Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
Yeah, but you can't attack people for not believing what you do. It doesn't expand your knowledge to listen to someone tell what they believe and you telling them that they are wrong.
if what someone says stimulates me to study and careful rebuttal followed by a well argued "you're wrong and here's why" type of posting, i think we are all a bit better off for both the effort and the increased understanding. perhaps what matters is how it is done and what attitude gets transmitted through the message, as much as the material and information itself.
__________________ i got a warning for flaming.
i find myself unable to participate here as a result.
this being the first of it's kind since i signed into FidoNet 20 years ago.
and am no longer posting to CF.
thanks to everyone who i have encountered over the years i spent here.
if what someone says stimulates me to study and careful rebuttal followed by a well argued "you're wrong and here's why" type of posting, i think we are all a bit better off for both the effort and the increased understanding. perhaps what matters is how it is done and what attitude gets transmitted through the message, as much as the material and information itself.
I agree
The thing is I think that no matter what one says, the other will most likely close their ears to what they have to say. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that somebody will say "HEY, you are right! What was I thinking?" There is nothing wrong (infact it is right) to debate about something, but I really don't see a YEC take sides with an EVO or vice versa. I will say that both are possible, and both should be critiqued.
I agree
The thing is I think that no matter what one says, the other will most likely close their ears to what they have to say. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that somebody will say "HEY, you are right! What was I thinking?" There is nothing wrong (infact it is right) to debate about something, but I really don't see a YEC take sides with an EVO or vice versa. I will say that both are possible, and both should be critiqued.
We have witnessed conversions in both directions in this forum.
Although, I would hold that the initial conditions that provided for those conversions existed prior to and outside of engagement with this forum.
__________________
I use the black cross, because at heart, I'm Johnny Cash.
The thing is I think that no matter what one says, the other will most likely close their ears to what they have to say. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that somebody will say "HEY, you are right! What was I thinking?" There is nothing wrong (infact it is right) to debate about something, but I really don't see a YEC take sides with an EVO or vice versa. I will say that both are possible, and both should be critiqued.
So many ways to respond to that... so little time...
Hi.
Some people come here only to stick to their guns and inform others about what they think.
But some people come here looking for new ideas to learn about. Discussion stimulates such things in ways that googling does not.
And, people read without posting all the time. Why are they doing that? Maybe they're interested in the discussions and not the debate.
__________________ If winning is not important, than why keep score?
Some people didn't read this clearly so I will underline key words.
The thing is I think that no matter what one says, the other will most likely close their ears to what they have to say. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that somebody will say "HEY, you are right! What was I thinking?" There is nothing wrong (infact it is right) to debate about something, but I really don't see a YEC take sides with an EVO or vice versa. I will say that both are possible, and both should be critiqued.
There is nothing wrong (infact it is right) to debate about something, but I really don't see a YEC take sides with an EVO or vice versa. I will say that both are possible, and both should be critiqued.
When I was a YEC, I critiqued the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics argument as being irrelevant to the question of the complexity of life.
And as an evo, I did propose in the Creationist subforum that the question of salinity did not pose too much of a problem to fish surviving the flood.
It really isn't a matter of sides. A creationist can be right or an evolutionist wrong, it happens, no big deal. What is more important is that we teach others what we know to be true, learn from others what they can show to be true, and edify each other in the body of Christ.
__________________
And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? - Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]
Linear Mode
