Posted on 03/23/2005 10:48:58 PM PST by Quick1
You don't teach a kid quantum theory. You teach them basic physics first.
You don't start a kid off with abiogenesis. The idea is ridiculous even to me, and I understand the concept! You teach them that things are here. And those things have a reason for being here. You fill in the holes with suggestions from the scientific community.
This makes me quite happy.
I'm surprised at the amount of anti-Christ support in this country. I guess hating Christians is the new age wave, aye?
Some people simply will not allow others free thought about our origin because they disagree with anything other than their own self creation and worship. It's pretty sad really. Thought control is a terrible thing.
"First evo to take the time to try to explain it."
I am not an evolutionist, but I try to be scientific and rational.
"Of course, considering you are an IDest, wuoldn't venture into it being TO big a suprise. After all, we're both reasonable here."
No idea. I'm sure that Issac Newton would be surprised at a lot of the scientific advances if he was around today. What appears miraculous today may be science tomorrow. For me personally, everything is miraculous whether it has a decent scientific theory or not; this is not an intellectual position but a spiritual one.
"Sound arguement, but I still hold that evolution (as gravity) needs to be a sidenote (as does ID) in basic science classes."
If ID can be used to make predictions about the world that can be tested then I would agree. Otherwise it does not belong. If the question of ID should come up in a science class then the students should be taught that science has nothing to say on this matter, either for or against, because it is a matter beyond the reach of the scientific method.
I think we're essentially looking towards the same pint, just from opposite sides of the river.
I hold that evolution AND ID should both be held off until higher (more focussed) classes.
It should get the same (proper) treatment gravity has always gotten.
"I'm surprised at the amount of anti-Christ support in this country. I guess hating Christians is the new age wave, aye?"
I am very supportive of reasonable Christians. Actually you would be hard-pressed to find a more pro-Christian non-Christian than myself. Fundamentalists trying to push their unscientific (which does not necessarily imply untrue) beliefs into science education to the detriment our country is something that I don't have a lot of patience for however.
"Some people simply will not allow others free thought about our origin because they disagree with anything other than their own self creation and worship. It's pretty sad really. Thought control is a terrible thing."
Go ahead, no one's stopping you, free-think all you want.
"I hold that evolution AND ID should both be held off until higher (more focussed) classes."
No, ID is not a scientific theory and therefore should not be included. Various scientific (i.e. able to make predictions that can or have been verified by experiment or observation) theories of how the various forms of life on Earth came to be are of scientific interest even when they are wrong or approximate because this still gives us direction on how the theories might be improved. With ID there's not really much to say - people could argue endlessly about whether this or that thing is really intelligently designed but ultimately it comes down to opinions. In order to be able to proceed scientifically at all in regards to "intelligent design" we would first need to be able to define "intelligence." Is a amoeba intelligent? Is a dog intelligent? Is a computer intelligent? Could we say that the universe is intelligent since it contains all these "intelligent" organisms? The definition of "intelligence" is problematic and is a show-stopper in regards to the scientific study of ID.
The"focus" would be the theology classes. My bad for not clarifying there, but I have stated so in previous posts.
Islam's is the same as Christianity's.
BTW, ID is not a "creation story" any more than evolution is.
It is a philosphical approach to the answer of "where did life come from" NOT a religious one.
Because they think we got who the Saviour is wrong, and by their teachings, we must die for it.
It's a matter of self-preservation on our part. It's a matter of blind-faith on theirs.
They blindly assume they are God's Chosen. Yet in all counts (even their own) they are from the ill-begotten, Ishmael.
All I'm saying is fundementalists on both sides scare me... and make me think the He has abandoned us.
What can I say to you except that the Truth will set you free.
You might think He is gone, but look around at the simple fact that this world even EXISTS. DESPITE itself. I think if this world were full of only people who hated each other, then why is it still here to talk about?
Seeing people hate is not evidence of a lack of God, but evidence of a lack of Godliness. It only proves we're human. It doesn't prove He isn't working in our lives to this day.
If you're scared of a TRUE fundamentalist Christian, then I have nothing to offer.
You should just give up on life now if you think that disciples of Christ are cause for you to fear.
Love, morals, and Truth.
If you fear these, then you need help.
here here!
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.