Posted on 04/20/2008 6:09:13 PM PDT by Soliton
Ben Stein was just on Fox News with Geraldo. He was asked If ID versus Evolution was a "left, right thing". He responded,"No, It's an atheist versus a non-believer thing". Stein inadvertantly admitted that ID is a religious argument, not science!
"My personal belief is God made it in six literal days.The example I gave you is what is called, day-age theory's."
I suppose that it's pointless to mention that with one exception they all pre-dated Darwin and his theories?
And yes, you’re right, evolutionists aren’t all atheists,
So were you mistaken in your earlier post when you lumped the two together? Or were you...exaggerating?
but “evolution is the engine of atheism” is a truism.
Because you say so? Well thanks for clearing that up for us.
Darwin himself wasn’t an atheist, since he did refer to “his deity, Natural Selection”.
Quote please?
Yes, it IS pointless and a non-sequiter to mention that all the founders of modern science predated Darwin. Their scientific development was based on a foundation of Creation with empirically discoverable laws.
“Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented.” -— Dr. William Provine, Professor of History and Biology, Cornell University.
(no, not because I say so, because atheists say so, and don’t split my quote to try to refute part of it)
“My Deity, Natural Selection” in a letter from
Darwin, C. R. to Gray, Asa, 5 June [1861]
And my point is that if the scriptures are, as they claim to be, inspired, and they are not absolutely true, then we have a problem:
1) They are either not inspired (God-breathed).
2) They are inspired but God lied.
3) They are inspired and true, but they do not speak in a way that they can be correctly interpreted, understood, and communicated at present, if ever. (If this is the case, WHAT, EXACTLY, do we know from Scripture? We need to reexamine our epistemology and our hermeneutics.
On another thread I read where someone mentioned the ‘gap theory.’ IMO, the gap theory and day-age theory are pretty much one in the same. Do you agree? If not, where am I in error on that?
It requires willing ignorance to believe otherwise.
I agree.
Oh, wait a minute! What are these things in the rear: 
I guess those aren't legs?
And funny, a leg isn't an organ, it's superficial anatomy. An organ would be something like a liver, or a heart, or brain. Or maybe you could stretch it to an organ system like the muscles, veins, or skeleton. But a leg is not an organ!
And of course, we have cases were some people actually walk like apes in that they usually walk on all fours.
You and I will never agree. I believe the truths revealed in the Bible are inerrant and accurate; but I believe the Bible is not a literal-for-literal dictate.
What version of the Bible do you use? Because different translations have different words for the same thing. Clearly not literal-for-literal! Even the issues with translations of Genesis try to get around the differences in the creation timelines (Genesis 1 has plants and animals before man, Genesis 2 has plants and animals after man).
And how do you know your version is correct? The Catholic Bible and the Orthodox Bible both have different books, and greatly pre-date the Protestant Bible. Not to mention the complete Torah which spans much more than just the Bible.
So you feel comfortable throwing away a lot of the literal-for-literal dictates from God?
Fundamentally, you and I will never agree simply because we have a different baseline of faith. Go in peace, brother!
I’m ignorant in this field, but just from reading some of it does the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics make evolution impossible?
<rant>
I can't even begin to tell you how tiresome I find these arguments between young earth creationists and atheists. As a skeptic of theism in all its forms (including atheism) I think there are very good ID arguments. However, the claim that evolution violates the 2nd Law is flat-out crap and ID proponents make themselves look like idiots when they try to make this claim. I got my PhD in physics in 1984, and other than a brief stint as an instructor (I did, coincidentally, teach thermodynamics and statistical thermo to undergrads), I have never used my degree. I know I open myself to all kinds of flames from people in replying to these threads and usually don't, but the 2nd law claim is one I just won't put up with. It's baloney.
</rant>
To answer your question: the mistake evolutionary critics make is in describing evolution as "random." Nothing could be further from the truth. evolution is not random. It is ultimately driven by energy extremization principles and the 2nd law of thermodynamics. What is a remarkable argument in favor of ID is missed by young earth creationists desperate to invoke physics against evolution is this: the process by which evolution proceeds is essentially a Markov process. Of all processes in mathematical statistics, this kind of process is the only one which can be proven to absolutely guarantee that the optimum configuration will be reached. Now that is an argument in favor of a designer, whether you like it or not. The problem is, the Designer utilizing the optimum process would have to use evolution to achieve His results--and this is what the young earth creationists find objectionable.
Sorry buddy, but this film has peaked. Michael Moore's horrible crap made money and garnered awards because it catered to anti-Bushies and America haters. "Expelled" is very weak science, but it isn't anti-American, so its audience has pretty much been reached. It has no overseas market. "The Passion" did half a billion dollars and won nothing. "Expelled" won't earn back its marketing costs. It may do $10mm.
It is ultimately driven by energy extremization principles and the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
But I thought I read where TLoT, only applies to physcial events and chemical reactions, not evolution?
No need to get huffy with your answer.
I got my PhD in physics in 1984, and other than a brief stint as an instructor (I did, coincidentally, teach thermodynamics and statistical thermo to undergrads), I have never used my degree.
And I'm just a 9th grade drop-out. So there! :)
Are you talking about the Markov chain?
Oh, and I'm on the God side.
"On another thread I read where someone mentioned the ‘gap theory.’ IMO, the gap theory and day-age theory are pretty much one in the same. Do you agree? If not, where am I in error on that?"
"You and I will never agree. I believe the truths revealed in the Bible are inerrant and accurate; but I believe the Bible is not a literal-for-literal dictate.
What version of the Bible do you use? Because different translations have different words for the same thing. Clearly not literal-for-literal! Even the issues with translations of Genesis try to get around the differences in the creation timelines (Genesis 1 has plants and animals before man, Genesis 2 has plants and animals after man).
And how do you know your version is correct? The Catholic Bible and the Orthodox Bible both have different books, and greatly pre-date the Protestant Bible. Not to mention the complete Torah which spans much more than just the Bible.
So you feel comfortable throwing away a lot of the literal-for-literal dictates from God?
Fundamentally, you and I will never agree simply because we have a different baseline of faith. Go in peace, brother!"
icon to get the concordance lookup.I couldn't agree more.
Thanks for the link. I bookmarked it for later reading. Many articles there, should be an interesting read.
Here's an interesting site I had in my Bible bookmarks that talks about the gap theory, day-age theory and the Bible.
Does it make a difference in it’s validity? I was not passing it off as my own work, but I was in a hurry to get to a meeting, and wanted to respond.
I think God's laughing his ass off at all of us.
I’m pretty sure he is. He does have a sense of humor, the Zebra and platypus proves it.
I don’t think anyone can lay claim to understanding how life works anymore than they can lay claim to knowing what God thinks.
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.