Posted on 06/10/2006 4:33:28 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
Save it for those times when you want to imitate an ignorant, retarded, incestuous, transvestite, drug-crazed leper.
I suggest you save it for special occasions. If you use it too much it's likely to loose some of it's punch. Don't worry, those special occasions will be frequent and easy to see.
Homer's are long ballads -- not sworn testimony before a body of men acting as court in all significant ways. The Holy Scripture is the sworn witness testimony of serious and honest men and has been carried along in a chain of custody by serious, honest caretakers.
Let me revise that last remark. I do not think that Homer was a prophet from what I know of him and his works. Perhaps he was a prophet of some sort. The important thing is that the Illiad is not sworn legal testimony. It is a narrative mixing fact, story-telling elements that may not be facts, and legends meant to be pleasing as an epic ballad. It is not legislation.
Well, you're all over the board on everything, because you can't actually defend yourself rationally on any of the positions you've taken. But I'll bite. I believe in evolution and a semblance of ID together. YEC is incredibly stupid however.
There is NO chain of custody for the Biblical accounts, except the Bible itself. We take them on faith. Still, you haven't addressed your own insistence that the good poster to whom you mockingly replied accept your proffer of accepting as given fact your selected interpretation of indirect evidence of events that transpired billions of years ago.
The fact I turned someone's version of "logic" back on him doesn't affect my logic. The Sheehandic response of "how DARE you make me provide scientific proof of my beliefs!" rings hollow in a scientific discussion. I pointed out that insistence on "proof" runs both ways. I can provide it for TToE. No one can for The Bible.
You see it is not just indirect evidence you have asked to be accepted, it is one particular interpretation of that evidence that you are asking to be accepted. Yet you deny his use of reliable sworn testimony from older hearings, older but certainly much less old than billions of years, mind you.
We can look at fossils right now. We can use scientific analysis to determine how they lived and what they did. We can date them. We can see their changes over great lengths of time to see the patterns emerge. We can refine those patterns.
Religion can do none of these things. When someone puts "God's word" up as an absolute proof, I throw the Cindy Sheehan flag and require of them what they require of Science (which I can provide and they can't).
Using the Bible as Axiomatic text is the same as using the accursed qu'uran or cave drawings. It doesn't mean I don;t believe in the Bible, it just means that I take it on faith and I use my God given brain to review science.
Gotta go. I'll check this sometime tomorrow.
Speaking for gusopol3, what has neen done here is changing of definition.
Biblical Literalists are generally considered (by some) "Conservative" Christians. Simply viewed, the phrase "Bible believing Christians, whose outlook is conservative" whould be a tautology.
However, choice of the word "outlook" implies that political conservatism is meant here.
This ignores the fact that there is a large group of -Americans, who strongly consider Genesis to be Literal History, and vote solidly Democrat.
liberal Christians, whose doctrine is more "acceptable" to you."
Here the use of the word "doctrine" rather than "outlook" indicates "liberal Christians" implies theological liberalism rather than a political meaning.
Hope that is clear - and don't ask me where Roman Catholics fit.
Increase the dosage.
Say what?
The Bible is a set of third hand stories, the veracity of which is accepted on faith.
The Bible isn't even the full set of stories, many of which were left out for one reason or another.
That would be ID, then, I take it. You just found the DI's handling of the Pennsylvania trial -- bad, incomptent, dysfunctional. Would that be right?
You are aware that the first five books are law, and were the practised law in ancient Israel when it was a sovereign state, are you not? That the content of those laws has been faithfully recorded and passed along -- chain of custody, unbroken chain of custody -- for thousands of years. No faith involved. Merely accurate recording of sworn testimony, and faithful conveyance of the "court record" so to speak.
Time is only so long for each of us. Use it well.
Mohammed, ok?
At least he wasn't told to snip off his daughter's arms.
Yet.
What is intelligent design?It's the missing link between creationism and religious instruction masquerading as biology.
Bruce Bower, Science News, vol. 168 (Nos 26 & 27), 2006, p. 414:
Happy now?
The Genesis creation story is/was law? How so?
How does ancient Israel adopting parts of the early Bible as law verify the creation story as anything but a myth?
" This is an very good example of the goggles many anti-evolutionists wear."
I wouldn't call Tom Wolfe an "anti-evolutionist", by far. His argument about language and evolution in that article is way off however, at least I wouldn't have used the terminology he is using. (I.e. evolution stopping with the advent of language. It is now perfectly demonstrable that it did not.)
"In fact the common belief today is that any 'primal animal urges' we have led to our development of community and conflict resolution."
Contrary to what Liberal Creationists (TM) tell you, human evolution has never stopped. And yes, Hamiltonianism is the best theory on the evolution of sociability and altruism available.
"Heck even Pinker believes our genome contributes to only about 30% to 40% of our mental makeup."
As for estimating the precise "genetic impact" on our mental state, that is dependent on the environment, as well as on precisely which variable is being studied. General intelligence is frequently estimated to have an hereditability coefficient above 60 percent, for instance. But keep in mind plasticity is also a trait coded for by our genes...
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.