To answer your questions, I really don't care what conclusions you draw from handpicked parsing of articles. It's your faith. Calling it the 'truth' and then saying the debate is over is what is wrong. An intelligent being will look deeper, ask more questions, search for answers. It's mans nature to be that way. Using faith to measure the value of another POLITICALLY is what I disagree with.
In the end we, as unworthy sinners, strive to be the best person we can be before our judgment.
LOLOLOLOL!!!!! Last I checked it has been the evos saying that the debate is over with respect to origins, and the Creationists and IDers who have been trying to open the debate up. This guy is DILLUSIONAL!
And separating the MORALS of the religions you decry gives us liberalism. And that is what I disagree with.
In the end we are unworthy sinners (hopefully saved by Gods grace by our Faith in His Son), striving to walk as He would.
And how is that any different from what the evolutionists do on these threads?
One can't accuse someone of lying unless they know what the truth is. Nor can one tell others that they are wrong without a standard to measure against.
Some evos say that science is about the truth, present their theory as fact, and then go on to tell others that they are wrong.
When it gets down to it, evolutionists have a theory that they think is well supported by facts and that's all they can lay claim to. Anything else, like it's true, is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one..
Creationists support their position with the contention that the one who created it all and created from the dust of the earth and created in kinds, told us what He did.
One view is deduced. The other is by testimony. In either case, no one was there to see it.