Posted on 01/16/2006 8:32:58 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Darwinists must be an endangered species. How else to explain their 80-year need for court protection to ensure their survival?
In 1925, an ACLU-driven defense team in the Scopes-Monkey Trial wanted a court to declare that laws forbidding the teaching of evolution were unconstitutional. In recent weeks, in a courtroom in Dover, Pa., the same organization applauded a judge’s ruling that the teaching of ideas contrary to evolution, in this case Intelligent Design, were unconstitutional.
The same ACLU that once advocated for free and open discussion in schools is working to see it stifled today.
Its website boasts, “Intelligent Design is a religious view, not a scientific theory, according to U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III in his historic decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover. The decision is a victory not only for the ACLU, who led the legal challenge, but for all who believe it is inappropriate, and unconstitutional, to advance a particular religious belief at the expense of our children's education.”
Science involves observing nature and producing hypotheses which explain the data -- and of discrediting theories which don’t fit new observations. Having judges decide what constitutes science is as nonsensical as scientists issuing judicial decisions.
And the irreligious left, perpetually misusing the First Amendment, can’t identify which religion is being established. Is it that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses or of Catholicism? Perhaps Mormonism or Orthodox Judaism? Among many others, these disparate faiths all claim as canon the book of Genesis, where the religious version of creation is found.
But ironically, while no particular religion is being promoted by the teaching of Intelligent Design, there’s a belief system, which has established “churches” in several states, that is being favored by ACLU-- and court-imposed censorship: atheism, whose worldview promotes moral relativism and secular humanism.
The left maintains that Intelligent Design is merely creationism -- a literal reading of the Bible’s account of creation -- camouflaged in scientific language. But even a casual perusal of ID demonstrates there is no dependence on Genesis for any of its arguments, nor does it teach any biblical doctrine. It merely demands an examination of the evidence -- or lack thereof -- that uncountable species arose from primordial soup, or that they evolved over time from one to another.
To support Darwin’s theory, the earth should be teeming with myriad transitional specimens, but they are noteworthy, despite incessant extrapolation, only by their absence.
Other modern observations are daunting for Darwinists: digital information -- universally a mark of design -- in the genetic code and irreducibly complex structures such as miniature molecular machines within the cell which Darwin could hardly begin to imagine. Using the eye as an example, he coined the phrase, “organs of extreme perfection and complication” and recognized his theory’s inability to explain them. New discoveries only exacerbate these shortcomings.
And despite frequent references to “organic chemicals” present on the formative earth, neither Darwin nor modern scientists can demonstrate how to get from these compounds to just a single-cell living organism, or even a virus -- let alone the complex life forms. The search for that initial “spark” of life, or an explanation of why it is no longer in evidence, has been forever elusive.
Ironically, the scientific community, which anxiously tries to find evidence of other intelligent life in the universe, blatantly turns its back on the one intelligence we have the most indication of: a creator; a master chemist for whom the DNA code -- a puzzle which even our terrestrial species is just starting to grasp -- is a simple blueprint.
Even though ID relies not at all on the Bible, it does leave open the conclusion that the designer is the biblical God and this implication of God is what the Darwinists seem to fear.
So there may yet be hope for these folks since the Psalmist says, “The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.” Let’s hope they eventually wise up.
Haven't read the whole thread - just checking in here. Actually there is only "one" religion - love for God. He has millions of names. If someone's religion or spiritual path helps him/her love God more, then good. If not, either the path isn't that good, or s/he isn't following well.
One symptom of someone whose love for God is growing is that person will love others as much as he loves himself. IOW, he will care about others' wellbeing as much or more than his own. Without that love for others, the love for God is still very immature.
And sometimes love manifests as "tough love" - as any parent knows.
;-)
"And besides, that is decided by HIM who is beyond all concepts."
****thanks for your comments....I don't feel comfortable when "hard hitting Christians" of "authority"? start condeming people to h*ll. I have a problem with that. It's just from a Christian's point of view we just share our belief and then move on......
The love of Jesus, and accepting his death is the key....that is what the Christians believe and what the Bible says. The Koran says something else....The Jehovahs' witnesses say that you will inherit a planet when you die.....yes, they actually do believe that....Mormans something else....
So, It would only stand to reason that if I chose a religion, it would be Jehovah's witnesses and I could handle a planet.....why not. But, does that make it so. Why can't I form my own religion.....and give it conditions, rewards and it should come true, right?
I found all these issues and realized that something was wrong here.....So, I searched for the truth.....
I'll leave it here..................One God, one set of rules, one standard......otherwise, I can just form my own if I believe hard enough, love everyone...and so forth....really! why not....
Think about it....
Just a quick addition here..
Even "Awake" pamphlets I've found truth in, even the Koran. Although I'm pretty disgusted with the Muslims in general and jihadis in particular...
I'm not trying to say that every religious sect is all true, all the time - they'd cancel each other out.
But the basics of "God exists" and "He is the Supreme Controller, Owner, and Friend of all living beings" and "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you", followed by "everyone reaps what they sow" - are universal, and any religious system that rejects these ain't no religion.
I'd add two more, the most important:
1. Love God with all one's heart and mind.
2. Love others at least as much as we love ourselves.
The greatest saints think themselves more lowly than the straw in the street.
I've read that a saintly person thinks like this:
"I'm just a poor soul who has taken complete shelter in God."
It depends upon whether the parents have been teaching that evolution is false. That seems to be the only explanation that would cause such confusion.
If so, then the confusion arises because the parents are the one's leading the kids astray, not the schools.
A parent can teach their kids whatever they want, but if the parents tell the kids something that they later learn to be untrue, then the kids start to question other things their parents told them. And rightfully so.
Brahe hired Kepler as an assistant to calculate planetary orbits from Brahe's observations of planetary positions. Brahe set up his observatory sometime after 1574, and abandoned it in 1597. Brahe died in 1601. So it's more like 20 years of observations.
Brahe believed that all planets except Earth orbited the Sun, and the Sun and the Moon orbited Earth.
Well, as a Christian, and I have a son, I tell him as I believe and have read, that evolution is not true. I would keep my opinion pretty much neutral here, as I said in another post, as the post was written to be neutral. My personal belief based on current evidence that I've found, is that evolution is not possible. However, a pro-evolutionist would see it another way due to not believing in God, and yet another who does believe in God would say that God used evolution as another twist.....
Now, that's just me.....
absolutely.......I'll drink...er I mean, I'll go along with that one.....:)
good point........
It's at this point that our opinions diverge.
I appreciate the civil tone our discussion has enjoyed. I will say that respectfully, I disagree and I'd like to leave it at that.
FRegards,
Dan
If you spend a lot of time with it, you can find sources of hard copy translations of some of these guys' interchanges. Although I'm frequently frustrated with how much information is still not available in English.
Of course......I don't see why people have to do all this shouting...that was why I had the humor of the post prior to this.....about "we're supposed to be shouting"....:)
however, I've had some colorful attacks and I do get crude with those.....but, discussion, reference, expression of thought and opinion, exchange and agreeing, or agreeing to disagree......who cares, life if too short.....
:)) I've had a date to end in 20 minutes because the "date" was up front quickly and ask me...get this....was I for the death penalty. "Say what"? Okay, I said yes, with some reservations......opps...end of date that quick.....:))))
Oh, that son I told you about......I encourage him by the way, he should always, see for himself. I didn't include that in my "declaration" paragraph. I also encourage him to make his own decisions that he can live with.....this is mine based on blah blah blah.......
So, thanks and I also appreciate the exchange.....However, even now, I still look for contradictions and I have to resolve them; in my own beliefs......that is a personal thing......ever hear of Doubting Thomas.....that Be me.
I understood the humorous reference.
So, thanks and I also appreciate the exchange.....However, even now, I still look for contradictions and I have to resolve them; in my own beliefs......that is a personal thing......ever hear of Doubting Thomas.....that Be me.
Me, too. Only I'm Doubting Dan. :)
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.