Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill Maher challenged to intelligent-design debate
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | May 10, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

Posted on 05/10/2006 9:38:22 PM PDT by Tim Long

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-145 next last
Comment #101 Removed by Moderator

To: DaveLoneRanger

It was a joke, but I am a big fan of Hovind's debate style.


102 posted on 05/11/2006 2:43:12 PM PDT by Tim Long (I spit in the face of people who don't want to be cool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
You must 'know' a LOT of folks!

Correction noted. That's not what I meant.

103 posted on 05/11/2006 2:43:27 PM PDT by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: aliquando

"Anything is possible in G_d. Even evolution. I still do not see the conflict between salvation and science."

I see a conflict. God says there was no death until the sin of Adam. Evolution says you got to keep dying to develop and adapt.

You either believe the truth of the Bible or believe something else. Both can't be rigth.


104 posted on 05/11/2006 2:44:39 PM PDT by WKUHilltopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tim Long
I don't accept oldearthism, as it is only needed for evolution to occur.

Not if life didn't exist during those billions of years.

105 posted on 05/11/2006 2:45:47 PM PDT by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: pcottraux

I said that wrong. I meant that the only reason to believe in an old earth is to make evolution possible. There is no evidence for it and much evidence to the contrary.


106 posted on 05/11/2006 2:58:03 PM PDT by Tim Long (I spit in the face of people who don't want to be cool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Tim Long
The fact that a carbon-14 isotope will completely decay in ~100,000 years seems to disprove the notion of an old earth.

How? I don't see the connection at all.

107 posted on 05/11/2006 2:58:47 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Tim Long
I was just thinking about the hollow earth theory. You know Newton believed it.

No, I didn't know that. Could you give a citation or two please?

108 posted on 05/11/2006 3:01:38 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Tim Long

Well, I'm sure there are geological reasons as well.

My point is that there's no reason scientific theories that put the age of this planet at billions of years has to contradict what the Bible says. This is putting evolution aside (and speaking strictly on geological terms).


109 posted on 05/11/2006 3:08:51 PM PDT by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: pcottraux

Well, as I understand it, the Hebrew word for "day" meant a 24 hour day. Also the day and night designations did not need the presence of a sun, as there was light before the sun. Probably not from stars though, as they seem to have been created on day 4.


110 posted on 05/11/2006 3:13:26 PM PDT by Tim Long (I spit in the face of people who don't want to be cool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper; MHGinTN

WKUHilltopper...you raise an interesting, but hardly new, point, in your post #104...many on these crevo threads have raised the very same issue, that there was no death until the sin of Adam and that evolution says you got to keep dying to develop and adapt...that particular thought, has been floating around these crevo threads for some time now...

But as recently as yesterday,someone else raised this very point and then , I saw someone else give quite an eloquent rebuttal to this, and so I reprint it here for you to consider...

MHGinTN...since these two posts I reprint here were your posts, I am pinging you, tho I know, you said, that you really do not have a lot of interest on these crevo threads....however, I think that your post was spot on regarding these questions about death relating to Adam, and Evolution...hope you dont mind my using your words...

WKUHilltopper...here is MHGinTNs post......"As a Christian, I cannot pass on this one: "How about the Fall of Man, a fundamental tenant of the Christian faith? How can evolution have occurred before the Fall? Before death and corruption were introduced into Creation?" The fall to which you refer is 'death on a spiritual level' and as best my Christian reading can instruct me, plants and animals aren't vested with a spirit, though they have a soul of life since they do die. Is it so great a stretch to your faith to realize that spiritual forces do manifest in physical and living consequences? Of course not ... so please try to check dogma at the door when entering these evo-crevo threads because your narrowness is embarrassing to fellow Christians like myself."

And then there is this follow-posts of MHGinTN...




"Were these critics to focus upon the advent of spirit in the human soul/animal soul, I would see the debates as constructive. But to confuse soul and spirit in the name of 'doing God's heavy lifting on the nature of the universe we've been given to explore' is an exercise in futility. I don't believe the spirit component of humankind has been evolving for ttens or hundreds or millions of years. But the fossil record indicates the physical bodies and accompanying forms for function have been. In short, the human spirit hasn't evolved from apes or amoebas, but the science we have seems to indicate that the body used to inveigle spirit into the universe of space and time and life-force has descended from such. It's kind of like arguing whether the body Jesus occupied could have held 'all of God' ... Philip got a lecture on that very topic, BTW."

WKUHilltopper...you may not agree with these posts, but surely they offer a fine rebuttal to your claims about death...


111 posted on 05/11/2006 3:19:38 PM PDT by andysandmikesmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Tim Long

But even the light itself isn't created until verse 3. And no specific time period, day or otherwise, is given until verse 2. I really can't see the time span of verses 1 and 2 being within one 24-hour period. But since days and nights didn't exist until light was created, there really is no such thing as "time" at the very beginning so what goes on before that is probably ageless.


112 posted on 05/11/2006 3:22:29 PM PDT by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

Comment #113 Removed by Moderator

To: DaveLoneRanger
He actually doesn't repeat arguments. He has a fairly unique Creationist view. He is probably the most aggressive Creationist I have ever seen. The only thing that bothers me is that he believes the US govt. was behind 9/11. He may get this from the heads of Truth Radio, which carries his program.

A.D.D.? Whadayamean?

114 posted on 05/11/2006 5:17:03 PM PDT by Tim Long (I spit in the face of people who don't want to be cool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

Comment #115 Removed by Moderator

To: WKUHilltopper

This is assuming that you have complete understanding of G_d's word. Do you read the Bible in Greek, Hebrew, or English?


116 posted on 05/11/2006 7:03:32 PM PDT by aliquando (A Scout is T, L, H, F, C, K, O, C, T, B, C, and R.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: aliquando

"This is assuming that you have complete understanding of G_d's word. Do you read the Bible in Greek, Hebrew, or English?"

I always fiqured this was immaterial. If God is powerful enough to speak into existence everything in a flash, then He certainly can invoke His will to mere men to transcribe His points properly. I consider it much like you'd see a car operations manual. It may be written in different languages, but the intent and written instruction maintaining the vehicle gets you to the same point/objective.


117 posted on 05/11/2006 7:49:04 PM PDT by WKUHilltopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
And he said, "Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?"

August 30, 1997 - Sammy Hagar appeared on Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher last Thursday night.

Oh, the other Hagar, said Maher...

118 posted on 05/11/2006 8:13:09 PM PDT by TeddyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper

Good point. If the will of God isn't clear and is only available to a tiny few who can read dead languages, the words aren't worth much.


119 posted on 05/11/2006 8:17:46 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Tim Long
If Mr. Comforts want to challange the theory, and he's confident he's right, then should challange the person most qualified to defend it. In the case of a scientific theory, that person would be a scientist. Yet Mr. Comfort challanges not a scientist, but some goofball talk show host without even a bachelor's degree in science.

Yes, that sure makes Mr. Comfort look like he's confident in his position.

120 posted on 05/11/2006 9:13:51 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-145 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson