Posted on 08/07/2005 6:25:03 AM PDT by RepublicNewbie
In the "Monkey Trial," 80 years ago, the issue was: Did John Scopes violate Tennessee law forbidding the teaching of evolution? Indeed he had. Scopes was convicted and fined $100.
But because a cheerleader press favored Clarence Darrow, the agnostic who defended Scopes, Christian fundamentalism -- and the reputation of William Jennings Bryan, who was put on the stand and made to defend the literal truth of every Bible story from Jonah and the whale to the six days of creation -- took a pounding.
Yeshua?
Darwinists are a theocracy... I wil prove it right here...
Like the so-called “Big Bang” theory rests upon an assumption of a singularity, so does evolutionary theory - - the DNA molecule (all life has it).
The “Big Bang” theorists and the evolutionists have already admitted both the universe and life itself is an immaculate conception...
And, this is what they are REALLY afraid of!
The fact that something works is proof that a designer probably wanted it to work that way.
Dimensio: You're assuming that life is "working" according to a design, though. You've yet to demonstrate this.
Step one in the scientific method: Observation.
At least design can be observed. Funny you should insist on "demonstration" when evolution can neither be demonstrated nor observed.
Is that some sort of death threat?
Let's emphasize the words "scientific character," too. What does he mean by that? I am perfectly willing to grant "scientific character" to evolutionism. Veracity and certitude are another matter altogether. Your own spokesman waffles, as he should, because he just isn't sure where he came from and where he's going.
>>Stone ignorant. <<
Can you be specific rather than conclusory? What is ignorant about that?
And I'm going to pray for you tonight RA. Maybe you'll die so that you might live. And you can call me a murderous prayer warrior.
Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live
You are the crazy person in this exchange, and a dangerous religious extremist. But as you may be unfamiliar with the general flavor and tone of the New Testament regarding love and forgiveness, here is something you might understand from someone you are likely familiar with:
Forgiving Your Enemies
By Pat Robertson
The 700 Club
CBN.com - The first step in forgiveness is to recognize your resentment against an enemy. You must understand who the enemy is and what he has done to hurt you. Then you must consciously say, "I forgive that person for the following wrongs against me." Then repent of your feelings against your enemy and ask God to forgive you, even as "we also forgive everyone who is indebted to us" (Luke 11:4).
After that, begin to pray actively for your enemy's good. Jesus told us to pray for our enemies and that doing this will help to fill us with love for them.
When you pray for your enemies, asking God to meet their needs and manifest Himself to them, you are overcoming evil with good. Instead of fighting negative thoughts in your mind, you are filling your mind with positive thoughts. You are now on the side of your enemy; you have a spiritual stake in his well-being. If God answers your prayer, which you want Him to do, the person prayed for will be blessed, and you will learn about redemption--the ultimate form of forgiveness.
Keep in mind that if you ask God to bless somebody, God will bring that person to a condition where blessing is possible. God will not bless an evildoer until he or she repents of sin, provides restitution where necessary, and gets right with God. So if you ask God to bless someone who has wronged you, the result may well be a repentant sinner and a new brother or sister in the Lord!
As you are well aware, God does not listen to the prayers of religious nuts asking that evil be done to those they hate. Neither does God honor requests made by twisting the meaning of Scripture, such as the verse quoted above.
Rest assured, my friend, your relationship with the Almighty is secure.
bluepistolero
Your reply: Yeshua?
ROFL! You owe me a new keyboard for this reply. Of course the radical Christians are afraid of Yeshua...for He will tell them that their thinking is incorrect and that their concept of Him is, at the very least, seriously flawed.
Fear guides these people...fear that their special agendas will be discovered and that the Almighty really doesn't support their causes. Oh, what mega-bucks would dry up if the business of "Christianity" was revealed!
However, my experience with evolutionists is that they will fight, almost to the "death" to suppress ANY altnernative that might challenge their sacred belief.
That is sheer insanity, to paraphrase, "Because it works, the poster shouts back IT DOESN'T WORK!" That is pure religious fundamentalism, in other words, don't bother me with science or facts, I'm not interested.
If this refers to a post of mine, you missed the point. Scientific theories have specific explanatory power and specific implications. Most importantly, they are capable of being falsified. This means that any scientific theory must allow something like the following: If fact "A" becomes known, it disproves (or falsifies), this theory.
A theory that can account for absolutely everything and fails to propose a test for falsification is simply not science.
Evolution, as has been pointed out here many times, would be falsified by a Precambrian rabbit fossil. The theory would have no way to explain such a thing, and would thereby be falsified.
Creationism or ID, on the other hand, can simply say, "That's the way God (or the designer), did it." How would one use ID or creationism to disprove the jackalope?
Evolution would also be falsified if we were to observe an event one sees occasionally demanded by creationists mistakenly assuming that such a thing is evolution: A fish giving birth to a cat. The theory of evolution states that such an event can never happen. How would you rule it out using ID or creationism?
Until a faslification for them is proposed, creationism and ID cannot rise to the level of science.
Oh, and the more direct answer to what you posited is that intelligent design DOES answer the existing problems with evolution, but it's not an acceptable answer to the secular fundamentalists of the evolution movement.
That's the crux of the issue: there's nothing creationism and ID don't predict. It's rather like Nostradamus that way. You can read anything you like into the quatrains. I've heard Nostradamus called a lot of things, but "scientific" was never one of them.
So what is the theory of ID and how can it be tested?
Since you don't know anything about evolutionary theory and haven't read much of the thread, I'll help you out.
Evloutionary theory is based on the fossil record which contains trillions of examples. Creationism and ID have no examples. There's no evidence for the cement flood and none that there are space aliens designing species on earth.
Do you have a theory?
Actually ID can't be observed. ID is argument from ignorance. The less one knows, the more "evidence" for ID there is.
Welcome back by the way. Haven't seen you posting for awhile. Hope everything is OK with you and your family. ;)
Placemarker.
C'mon now. A serious student of Dembski, Behe and Dr. Dino, like yourself, should be able to explain the theory of ID and provide some testable predictions very quickly and easily.
No?
All of which things had DNA...
Evolution clearly rests on the DNA molecule, period. All life has DNA, it is the single common thread for all living things, both flora and fauna; the singularity, the immaculate conception.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
I'll help you out.
I don't need your “help.” Did I ask you for it? Just like a liberal, you want to “help.” You ain't that smart...
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.