I've always considered "a picture is worth a thousand words"...
Posted on 06/27/2008 2:04:21 PM PDT by EveningStar
‘Whats sad is when people believe something, not because they researched it and found it to be true, but because of religious fiat.’
I, and so many others have researched it to the point where Creationists have to rely solely on theologic arguments. The science isn’t on their side.
I’ve always considered posting graphics instead of an actual argument a coward’s tactic. You don’t have to defend what you’re saying if you never really said anything.
How can a star be formed. Read Genesis. It is fully explained, unless you reject the Bible. But, isn't the Bible the acclaimed Word of God, according to Roman theology? ...or, is God just over-ruled by the scientists?
Inquiring minds want to know!
I've always considered "a picture is worth a thousand words"...
How precious.
So build me a perfect circle with a diameter to circumfrence ratio of 3. Unless you have so little faith in God you believe it can’t be done.
Oh...and you didn’t link me to proof of how a star is born using observed data.
I answered your question. Answer mine and we may get somewhere. I understand your method of argument. I also understand that you appear to display a lack of commitment to God's truths.
No, you didn’t answer my question. What you did was hold up the Bible and said believe in it as you do or else.
You’re not being scientific. You’re showing the intellectual honesty of a communist at an economic summit or a global warming advocate.
how many people do you think you’ve helped into the flames of Hell by telling them to believe in your narrow lie over what they know to be true? I know if I was wavering in my faith and some hack came up to me and told me that I had to believe the Earth was 6,000 as well as all the stars in the Universe or else I wouldn’t be a true Christian, you’d have sealed me oin the idea of becoming an Atheist.
There is no Christian mandate that I have to purposefully reject Science to be a good Christian. And you can believe in nonsense all you want but I’ll be damned if I’ll passively sit by and watch you damn kids to being uneducated fools.
Evolutionary Philosophy, as espoused by Darwin, et al, is not science, it is just another religion, soundly based on faith in the natural man. It does everything possible to deny any type of Divine influences.
I see no further reason to respond to your atheistic predilection. I have already found my Truth. You must be still searching...
"In the beginning, God..." In the end, as well!
"I, and so many others have researched it to the point where Creationists have to rely solely on theologic arguments. The science isn’t on their side."If the above were true, then I wouldn't imagine you would have to resort to elephant hurling as demonstrated above.
If only it were so simple to label all who disagree with you as disbelievers. Can’t you just accept that you’re putting all your chips into an interpretation of the Bible that is wrong? How much pride and arrogance do you have in yourself?
FYI, a Catholic told me that RCC doctrine must be in harmony with science.
‘Science’ is always ‘right’.
Last I checked, God was still sovereign and not defined by man.
(And you beautifully demonstrated with that picture where many of these ‘scientists’ have their heads.)
2 Timothy 3:
1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth—men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.
10You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11persecutions, sufferings—what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord rescued me from all of them. 12In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Show me my error, according to your faith!
"Can’t you just accept that you’re putting all your chips into an interpretation of the Bible that is wrong?" [excerpt]Wrong?
Yes, science was abandoned a few hundred years ago, but Einstein and Humphries brought us back. Humphries model is mathematical perfection, and cosmological perfection, being the only model that fits all observable phenomenon, and also fits God's word. (the last part is why you hate it) The Earth is the reason for the universe; God said so, and the observable universe says so too. No "dark matter," and no "dark energy" needed to make it work, either. Doesn't that just drive you crazy? (it shows)
Then by all means, reject all mathematics built upon the concept that the Earth is round and that pi doesn’t equal 3.
Because certainly some fix those values, as the Bible so firmly plants them, as immutable truths. Or are you one of those bad Christians that says pi is an irrational number and that the Earth is round?
Mobility isn't required for life. At simplest you need RNA, a membrane (cell wall) and metabolism. It's been found that fatty acids will form a membrane in the right pH and nucleotides will move into and out of the vesicle. A certain type of clay is known to both activate the generation of that membrane and polymerize RNA from those nucleotides.
BTW, yes, I was waiting for this eventual irreducible complexity question based on your question in #250. Please don’t try such an obvious set-up again. At least make it challenging to detect.
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.