Have You Made An Informed Choice?

[OdwinOddball]

Nothing contradicts Genesis and creationists are not opposed to science. A lot of creationists like Wise, Schroeder, Ross and so on, have Phd's in science.

And yet, they continue failing to actually produce any science in the "field" of Creationism. Wonder why that is...

Everything we know of the natural world contradicts a literal interpreattion of Genesis. To say otherwise is to admit willfull blindness and self imposed ignorance.

 

[arensb]

I do however have trouble believing that things just evolved with no design to their makeup.

Out of curiosity, how do you explain the multiple nested hierarchies observed in nature?

 

[JohnR7]

They can't both be right, so which one is a lie?

It is to much for you to comprehend that they could both be right?

Do you believe a book written and edited by men, or do you believe the history written in the rocks of the earth?

There is no contradiction between the two, they both agree with each other. The same God who gave us our Bible gave us the "history written in the rocks". You need to learn how to turn your stumblingblocks into stepping stones.

 

[OdwinOddball]

It is to much for you to comprehend that they could both be right?

There is no contradiction between the two, they both agree with each other. The same God who gave us our Bible gave us the "history written in the rocks". You need to learn how to turn your stumblingblocks into stepping stones.

Hah! Hearing you tell someone they need to learn soemthing is the height of hypocrisy. Someone who has admitted they know little of science and has no desire to learn more is in no position to tell someone else to learn anything.

 

[Chrono Traveler]

I grew up learning about evolution only. Sure as a child, a book was read to me depicting Adam and Eve, but it was a story. In spite of all of this, I have never bought into evolution. When I got older, and God literally came to get me, I began to read His word again and it came alive. It is no contest for me, I have no problem believing that the God of this universe can create anything in 6 days. I do however have trouble believing that things just evolved with no design to their makeup. I have even bigger problems with TE, because the very nature of evolution is in complete opposition to scripture. The Bible says that sin caused death. Evolution says death causes life. See the conflict?

By the way, I am not going to get into a long argument. I simply wanted to give my 2 cents in an evolution dominated thread.

who said god couldn't have created something small to evolve into something big?

 

[pinqy]

The alphabet is the same in every language. The alphabet is based on the sounds of langauge.

These statements contradict. Different languages have different phonemes and therefore different sounds are represented as some sounds don't exist in some languages. Example: most languages don't have a "TH" sound. English needs to combine two letters to represent the one sound. Arabic has three "TH" sounds that are seperate letters and distinct sounds in Arabic, but a native English speaker would not hear a noticable difference. Likewise, Russian has the sound and letter ы which does not exist in English and which most English speakers would not differentiate from "I." And then there's Japanese which does not recognize a difference between R and L sounds, which sound the same to a native Japanese speaker.


Universal alphabets are extremely complicated.

 

[JohnR7]

who said god couldn't have created something small to evolve into something big?

That is a nice theory, but the evidence does not support the theory. Perhaps God has a sense of humer because it would appear that He hides this from the wise and reveals it to the simple.

Matthew 11:25
At that time Jesus answered and said, "I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes.

There is no question that there has been a massive effort to indoctrinate the common person with evolutionary thinking and theory. But all of their efforts have failed. Because the common person knows that it is nonsense, but the educated and the wise do not seem to be able to see that.

 

[JohnR7]

Someone who has admitted they know little of science.

I know more about science than you can ever hope to know.

 

[shinbits]

This is all I ask. Have you read both sides of the issue and derived your own conclusion?

Or have you listened to someone at church and gained all your information about evolution there? Have you gone to a biology class and thought Creationism is silly without reading Genesis?

As for me.........

I have read the Bible twice, some Christian books, Christian sites about Creationism.

I have read the Origin of the Species, biological textbooks, and viewed sites explaining evolution.

Well, After MANY posts on this site, I have come to some conclusions.

First, I do realize and acknowledge that there isn't much, if any real evidence for the creation account in Genesis. However, I still believed that it happened, but I won't say that there's evidence for it at this point.

Hope that's not a problem.

Evolution.........

I don't think evolution is a silly as I used to think it was. I still don't think it's a fact, but it trully is the best explanation science has to offer.

However, I do think it's unfortunate that the nature of science excludes any inclusion or discussion of the divine. All explanations on origins must be purely naturalistic. But then, there's the catch 22 of the fact that science can't prove or disprove God.

This is an unfortunate circumstance, since that if God is real (and He is), there's nothing really that science can do to include Him.


ID.......

I do understand that because it doesn't follow a the set method of science, that it can't really be used by science. However, I do believe that philosophically and logically, that ID is a sound thing to believe in.


But, we never know what the future will reveal. Maybe one day science will make more of a case for the God of the Bible.

But, just my two cents.

 

[urbanxy]

... The A here is the first letter in the alphabet. It is the beginning and DNA is also the beginning of everthing that is living. C stands for Christians. It is the Christians that are here to deliver God's message to the world. G of course stands for God. It is God who is expressing Himself in the DNA and thus God is expressing Himself in Creation. The T of course expresses God and the head or in His leadership over man... We are limited using English because they have made changes to try to make it easier to learn and that tends to cause it to lose meaning.

Is there a word that means "Numerology, except done with letters"? Maybe Alphabetics? Can I coin that, if not?

.

 

[Cassandra]

First off...yes to the OP.


Next of. You're all wrong. ACGT stands for "Apple, Corkscrew, Gobble, Tarantula" Scientists study DNA because...well...it's a great mystery how these things could make up every living thing.


You know...while we're talking about the different alphabets...When I got my ID in the US...well, my surname has letters that are not in the English alphabet...so they had to substitue letters. Some have no equivalent. Like there is no letter to represent the Vwah sound.

 

[JohnR7]

no position to tell someone

Are you mean & nasty by nature or did it take some sort of a pill that makes you like that? Just what is it about insulting people that you enjoy?

 

[JohnR7]

Maybe Alphabetics? Can I coin that, if not?

You can coin whatever you want to coin. I am all for making up words as we go along. They say to run it up the flag pole to see if people salute it or shoot at it.

 

[tocis]

I see misrepresentation.

Not to forget hoover, err, hovind babble. That phrase so damn typical...

 

[tocis]

Do you believe a book written and edited by men, or do you believe the history written in the rocks of the earth?

Strrrrrrike!

 

[Asimov]

Hope that's not a problem.

Only for you.

Evolution.........

I don't think evolution is a silly as I used to think it was. I still don't think it's a fact, but it trully is the best explanation science has to offer.

It shouldn't be considered a fact. A theory is a collection of facts that corroborate each other and explain any given phenomenon.

However, I do think it's unfortunate that the nature of science excludes any inclusion or discussion of the divine. All explanations on origins must be purely naturalistic. But then, there's the catch 22 of the fact that science can't prove or disprove God.

As it shouldn't. Neither can religion, so how is that a problem for science?

I do understand that because it doesn't follow a the set method of science, that it can't really be used by science. However, I do believe that philosophically and logically, that ID is a sound thing to believe in.

You think appeals to incredulity and begging the question is a sound thing to believe in?

 

[tocis]

Example: most languages don't have a "TH" sound. English needs to combine two letters to represent the one sound. Arabic has three "TH" sounds that are seperate letters and distinct sounds in Arabic, but a native English speaker would not hear a noticable difference.

Just for fun (and to throw in another ancient example), the Futhark runic alphabet has a "th" too, the rune Thurisaz.

<irony>
Funny how English degenerated from its more or less "Nordic" origins so that it now needs those two stupid letters where earlier there was one...
</irony>

Sorry couldn't resist

 

[Asimov]

I know more about science than you can ever hope to know.

I'm sorry? Aren't you John, the humble man who claims he knows nothing about science and then blames it on us for not teaching him properly?

 

[Jan87676]

I know more about science than you can ever hope to know.

Indeed. You don't need a Ph.D to know that Evolution is false.

 

[Asimov]

Indeed. You don't need a Ph.D to know that Evolution is false.

Indeed, you just need good rebuttals to show it....something you seem to lack. Prove me wrong.