted on 02/20/2006 10:03:37 AM PST by BMCDA (If the human brain were so simple that we could understand it,we would be so simple that we couldn't)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
"I do NOT disbelieve in God. I just dont see him in the ramblings of the primitive people who penned the words."

What God allowed is the personalty of the writer to come through in what was written. All of it is God breathed or inspired from Him. The people that penned the words aren't primitive nor ramblings since they penned what God wanted. Even today they don't understand earlier people. There is evidence of sophistication - such as the pyramids. We can't duplicate them today!

2Tim.3:16

[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
180 posted on 02/20/2006 10:05:17 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people believe in Intelligent Design (God))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 2,341 next last

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.

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