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

To: Dog Gone

No, not shocked but I am surprised that one can believe in a God incapable of creating, or only capable of controlling while not capable of creating, not responsible, or not involved with creation. To ME, it doesn’t make any sense.

But I’ve seen that today for the first time, and it seems to me an extraordinary effort to believe the LEAST likely scenario, while disparaging others.

Not speaking of you of course.

It sounds like we believe the same exact thing, at least from the nuts and bolts of it.

And yes scientifically, we have two competing theories, that I don’t see necessary in place to threaten the other, because neither offers definitive end all answers, so the logical thing TO ME seems to let them play out!

I also think when a person, or group begins demanding to define and to control exchange of information is dangerous, from EITHER side BTW, and I’d vigorously tell ID proponents looking to DEMAND evolution be banned, or dismissed or made fun of, that they’re doing more to HARM ID with that attitude.

But demanidng people to shut up because that’s not science, etc. likewise isn’t a genuine exploration of ideas IMO.

As far as the earth being 6000 years old, I don’t much CARE...some people are fixated, but the FACT is no one was there to live to tell about it, we simply study what’s been left behind with the MAN-made (ie INFALLABLE) TOOLS WE’VE CREATED!

Science indeed explains the things we CAN explain, but that doesn’t mean that which it can not explain, ie the supernatural, OR that science is the ONLY means to explain our world.

For all I know the thousands vs. millions of years is as simple as years in ancient times were measured differently than today, which explains Biblical figures being hundreds of years old, when they may have only been 30-40, I don’t know.

If God was able to create Adam and all we know from dirt or nothing...and Satan was able to cause the fall of man in the Garden of Eden, then it seems to me dinosaurs could well be something unexplained by science and supernatural as well, don’t know, wasn’t there.

Maybe when God created the dinosaurs on day one...that day TOOK a ga-jillion years...and as God progressed through creation, He was measuring days in it’s infancy for the first time, perhaps he adjusted a day as he went along, to the point by the end it more closely resembled what we now have.

I don’t think sciewnce, the Bible, etc. was intended to explain every single solitary thing we think about, otherwise how utterly BORING it owuld be to “know it all”.

Besides, I think the next life will be for all that.

But yes, I agree science shouldn’t be forced to address ID, but I also agree it shouldn’t demand it be hidden either!

Let the people decide for themselves!

I think we agree on far more than we disagree btw.


307 posted on 04/29/2008 8:14:31 AM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing-----Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies ]


To: tpanther
Let the people decide for themselves!

I think we agree on far more than we disagree btw.

I think we do, too, and I have no problem with people who believe in ID, or Special Creation.

Really my only objection to ID is that some advocates of it want to say that it IS science and should be taught as valid science.

But it's not science. That doesn't even mean it's wrong. It might be 100% right. But science doesn't permit a conclusion without testable evidence, and ID probably can never provide that. Science only deals in the natural world. It can't jump in with supernatural explanations because those can't be tested or recreated by peers.

Science has an explanation for why trees sprout new leaves in the Spring. But the real explanation is that there are tree fairies who wave their magic wands. That's ridiculous, of course, but made only to illustrate the point that once science accepts a supernatural explanation, it's no longer science at all. You might as well not even bother.

If ID can start being a science instead of claiming that is science, then the discussion should be fascinating.

325 posted on 04/29/2008 5:53:35 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies ]

To: tpanther
I also think when a person, or group begins demanding to define and to control exchange of information is dangerous, from EITHER side BTW, and I’d vigorously tell ID proponents looking to DEMAND evolution be banned, or dismissed or made fun of, that they’re doing more to HARM ID with that attitude. But demanidng people to shut up because that’s not science, etc. likewise isn’t a genuine exploration of ideas IMO.

You're about the only person on these threads who isn't a dope when it comes to this subject.

395 posted on 05/01/2008 8:02:55 AM PDT by jmc813 (Eek!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies ]

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