Posted on 05/23/2005 3:29:06 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
About like remarking how good those kosher porkchops were last night for dinner.........
proving WHAT?
Oh please, not before dinner.
She's proof that cro-magnon DNA has indeed survived into modern times.
Just wait.........
SOMEONE will post her picture!
(Fair's fair, after all.....)
VV may noy be EVERYONE's cup of tea!
Who created God?
If God created himself, then it is possible for something to create itself, so why can't the universe create itself?
If God created the universe and did not create himself, then God is not a part of the universe, so God must be outside the universe. Who created the place where God is?
If, as astronomers and astrophysicists tell us, the universe contains a hundred billion galaxies , each with a hundred billion stars, why is this astronomy not in the Bible? Are astronomers lying or deceived?
If orbiting some of those stars there are planets similar to the Earth with creatures at least as intelligent as human beings, do they find any less favor with God than do humans on Earth? Does anything in the Bible imply that such creatures cannot exist?
What is wrong with asking questions like these?
Just contradicting the idea that the Bible is the 'basis for science'. It clearly is not...
No time as WE know it. Time is just God's way of keeping everything from happening at once. But HE existed out of time - before time. Everything in our universe had a beginning ('promised before the beginning of time'), and everything He created was good.
Nothing wrong with asking these questions at all.
Got about a couple of years so we can talk about it over coffee?
Who created God?
"In the beginning God..." Moses tells us that God "is".
Before everything God created, he was already here.
"theistic - deistic
What's the difference?"
I was just being silly. However, theists generally believe in a personally involved god (i.e. Christianity, Islam, Judaism), whereas deists believe in a higher power, deity, supreme being, who does not or cannot get involved in the lives of individuals. I, for instance, believe that god doesn't make natural law, but rather that god is natural law. That is, the structure of the universe is god.
Although since you ask, when it comes to the theory of evolution, I suppose that there really isn't a significant difference between theistic and deistic evolution.
You are simply twisting my words to start an argument.
If you are going to boldly state its so clear, then just provide the corresponding dates of when the Bible was written and when the Chinese wrote some stuff.
My contention has nothing to do with the dates associated with the writings. Youve chosen to focus on the dates. Now provide the clarity.
Man has engaged in science from the moment he was created. With the assistance of intelligent design he was endowed with reason and senses. With these attributes he has, throughout history, communicated general and specific knowledge about the intelligently-designed universe into which he was placed. Had God not created man there would be no such thing as science.
Before you do, you might want to check with Patrick Henry. Last year he posted this thread with a link to an agenda to introduce evolution into kindergardens.
Agenda for Kindergardeners From Berkely site.
FR Thread where Patrick Henry pomoted this site.
I'll be more charitable to you than you were to me and not call you a liar, you were obviously just uninformed.
You've gotten to be as big a word lawyer as Elwood Blues (the one surviving Blues Brother).
Oh please, who is the one being lawyerly here?
The evo's have a website up with an agenda to teach evolution starting at the kindergarden level. And you are trying to draw a line between promoting teaching kindergardners and actually teaching them? Do you really believe that of all the kindergarden teachers out there, none of them are paying attention?
I hope for the kids sake, none are. But the evo's are promoting teaching at that level and Patrick Henry was certainly for it on that thread. So whether it's being practiced or not, the desire and the attempt is there.
That's a mighty wide brush yer paintin' with, pardner.
I'm left wondering if you have actually read what Answers In Genesis has to say on their website. The have articles that claim Nessie is real and UFOs are from the devil. Evolution is blamed for every evil from nazism to communism to robber-baronism. All of science, not just evolutionary biology, but all of science including geology, astronomy, physics, and chemistry must be false in order for the young-earth creationism promoted by Ken Ham and Answers In Genesis to be true.
I tried to post this story written on the Cincinnati Enquirer, May 22, 2005, not knowing it was not allowed.
It is in a very visible location from I-275, on the way to the Indiana Casinos!
Only bits and pieces. I do not get the impression their writings can be accurately subsumed under the statement, "Science is false." On the face of it, such a statement is absurd to begin with. It's like saying, "Knowledge is false." Some might call it, "Begging the question."
LawyersDidit place mark
Unlike having faith, young-earth creationism is mutually exclusive with modern science. In order for young-earth creationism to be true, science must be false. Not just biologic evolution, either, but all of science. Geologists who prospect for oil must be wrong about the global flood. They see evidence of erosion under layers of sediment. Astronomers must be wrong about the age of the sun and planets. The light from the supernova 1987A could not have reached the earth in 6000 years. Chemists must be wrong about radiometric dating. So on and so forth.
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.