Posted on 12/29/2001 12:09:43 AM PST by Starmaker
That is why they are called miracles :>)
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Happy New Year!
The literal reading or the symbolic reading? Seems to me that someone who never had a science cource somehow got the basic chronology correct 3000 years ago. Since then, some other people have been inserting 'details' between the lines. Those details are usually wrong.
Reading Peikoff I don’t find him sneering at Christian’s but merely acknowledging reality. The commercial part of Christmas has eclipsed the religious celebration as demonstrated by where most Americans spend their time, money and energy. Compare the amount of ink used or thought put into Christmas trees, light displays, shopping for presents and all of the other secular parts of Christmas; as opposed to nativity scenes, religious services and thoughts about the birth of Christ.
Extreme atheism: extreme is an adjective that adds nothing to atheism. You are either an atheist or not just as you are either a theist or not; you can’t be any more or any less of an atheist.
Claiming Creation theory is more rational than evolution theory is wrong. While it is true that evolution as a complete theory is lacking in certain areas, it still is a simpler and therefore more likely explanation of the origin of the universe. If God exits he would have to be greater and more complex than that which he created. Theists believe that God somehow came into existence, which would be even less likely than that a less complex Universe happened on its own. You can’t arrive at a belief in God through a rational process; it requires faith.
I would have to agree with you about many of our current Socialist intellectual leaders desiring the sacrifice of others. But there are also Pastors that profess Christ while demanding sacrifice on the part of their congregation; sacrifice that in reality ends up benefiting primarily the church leaders.
To call the vision utopian is mistaken. Utopian requires a belief in the perfectibility of mankind. Ayn Rand laid out an idealized vision of man’s potential but I find no evidence that she expected many would live up to it. Until all men are perfect you can never create utopia and to try will always result in catastrophe. The best we can do is try to move things in a better direction.
To claim that an accurate historical description of the true origin of the Christmas holiday some how venerates paganism is wrong. If any one venerates paganism it is those that worship the holiday as a historical reality.
To end with a parting cheap shot about Ayn Rand being influenced by a socialist upbringing is beneath you. I enjoyed your little essay but I am sure with a little time you could have improved the title.
Good points. These are good examples of changes made by a specific species to survive to a specific selecetive pressure(s). However, none of the examples that you gave give any support to the large phylogenic leaps that would be necessary to give rise to all of the diversity we see today. One has to assume that these small changes could have possibly brought about larger changes. In the end, none of these examples lends any real support to phylogenesis.
And I reject faithless scientists who spend their days spewing the meaningless words of fellow heathens.
Perhaps they can trace their lineage to some puddle of mud or a tree swining primate, but I was created by God in His image and likeness.
The Bible says that grasses and trees existed before the sun did. That is not remotely correct.
It does? Where?
I logically conclude that miracles are simple, logical, manipulations of energy presently not known nor fully understood by man. The reason that the agnostic discredits some things that were once considered miracles is because they are now logically understood. Miracles are logical. To understand a miracle logically, is a miracle.
Both the agnostic and the believer discover miracles by the same method, faith. My religious fantasies can be observed logically without contradiction. That man may not logically understand a miracle, is man's limitation. With God all things are possible, simply because He knows just a few more logical applications that we have not yet discovered.
I have long wondered why these two concepts are mutually exclusive. Anyone willing to entertain the possibility that a supernatural and divine aspect was the catalyst for man emerging from the 'ooze'?
Huck BUMP!
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.