Posted on 09/24/2009 6:08:52 AM PDT by xcamel
William Dembski, the “intelligent design” creationist who is a professor in philosophy at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, has some rather interesting requirements for students of his creationism courses — 20% of their final grade comes from having written 10 posts promoting ID on “hostile” websites: Academic Year 2009-2010.
Spring 2009
Intelligent Design (SOUTHERN EVANGELICAL SEMINARY #AP 410, 510, and 810; May 11 – 16, 2009)
NEW! THE DUE DATE FOR ALL WORK IN THIS COURSE IS AUGUST 14, 2009. Here’s what you will need to do to wrap things up:
AP410 — This is the undegrad [sic] course. You have three things to do: (1) take the final exam (worth 40% of your grade); (2) write a 3,000-word essay on the theological significance of intelligent design (worth 40% of your grade); (3) provide at least 10 posts defending ID that you’ve made on “hostile” websites, the posts totalling 2,000 words, along with the URLs (i.e., web links) to each post (worth 20% of your grade).
AP510 — This is the masters course. You have four things to do: (1) take the final exam (worth 30% of your grade); (2) write a 1,500- to 2,000-word critical review of Francis Collins’s The Language of God — for instructions, see below (20% of your grade); (3) write a 3,000-word essay on the theological significance of intelligent design (worth 30% of your grade); (4) provide at least 10 posts defending ID that you’ve made on “hostile” websites, the posts totalling 3,000 words, along with the URLs (i.e., web links) to each post (worth 20% of your grade).
==And they wonder why its so damned hard to get through a freepathon nowadays...
Quit knocking FR you little cry baby. FR’s posting policies are FR’s posting policies. If you don’t like it, leave. You don’t hear Creationists or IDers crying when you post your evo-religious screeds in the threads.
PS And while I’m at it, please quite following me around from thread to thread comparing biblical creationists to the Taliban, or posting pictures of cans of spam. You are welcome to join the debate, but leave your trolling ways at the thread’s door. Thank you for your cooperation.
Why the ping to JR and the mods?
I am being very civil in this thread and want to have the debate that CottShop mentioned. Your side wont post any of their proof.
I did not attack anybody’s religion. I stated my views and was attacked for them.
Because I’m sick of xcamel constantly going around bashing FR simply because Creationists and IDers are not treated like second class citizens on FR. What has been decided has been decided...and I think xcamel has had pleny of time to come to terms with it.
PS The ping to JR and the mods had nothing to do with you.
Nothing like a can of Spam picture to draw those contributers! Mere trollfuls.
[[If he is the Christian he claims to be maybe he can back up his allegedly “Christian” beliefs with a Scripture reference or two.]]
I’d liek to see where the bible talks about infant baptism, or that being a member of a church is all you need for salvation- Seems ot me that Christ spoke out against such a notion and said it was not man that earned his way to heaven by being a member of a church- infact He said salvation was through Him and Him alone, so that no man coudl boast- IF a man can earn their way to heaven by being a ‘good member’ then that certainly DOES give a person reason to boast- and one has to admit that if a man only gets to heaven by being a ‘good member, then apparently, not goign to church would mean loss of salvation- showing once again that it’s a man who maintains their salvation- and not Christ as the bible speaks about- again givign the man somethign to boast about
[[Show PROOF that they are wrong assumptions, and which specific assumptions are they.]]
We’ve doen so many times- We’ve shown that dirty chemicals can not give birth to metainformation, we’ve shown proof that radio-alos form very quickly (a peer reviewed scientific research discovery that has stood the test of scrutiny now for over 2 decades btw) we’ve shown that nature vioaltes the second law, and we’ve shown that the silly argument that ‘the second law doesn’t apply in an open system’ is just that- a very silly ‘argument’ to make, we’ve shown that biologically, DNA does not just occure all on it’s own and that amino acids can not make the biologically impossible leap to protiens, and that RNA can’t produce life without being intelligently and artificially manipulated in intelligently designed experiments, we’ve shown that the dating methods used past 5-9,000 years is based on nothign but assumptions (I’ve personally listed links that point out the myriad problems associated with all the major dating methods beyond carbon dating) we’ve shown that dino soft tissue is another problem for old age, several times, we’ve shown that the fossil records show discontinuity, NOT common descent which hasn’t a shred of actual evidence to back up and is nothign but another far-fetched assumption, we’ve shown the deception in the ‘charts of ear evolution’ which was a gross and blatant deception, we’ve shown that higher complexity blood clotting could NOT evolve without intelligent design (and I’ve personally dissected Miller’s silly argument and shown that he unwittingly proved nature could NOT have produced or evolved higher complexity blood clotting, and that it would be impossible for nature to do so without several MIRACLES that violate nature happening) on and on it goes!!!
the proof is right here on FR- happy hunting-
[[Because I’m sick of xcamel constantly going around bashing FR simply because Creationists and IDers are not treated like second class citizens on FR.]]
peoplel ike him apaprently feel that they are buying stock in FR when they donate, and feel it’s their right to dictate to JR how FR shoudl be run because they donated- Apparently their ‘donations’ come with a price lol
[[I am being civil and stated my views and get my religion ridiculed]]
Oh for crying out loud- I NEVER ridiculed your chosen religion- I’m simply pointing out what the bible states, why it states it, and what one needs to do, accordign to the bible, to be saved- you of course are welcome to dissagree- and I accept that you dissagree and respect your right to dissagree- so please- enough with the ‘you’re forcing your religion on everyone’ and the ‘I’m being ridiculed’ accusations
[[The 1st third of this online book refutes evolution systematically.]]
But but but... ‘the author isn’t an acreditted beleiver in macroevolution with degrees from secular colleges, so their facts and evidences against macroevolution don’t count- they must have a religious agenda, and therefore their facts and evodences are not valid- and hteir breath stinks, and they have zits, and their faces look like htey fell out of an ugly tree and hit every brnach o nthe way down, so therefore, their opinions are invalid... PSUEDOSCIECE!!! Religious Agenda!!!!- Just tryign to sneak through Creationism under the guise of ID!!!!!- Creationsits are Creatards!!!! ID doesn’t exist- it’s not a valid study!!!’ (There- I saved ya lots of time by pre-replying for the evos)
“I see only opinions of a few people, as opposed to the tens of thousands who see evolution as credible science, and not in conflict with religion which is faith.”
Bingo. There is no contradiction between evolution and religious faith. There is no threat to the bible in the concept or actuality of evolution. There is no need to defend Genesis against evolution. Creationists are just so afraid we all become godless if we don’t believe all the allegories and parables in the bible are literal. Oh ye of little faith! There is nothing to worry about!!! God created evolution. Rest in that and stop making asses of yourselves. You are as backwards as flat earthers!
xcamel, have you forgotten that we are in a recession?
“God created evolution. “
Should that be considered or taught as a possibility in the classroom when discussing evolution?
Yep- ‘oh Ye of little faith’- Dontchaknow it’s unscientific to disbeleive in the creative, miracle workign power of nature? Dontchaknow that faith in unguided , biologically, chemically, and naturally impossible evolution is perfectly combatible with hte bible? Stop questioning whether nature is capable of producing miracles that violate nature, and put your faith in evolution, because everyone knows that blind faith is what drives evolution, and that blind unquestioning faith in natural miracles is perfectly compatible with God’s word- Stop questioning the fact that God specifically said He created man and woman, and that He breathed life into their nostrils- Stop questioning the fact that the bible says there was NO spirit death BEFORE the fall of man- Stop questionign the fact that God looked aroudn the garden for a mate for Eve- found none that were compatible, and thus had to create one in His image for Adam- Yes- Stop quesitonign the scientific viability of Macroevolution, and just take it wholly on faith- don’t ever question whether nature is capable of creation- just accept it- to do otherwise is ‘unscientific’ by golly
Woopsie- Science itself REFUTES the hypothesis of evolution- but meh- just ignore all that and put your undying devoted blind faith to work and beleive- Yes people- Beleive nature violates it’s own principles, beleive that nature created life from dirty chemicals- Beleive Beleive Beleive! Never question!
God apaprently LIED to us when He said Physical, spiritual death and sin came into being AFTER the fall of man- apparently we’re to ignore these facts because ‘God was only ‘Joshing us’ when HE described the historical events of Genesis. (Oh, that’s right- the theistic evolutionists don’t beleive God’s word is God’s word, they simply think it’s man’s written testimony of ‘good writings and sayings handed down through the ages’- Yep- there’s no conflict with God’s word AS LONG AS you are comfortable DENYING God’s word is God’s word!)
“As some degree of apeman, Adam was going to die, so what was the use of God’s warning to Adam, ‘In the day you eat of it, dying you will die’? (literal translation). Did God give Adam the ability to live for ever and then after Adam’s sin take it away?”
Lol- musta been one heck of a crowded world IF species lived forever for billions of years while they evovled and avoided physical death
“In Scripture we read ‘for since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive’ (1 Corinthians 15:22, 23). If Adam was the end of the evolutionary line, then thousands of evolving men had already died, and death did not come by Adam. Chapter 15 also tells of the second Adam, who was Christ. If the first Adam ‘ex–apeman’ was as real a person as the second Adam, then there came a day when God must have said: ‘You are of this moment man, Adam!’”
Again- Apaprently God LIED to us by saying Death came into hte world THROUGH ONE MAN- Yep- By golly, there’s no conflict whatsoever with evolution and God’s word- oh Ye of little faith!
“Suddenly, everything was different. Now he is sinless and can sin, but as an ‘apeman’ or part ‘ape-like creature’ he couldn’t have sinned. Now he couldn’t take the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or he would be sinning, and would die. A moment ago there were no restrictions; now there are. For years he had gone without clothes, and of course he would not have been ashamed. But now he is a man. When did he lose his ape hair? A moment ago he had mates, now he has none!
If we make some allowances and jump these hurdles, the women of that day would present a problem. Let us set the stage again. If the theistic evolutionist believes Adam to be descended from ape-like creatures, but a creation of God, then what about the woman Eve? If Adam was a theistic evolution ‘creation’—a literal, though stretched, interpretation of the Genesis account—then what about Eve? God Himself said, ‘It is not good for man to be alone’.
What an incredible situation: Adam’s mother and father, sissy and brothers, aunts and uncles, cousins, nephews and nieces, and his grandparents, perhaps, were all around him, and he was lonely! Maybe God left them out of Eden, or was this first man ‘called out’ even as Abraham was in Genesis chapter 12?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v11/i2/evolution.asp
Fot htose claiming there is no conflict between God’s word and the hypothesis Macroevolution- this is an assinine statement to make, and one htat shows a ignroance of God’s word for the sake of meshing two diamtetrically opposed viewpoints- I’m not sure what ‘bible’ you folks who claim this are reading- but it certainly isn’t hte actual word of God that you’re reading!
“God brought all the animals before Adam, and the Bible recounts that there was not found among the animals a suitable mate or helper for Adam. Did all the animals not include his mother and father, sisters and brothers, aunts and uncles, cousins, nephews and nieces, and his grandparents? Did God only bring a couple of every kind of animal and did he leave Adam’s relatives out? Why couldn’t he marry one of them? What was wrong with one of his distant relatives, or the closer ones?
Even if, amazingly, only one family had become the proto-man type, surely there must have been others near enough, well up in the evolutionary tree. Surely if the line-up of eligible spinsters included his unmarried female relatives, Adam would have said, ‘This one will do!’. And God would have said, ‘No Adam. you can’t marry that sort, you are a new sort of creature, you are a new creation. Or rather a new evolution … She is not your sort!’
So, some allow that God evolved man, yet at a definite point declared: ‘Ape, you are now man! Adam is your name!’ And at that point, God invested him with God-likeness and the opportunity to live for ever as well. But, did he omit to evolve Eve? Is this why he had to create Eve? The Bible is very explicit as to how God made Eve. She was made from Adam’s side.”
Yep- all you need is blind faith (plus a WHOLE LOT of biblical manipluation, until the bible is no logner recognizable as God’s word) in order to beleive there’s no conflict between the bible and Evolution!
What do you need to have civil discussion with someone who has doesn't share your religious beliefs?
CAN WE TRUST THE BIBLE?
In accepting evolution, liberal theologians reject a number of key Christian beliefs. They reject the traditional date and authorship of many books in the Bible, which in itself represents a drastic undercutting of confidence in Scripture. If we cannot trust the Bible when it makes simple claims about when and by whom it was written, can we trust it when it makes much more important spiritual claims?
In treating the Bible as though it must be cut and patched to convey a ‘true’ picture, liberal theologians are saying it is full of errors. If the Bible is full of errors, it obviously cannot be revelation from God.
Take Genesis, for example. Liberalism rejects the Bible’s own claim that God told Moses what to write (Exodus 24:4; Numbers 33:2; etc.). Instead, it assumes that Genesis is a collection of writings by authors living much later. These hypothetical authors (dubbed J, E, D, and P) were writing merely out of their own experience and convictions. An example can be found in Conrad Hyer’s book, The Meaning of Creation. He attributes the content of Genesis 1 and 2 not to God’s revelation, but to the life experiences and religious purposes of its hypothetical authors, presumably writing hundreds of years after Moses.1
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/god_evolution.asp
“Biblical Evidence Against Theistic Evolution
By Bob Dutko
God and Evolution may sound like an acceptable mix, but this concept of Theistic Evolution, or the belief that God guided a process of evolution during the Genesis Creation does not stand up to science or the Bible. So many Christians have been sold the lie of evolution that they feel they must accept itas truth or else they are somehow denying science. In fact, if you boldly declare that God created the Heavens and the Earth in 6 literal 24 hour days just about 6000 years ago, you will likely be laughed at and accused of also believing the Earth is flat. (By the way, the Bible does not say the Earth is flat. It describes it as a sphere suspended upon nothing, which of course, is true. It also does not claim the Earth is the center of the Universe as Galileo’s persecutors believed)
If you believe Genesis can be interpreted to say God used evolution, then you might as well throw out the whole Bible. After all, if “man was made from the dust of the ground” can be interpreted as “man was born from part monkey parents”....or if “woman was created from man’s rib” can be interpreted as “woman grew up the child of part monkey parents”....or if “God breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life and he became a living being” can be interpreted as “man was already a living being before he even developed embryonic nostrils to breath into”.....then why believe anything the Bible has to say at all?
Why take anything Moses said seriously? Or David? Or Solomon? Or Paul? Or Jesus? If interpretation of Scripture can be twisted that far from what it really says, you can twist anything in the Bible to say whatever you want it to. Maybe we should just trust what God told us instead of trying to twist Scripture to fit what we think science tells us.”
http://toptenproofs.com/article_theisticevolution.php
Yep- just throw out compelte sections of God’s word, Deny they mean what they say, and Walla- Theistic evolutionm is ‘perfectly compatible with the bible’, and anyone not agreeing, is simply ‘unscientific’ for darign to question the assinine beleif that macroevolution and the bible are compatible
[[What do you need to have civil discussion with someone who has doesn’t share your religious beliefs?]]
Well let’s see- somethign other than the snide comments like
“There is no contradiction between evolution and religious faith. There is no threat to the bible in the concept or actuality of evolution. There is no need to defend Genesis against evolution. Creationists are just so afraid we all become godless if we don’t believe all the allegories and parables in the bible are literal. Oh ye of little faith! There is nothing to worry about!!! God created evolution. Rest in that and stop making asses of yourselves. You are as backwards as flat earthers!”
Start a civil discussion- and I’ll respond in like manner- Act liek a kid, and I’ll expose the assininity of the childish comments levelled agaisnt Creationists- pretty simple really-
I respect anyone’s right to dissagree- but what I do NOT respect is hwen they act liek a child and keep bringing FALSE ACCUSATIONS and insults to the table along with hteir beleifs- present the beleif in a respectful manner, and we’ll have a perfectly civil conversation
And by the way- what You quoted me stating IS civil- You MUST so manipulate hte word of God in order to beleive macoreovlution andthe bible aren’t in confl;ict- this is a fact- this isn’t a psurious statement.
In order beleive God used evolution- you must beleive God created evil, and that man was simply hte hapless victim of evil, and NOT the perpetrator, and therefore there woudl be no need for a Savior because man was not at fault for sin. God didn’t create evil- He allowed free will, and man brought sin and death upon himself willfully- hence the need for propitiation
The doctrine of theistic evolution undermines the very basic premisses, and key concepts of hte bible, and it must do so in order to justify their beleif- Pointing this out is not being uncivil- it’s beign factual- if someoen stil lwishes to beleive it after beign given the facts, then whatever- but challenging someone’s unbiblical beleifs is not being uncivil
The crevo wars have been going on for too long for any argument based on "well they started it" to be a rational starting point.
That's your opinion, based on a your personal belief in the a doctrine of literal interpreation and inerrancy. That's a theological disagreement that's been going on for centuries. On what basis do you submit that it should be considered an object of political activism?
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.