Let's Have No More Monkey Trials - To teach faith as science is to undermine both

Time Magazine ^ | Monday, Aug. 01, 2005 | CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

[Elsie]

I>...he's just tarnished the image of all other evos.

No, he hasn't.

He can't. He can only make himself appear one way or the other.

We all stand alone on what we say and how we say it.

[Elsie]

Is this not what I said?

Yes. I included one too many lines from your post in my reply: sorry.

[malakhi]

The evidence is there is see: the perception of theorderness of nature.

That is evidence of nothing more than the fact that the observable universe is orderly.

[malakhi]

So, what is the probability of the Carribbean Cruise Line having a hurricane blow a Cruise Liner 400 miles up the Mississippi?

With enough attempts, it approaches 100%. Basic statistics.

[b_sharp]

"We all stand alone on what we say and how we say it.

Yes. Thanks. Again I'll have to agree with you, now that I've thought about it.

[b_sharp]

"Yes. I included one too many lines from your post in my reply: sorry.

No problem. I'm just real easy to confuse. :)

[malakhi]

FYI, in the above I am operating under the assumption that the outcome is, in fact, possible, even if the likelihood of a single occurrence of it is minimal.

[Elsie]

Elsie, could you please read post 139 and tell me how you would take it? Our whole banter back and forth was a result of how he described my position RE this article.

 

 

 Ok............

#139

To: bethelgrad

But what Krauthammer misses is the fact that many Christians who strive to integrate faith and learning cannot simply agree with the notion that there is any sphere of learning that is out of bounds for religious thinking. Most genuine believers do not compartmentalize (or shouldn't), instead they view all the disciplines, science included, through the lens of faith.

Interesting. I didn't realize that Christians were so Islamic in their outlook regarding religion in every facet of life. How do you integrate the "Render unto Caesar..." part?

139 posted on 08/01/2005 2:51:59 PM CDT by WildHorseCrash

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

 

Three sentences are involved in his reply.

 

The first is short and ok, the third appears not be what the fuss is about, so that leaves the second one:

 

"I didn't realize that Christians were so Islamic in their outlook regarding religion in every facet of life. "

 

 

On the surface of it, literally, is a critique of most of today's "Christians".  We (as a whole) do NOT apply in our lives the very things we claim to beleive: IE our Nation would be a LOT different if we did.  More and more Christians ARE starting to live the way they are supposed to, and the secular world finds it 1. strange, and 2. scary.

 

They DON'T want to be ruled by the 'church' or THE church or God or whatever: afer all, the is a FREE country.

 

There could be an insult in here, but to me, if there is, it appears mild. 

 

 

 

It's easy, I'll grant, to take humbrage at some things that are said, but this flat screen and slow keyboard is a real crummy way to communicate.  Throw in the time delays between some posts and some replies and it gets even worse.

 

Also realise that if we all were face to face, we would treat each other more civily. 

 

I guess years of hollering at the dumb boobtube that causes us to treat our monitors the same way. 

 

Just remember:

 

There is a REAL human on the other end.

[Elsie]

Most creationists have only one thing in mind: to bring all walks of human life under strict religious control and to quash freedom of thought and expression.

Dang!

I'm a minority in a minority AGAIN!

[Elsie]

WOW!

Great minds...


(you know...)

[Elsie]

So, you are telling me that in order to prove that all races are one and the same, your creationism supporters are going to deepest parts of Africa in order to BREED with the locals ? Is that a normal practice for y'll ?

Now THIS is supposed to be an insult.

;^)

[b_sharp]

Weird, ain't it?

[Elsie]

Islam:

How to call a Crevo a Nazi without really saying it.

[RobbyS]

Dawkins is pretty representative of unbelievers, otherwise his books wouldn't sell. But we can go on to include those who like Gould held the centuries old notion of "two truths" which however implies that faith(and morals) is purely subjective. Huxley (and Darwin himself)exemplified those who held that one can hold onto Christian morality while rejecting Christian as a system. I cannot imagine anyone I would rather entertain for dinner than Thomas Huxley and Gould. Imagine the conversation between those two! Just sit back and enjoy.

[Elsie]

... I most often chat only with the most rational posters.

I thought I was being paranoid that you hadn't talked to me lately; but that's just me being irrational.

[MEGoody]

You know you're making a impact when the rhetoric of the other side becomes shrill and vitrolic. :)

[Elsie]

I've heard it said that if you want to lose your faith, just go to seminary!

[Doctor Stochastic]

Do you know how difficult it is to calculate repeated Bernoulli trials with extremely large numbers?

Perhaps I can be of help; I do know how difficult it is and how to circumvent such difficulties in many cases (but not all.)

[Elsie]

Therefore, the odds of YOU winning the lottery is zero.

Since I didn't buy a ticket, this statement is correct.

Not in Indiana. Here you can win if you DON'T buy one!

[PatrickHenry]

I thought I was being paranoid that you hadn't talked to me lately; but that's just me being irrational.

Your posts are so complete that they don't require any comments from me.