Posted on 06/29/2010 4:21:08 AM PDT by Christian_Capitalist
Rand Paul Won’t Say How Old the Earth Is
Charles Johnson
The Lizard Annex 6-28-2010
From PageOneKentucky.com, here’s a video of GOP candidate Rand Paul addressing a convention of Christian homeschoolers, and dodging a question about the age of the Earth.
The questions asked by the homeschoolers in the video: 1) are you a Christian, 2) how old is the Earth, and 3) will you let the UN take our children. Yep, really. And these are the teachers asking these questions. They’re raising a generation of kids who are ignorant anti-science fanatics, afraid that the United Nations is going to come and kidnap them. Good grief.
Did he dodge the question because he’s a creationist and he knows that he shouldn’t reveal it for political reasons, or because he’s not a creationist and he knows he shouldn’t reveal it for political reasons? Either way, this is very sleazy behavior.
My opinion: I think he probably is a creationist, just like his father Ron Paul, because his world view matches the creationist world view in every respect.
Accepting the clear evidence of an old Earth does not necessarily mean accepting natural selection (evolution). It only means rejecting the literal telling of the Christian creation myth. Proponents of Intelligent Design also operate with an old Earth.
But I'm not going to be offended if Rand Paul refuses to repudiate my own beliefs, y'know?
If I get purged for that comment then I guess it wouldn’t bother me. I wouldn’t want to continue posting on a website with such a narrow focus.
But this is clearly one of them.
Do you know how old the earth is?
Actually, he refused to endorse either creationism or evolution and the question was asked by a group who clearly endorse creationism. If he were ever going to endorse creationism that would have been the proper venue.
Here is what I saw.
1. CC - 'Flat-Earth Fools'
2. ray - 'Derisive name calling - is that way of the Lord?'
3. CC - 'Fool said in his heart...'
4. WV - gave examples of Jesus calling people names - 'brood of vipers'.
5. ray - I get it, you are calling evolutionists 'evil vipers'.
6. LFM - no, you don't get it.
7. ray - 'splain it to me.
in #4(post 23), an example of Jesus calling someone a 'derisive' name...brood of vipers. Others were white-washed tombs, wicked, perverse...lots of examples. Now ya 'get it'? He wasn't calling you an 'evil viper', but showing you that 'the Lord' did call people names...
If Rand Paul is a YEC, then I don't want him on my school board. But that's not what he's running for, is it? I'd vote for him. He wants to get the fed out of the schooling business, so his beliefs in this department would have no effect.
exactly, you just phrased my view better than I could myself
But, again, I'm just not displeased that Rand Paul refuses to repudiate Young Earth Creationism. JMHO.
I've heard arguments for both the King James manuscripts (approximately 6,000 years old), and the Alexandrian manuscripts (more like 10,000 years old). I study both of these arguments with interest.
In geology, the assumption that the Earth is only a few thousand years old is not a productive assumption exactly because the evidence doesn't support such a position.
That is why science should be taught in science class; because it discusses the evidence - not the relative merits of the King James manuscripts and the Alexandrian manuscripts.
Oh, now I get it. Because Jesus called sinners a "name" posters on FR get to call others names whenever they choose. Thanks.
Actually, yes it is.
There are a lot of references in Proverbs, especially, about how to recognize a fool and how to treat him.
As long as naming a fool is backed up by Biblical justification, yes, indeed, FReepers get to call others “fool”.
I was unaware that the age of the Earth is likely to come up in Senate business.
“because his world view matches the creationist world view in every respect.”
Yes, worldviews work that way. When you start from one base assumption or the other, you end up “matching” the conclusions of others on most issues who make the same base assumptions.
One of those base assumptions is “Imageo Dei” vs “Imageo Goo”.
Amen!
LOL!
No wonder people aren't "attracted" to religion anymore. The idea that you can "attract" someone by calling them names is an irony completely lost on a follower of Christ.
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.