To: Quix
IF as such so called "scientific" folks contend in favor of evolution . . . that man is nothing more than a rat, pigeon, radish or rock,
They do not. As your premise is folse, any conclusions drawn from it are faulty.
217 posted on
08/28/2006 10:31:23 AM PDT by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
218 posted on
08/28/2006 10:34:47 AM PDT by
PatrickHenry
(The universe is made for life, therefore ID. Life can't arise naturally, therefore ID.)
To: Dimensio; highball
To: Dimensio
I disagree. They do.
They are just dishonest about it.
They pretend that man is something because of rationalizations built on a sky-hook; on wisps of fog in Phoenix at noon in the spring . . . on foggy headed notions with no solid foundation at all . . .
As Jean Paul-Satre was wise enough to note though he never discovered it to his satisfaction . . .
For the finite to have meaning, it must have a connection with the infinite.
Evolutionists have no infinite beyond chance plus time.
Chance plus time are inadequate to afford man meaning.
382 posted on
08/28/2006 1:39:02 PM PDT by
Quix
(LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
