Posted on 03/19/2010 4:56:11 PM PDT by chessplayer
What if Darwin's theory of natural selection is inaccurate? What if the way you live now affects the life expectancy of your descendants?
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Now, now, Betty,
we can’t REALLLLLLY expect
pseudo-super-rationalists to speak in plain English.
What would be the use of all their endless hours practicing all that special perspective stuff
with all that special language stuff
with all that convoluted contradictory stuff
with all that exclusive cosmology stuff
with all that NO EXIT maze of impossible proof, impossible pseudo-logic stuff
with all that exclusive self-oriented dictionary stuff
. . . I mean . . . if we insist that they speak normal rational, logical, straight-forward English . . .
they’d likely durn near be speechless if not literally speechless . . .
wandering around like goldfish or kissing groumies with their mouths opening briefly
only to close again at the impossible challenge of saying something straight-forward and logical.
I don’t know that it’s REALLLLLY compassionate allowing them the delusion that their convoluted illogical pontifications mean anything of any value . . . they might be deluded into thinking that we and God had kowtowed to their nonsense.
However, it seems a LITTLE BIT brutal to ask them to learn a whole new rational language at their ages.
/s
ping to#461
LOL.
Yeah, read that.
Thx.
You are a genuine gem my dear!
Man you are totally lost. Life comes from god and as long as you are still breathing its not to late to turn back towards him.
“The natural man, i.e., the unbeliever, who has a dead human spirit, is incapable of receiving the things of the Spirit of God - because they are spiritually discerned.”
“The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being “
I am not an unbeliever, I just don't believe the Bible means the preposterous things you think it means. Presumably any more than YOU believe that the Bible means the Sun orbits the Earth. And yet our resident Geocentric creationists would claim that ALL “Bible believing Christians” are Geocentricists.
It seems the only argument tactic you have is “I am saved and you are lost. I am holier than thou because I believe the Bible means preposterous things that you do not accept.”
Ludicrous. Not logical. Not theologically sound. And a rather idiotic argument to make overall. Typical that it is the only one creationists can muster with any enthusiasm.
God made not just Adam from the dust. The Bible tells us that we are all “dust” and that all flesh shall “return to dust”. Were you literally made from dust? Or were you assembled utilizing a genetic program from nutrients and materials consumed while in utero? Did God not make you from dust?
God made me from dust, and to dust I will return. But I was also made via cellular processes, DNA, etc; while in utero. God made me from dust, and yet there was also a physical process involved that science can study and understand.
Like these?
Bogdanov Affair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdanov_Affair
Sokal affair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_Affair
You believe the Bible but don't believe the Bible?
Why do you feel the need to make things up about the Bible and constantly interject them into the debate? Can't you just hold your own without building monstrous strawmen to knock down?
I don't believe the preposterous things you claim the Bible means either; the stuff you make up about the Bible teaching that the Bible teaches geocentrism, for example.
Presumably any more than YOU believe that the Bible means the Sun orbits the Earth. And yet our resident Geocentric creationists would claim that ALL “Bible believing Christians” are Geocentricists.
Exhibit #1.
No, it's the resident evos who demand that ALL “Bible believing Christians” are Geocentricists, just like you're doing now. You make a lot of assumptions about what others believe. Your "reasoning" (rationale, "logic", whatever passes for thought processes in your brain) is seriously flawed.
It seems the only argument tactic you have is “I am saved and you are lost. I am holier than thou because I believe the Bible means preposterous things that you do not accept.”
It's the same argument that evos use against creationists and the evos go on to justify it using science to back themselves up as if throwing out a few scientific facts will wow us into silence in the face of such great intellect.
Evos, yourself included on this very thread, tell us constantly that we have weak faith, that we serve a lesser god, a trickster of starlight and why? Simply because we take the word of God in the Bible over the weak arguments of man against Him.
We choose to believe God rather than some deluded man and WE'RE the ones with weak faith?!? We believe what God said, instead of having to reinterpret it and back it up with evidence and we're the ones with weak faith? Evos constantly harp on how if you rely on evidence, you don't have faith, and then turn around and themselves claim evidence (the fossil record) to back up their interpretation of the Bible. And they accuse creationists of "weak faith" when they, by their own standards, are displaying that they have none.
It seems the only argument tactic you have is “I am saved and you are lost.
What other conclusion do you come to about someone who thinks that God lied to us in the Bible and that science has come along to rescue us from the deception and lead us into *truth*?
Where would we be if it weren't for the great scientists reinterpreting the Bible, telling us what God didn't really mean what He said when He said it but they figured it all out for us?
So, where do the apes come into it all? Why the demand/insistence, that evolution is how man came into existence?
There is no strawman, and nothing made up about the Bible in saying that. It is not a strawman that I don't believe the Bible means the preposterous things you think it means.
Whatever passes for thought processes in your brain is obviously immune from self awareness as you constantly try to tell me what I believe, or that anyone who doesn't accept the same meaning as you is only “claiming” to be Christian. Assumptions about my state of faith is your primary means of responding in any debate.
The arguments about trickery with starlight is not an argument against God. Science is not “arguments of men against Him”, but we see revealed the source of your animosity towards science.
By what criteria do you accept that the Earth is in orbit around the Sun? According to our geocentric creationist Freepers it is YOU who are not a “Bible believing Christian” for taking “the arguments of men against Him”.
As to where we would be if people of both faith and intellect didn't modify religious dogma in the face of fact and reason; we would be thinking the Earth was the center with the Sun in orbit, and human knowledge would be the much poorer for it.
So were you not made from the dust? Will you not return to dust? Were you not ALSO made via cellular processes involving DNA?
What is this with all of your strawmen? Even if if the sun did revoke around the earth it does not enter into the picture here. You project a lot, a whole lot, I would never have the audacity to say that I am saved.
I am just a hopeless sinner but I have been blessed with a few things in this life. Look this goes way beyond a debate, and maybe you really dont like who I am.
Its all true man, Christ rose from the dead. And if you were near to me I would take you to my church to celebrate that.
you are still projecting a lot. I wish you would look at what you are saying.
Easter!! He is arisen!!
Pyramids and cinder volcanoes are triangulat. A full moon is criclular, so are the irises of human eyes. These shapes exists in nature as well as in man-made objects. They are real, not imaginary shapes.
It seems to me you deny a lot. What I can't figure out is what you affirm; or rather, on what basis you affirm it.
I deny that which is not demonstrable because otherwise anyone could create anything in their head and claim it to be real.
I respect that as your hope and your choice. I take issue with that if I am told it's the absolute truth (as opposed to hope) unless you can prove it.
There are whole sparkling tiaras on this thread!
You can't even tell me what God is, betty boop, yet you accuse me of killing God.
You have also engaged in unsolicited psychoanalysis of me and what I have become. I never denied God. I just don't know what God is. If I don't know what God is then what am I supposed to believe in? Fantasy? Apparently, to some people that is a viable choice. I don't have a pejorative term for them, although I am sure I could come up with one. But you seem to have no problem slapping labels on me because I don't believe in things you can neither define, nor demonstrate.
Honesty.
Kosta seems to be on some quest for "truth", but he refuses to see the evidence for that truth or even to acknowledge that the evidence exists.
I refuse [sic][ to "see" the invisible evidence? You find that odd?
I refuse to acknowledge that the indemonstrable exists. Imagine that!
Kosta appears to not be specifically searching for truth, since he has chosen to disregard the evidence, but his quest appears to be one of looking for reasons to doubt; reasons to confirm his skepticism.
What evidence? What you call "evidence" is a book with fantastic tales in it.
As is clearly stated in Hebrews, FAITH is the EVIDENCE of things NOT seen
Well, there you go. For some people that is "evidence" enough. I guess I am different.
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.