Posted on 11/12/2009 8:53:24 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
While Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species has been described as “a grand narrative—a story of origins that would change the world”,1 ironically his book very pointedly avoided the question of the origin of life itself.
This ought not be surprising. Darwin’s theory of the origin of species “by means of natural selection”2 presupposes self-reproduction, so can’t explain the origin of self-reproduction.
Unfortunately, many proponents of evolution seem unaware of that. They don’t acknowledge that natural selection requires pre-existing life. As leading 20th century evolutionist Theodosius Dobzhansky lamented: ...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Why don’t you try reading the whole sentence!!!!
And let's face it, even in the narrow area of the origins debate where Darwin does speak, he is guilty of taking empirical evidence that pointed to minor variations within the various animal kinds and extrapolating it into a macro-evolutionary "theory" that is nothing more than his evo-atheist worldview being imposed on the evidence.
Natural selection is nothing more than differential reproduction, or in a word, “survival.” What is causing that survival? That would require an extremely sophisticated answer, much of which is still being guessed at by science. But whatever is actually causing it, the Temple of Darwin establishment assumes that it must be completely natural.
Sure you do. Make it up . . . then try to transfer ownership in order to pick a fight.
Troll being Troll. Doing Troll is Troll.
“Anyway, no sane biologist/biochemist would confuse origins of life with evolution of species”.
No logical non-cult afflicted scientist or other person dismisses, discounts, contorts into pretzels and above all: demands of others to be permanently dim-witted when acknowledging the impervious, logical and obvious connection between origins of life when discussing “origins of species/natural selection”.
The fact that liberals demand to have both explained away without any intelligence, any design and any common sense links the two as securely as liberals are linked to junk science ala algore’s hot air cult.
Or to coin an older phrase,
Troll is as Troll does.
( ^: } Thank you Mrs. Gump
I did, and it was unnecessary. I quoted an independent statement of yours whose meaning was not altered by the rest of the sentence.
Do you have any further thoughts to share?
Make it up? Hardly. Who do you think I am, Brian Thomas MS*?
I’m amused that you define “troll” as someone who holds a credible position in opposition to you.
Please, more!
Oh it matters all right. If it didn’t matter, liberals wouldn’t be clawing for children’s minds the way they do.
Welcome to FR!
Making assertions that do not prove the fact.
That's what Trolls do. Doing Troll is Troll.
Spewing drivel, and on cue!
Please, more!
That's what Trolls do. Doing Troll is Troll.
When I ask for more, I get more!
Please, more! We’re entertained!
More Troll droppings.
It’s sad to have a paucity of both logic and wit, yet you display the handicap proudly.
Please, more!
Look, if you want to read "windows of heaven" as a metaphor for changing gravitational attractions, that's perfectly fine with me. I'm not here to argue that the Bible shouldn't be read metaphorically. Just don't then tell me I can't do the same with the dust of the earth, breath of life part. (I know you haven't, but some do, which was my only point.)
It was an attempt to describe the reality of what The Bible meant. We may now have a better model of that reality.
I don't see what you're driving at. I agree with you, that painting you described was an attempt to depict what the Bible said. That's what I said from the start.
Yes I do.
I did not state that natural selection claims to be able to explain the origin of life. I merely stated the fact that it cannot explain it. And it was not an independent statement. It was only part of a full statement, used to preface the second part of the statement.
Please point out to me any part of my statement where I declared that natural selection claims to explain the origin of life.
“. . . no opinion or belief is sent to man from God contrary to natural knowledge.” (T. Aquinas, Of God and His Creatures , Book I, Chap. 7)
I’m not looking for a metaphor for anything. I’m looking for a better understanding. Tell me, what is the metaphoric meaning of “Thou shalt not covet . . .”? Or, the metaphoric meaning of “In the beginning”? Just to turn the question around (every debate sword has two edges) on those critics of Christianity who insist that, if The Bible is to be taken literally, it must be taken literally in its entirety (including Jonah and the whale – their favorite foil). Failing that, the critics are pleased to cry “cherry picker!” or “hypocrite!”
I do accept scripture literally (as in “Thou shalt not steal”). I also accept scripture metaphorically, allegorically, historically, doctrinally and literarily. On this I would note that the dual commission issued to the KJV translators was to combine elegance of translation with faithfulness to the text (see In The Beginning, by Alister McGrath). I think the translators were eminently successful in their task. All of which leads me to conclude that scripture amounts to something more than a lab report, or a series of disparate lab reports. If one’s object in surveying scripture is for a purpose greater than merely promoting an argument, this understanding is indispensable. The cultural tradition and the literary tradition of both the English-speaking people and of the Hebrew people demand it.
" I don't see what you're driving at.”
Which word is giving you trouble? ( ^: }
I’m simply suggesting that the Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud represent a better explanation (a better model) of the firmament, than a medieval depiction of soaring domes and towering pillars. I do not and cannot say, of course, that it will be the final explanation or model.
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.