4th Century St.Augustine Exposes Ape-To-Man Hoax.

FEZZILLA said:

I see no logical reason why I or anyone else should believe anything from moral relativists. Consider the source and the moral character of the source in all analysis.

Click to expand...

That is all very interesting, I'm sure, but as the theory of evolution does not require or imply moral relativism, perhaps you could address yourself to that topic.

Your entire post #237 misses the point, fails to address any of the points raised by other members and filled with strawmen.

FEZZILLA said:

There are plenty of creation scientists who disagree with Darwinian assumptions.

Click to expand...

1. So what? It is well understood that creationism (of the YEC variety) does not fit with science. No one here is disputing that.
2. The term Darwinian is arguably obsolete in relation to current evolutionary theory and so mentioning it here is irrelevant.
3. Any assumptions in Darwinian theory and its developments have long been validated through observation and experiment.

FEZZILLA said:

Modern science is not supposed to be a political game where scientists take on the mentality of vacuum cleaner salesman.

Click to expand...

It is fortunate that doesn't happen then, isn't it?

FEZZILLA said:

"And if natural Philosophy in all its Parts, by pursuing this Method, shall at length be perfected, the Bounds of Moral Philosophy will also be enlarged. For so far as we can know by natural Philosophy what is the first Cause, what Power he has over us, and what Benefits we receive from him, so far our Duty towards him, as well as that towards one another, will appear to us by the Light of Nature. And no doubt, if the Worship of false Gods had not blinded the Heathen, their moral Philosophy would have gone farther than to the four Cardinal Virtues; and instead of teaching the Transmigration of Souls, and to worship the Sun and Moon, and dead Heroes, they would have taught us to worship our true Author and Benefactor, as their Ancestors did under the Government of Noah and his Sons before they corrupted themselves." ~ Isaac Newton, "Opticks" (closing statement).

Click to expand...

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." ~Jane Austen "Pride and Prejudice" (opening paragraph)
I shall happily match any of your irrelevant quotations with one of my own.

FEZZILLA said:

Modern science was never meant to be a war against Christian morality.

Click to expand...

Provide evidence to demostrate that it is, otherwise retract the statement.

FEZZILLA said:

It took centuries of Christian morality to reach the kind of discipline necessary to achieve modern science, as scientific accomplishments are moral achievements and not just a means to boost the ego. One teaching in Christianity not commonly shared with atheist dogma is how Christians aren't suppose to lie. Those that lie, as Scripture very clearly teaches, will not be saved. So telling the truth and being honest was a major milestone achievement which made scientific method possible.

Click to expand...

Nonsense, false dichotomies and strawmen. Morality is an expression of natural behaviour arising through evolutionary pressures. Every religion has absorbed and restated these moralties.

FEZZILLA said:

Now atheism teaches that morality is relative which is at odds with Judeo-Christian doctrine which teaches that morality is an absolute. Newton was the father of modern physics and had he been a moral relativist I doubt modern physics would have had a place to begin. All scientists before Darwin were Bible believing Christians and it was their great achievements that ushered in and established modern science as a discipline.

Click to expand...

1. You fail to note that the morality of the NT is not the same as the morality of the OT.
2. Not all atheists believe morality is relative.
3. The arab scientists who preserved and built upon the science of the Greeks were not Christian. The Chinese scientists were not Christian. Your facts are as vacuous as your arguments.

FEZZILLA said:

Evolutionists have turned science into a political career where most evolutionists are not even trained in scientific method but are merely indoctrinated in the new religion of atheism and the moral relativism that comes with it. Science has become more ego centered compared to the Christ centered Christians who made modern science possible and without the help of atheists to make it happen.

Click to expand...

Empty rhetoric with out a single ounce or even milligram of support. If you think otherwise provide the three best supporting arguments for your assertion.

FEZZILLA said:

So Christians owe no apology to science since modern science was only possible with creationist scientists.

Click to expand...

Christians owe no apology to science since most Christians embrace the methods and findings of science, rather than the prejudiced, delusional beliefs of fundamentalist minority.

FEZZILLA said:

Evolutionists hitched a ride on the science train and hijacked science through political rivalry and sensational words aimed at stirring up emotions among the gullible. And where has decades of moral relativism from atheists taken us? Well today somehow we got Islam from atheism as most atheists today have become like the Ansar (i.e., "the Helpers") not to mention afterbirth abortions, a push for world communism and the list of ills goes on.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant nonsense. (Did you actually give any thought to answering any of the questions you were asked, or did your absolute morality not appreciate that failing to do so was rude and offensive?)

FEZZILLA said:

Lying and deceit in atheism is not a sin because the atheist don't believe in sin or see themselves as sinners. Once a person convinces himself the is no sin and there is no hell, lying and cheating for personal gain become options to those who egos have turned into a god-complex. For a man without sin is infallible and atheists have pronounced themselves as infallible.

Click to expand...

Sin is a loaded word. The majority of atheists and agnostics have clear notions of right and wrong and seek to do the former and avoid the latter. They do so for the same reasons that most Christians do: it is the proper way to behave. They do not do it for the reason expressed by some Christians: fear of eternal damnation.

FEZZILLA said:

Every word spoken by the atheist scientist is the infallible word of science until a younger generation of atheists comes along and refutes the previous indisputable facts with new indisputable facts and the story continues to change and old characters disappear and replaced by new characters.

Click to expand...

Balderdash!

FEZZILLA said:

I see no logical reason why I or anyone else should believe anything from moral relativists. Consider the source and the moral character of the source in all analysis.

Click to expand...

Good advice. I tend to ignore those who refuse to answer questions, avoid pertinent points, employ strawmen, express nonsense, deal in irrelevancies and make unsuppored claims.

Ophiolite said:

1. So what? It is well understood that creationism (of the YEC variety) does not fit with science. No one here is disputing that.

Click to expand...

I do, since YEC, by faith, have been telling us that in 6 Days/Ages, God is going to make a perfect Heaven and fill it with perfect people. What they didn't tell you is that we are currently living at the end of the last Day/Age, the 6th Day, the Day of Salvation. We will NOT enter the 7th Day, which has no beginning and no end, until AFTER the present Universe is burned. 2 Peter 3:10

God bless the Young Earthers for bringing God's Truth through the ages, to the present end time. They believed God instead of the changeable theories of Science.

FEZZILLA said:

Apes are apes.

Click to expand...

This sort of game playing is another indication that you're not interested in having an adult conversation.

Aman777 said:

They believed God instead of the changeable theories of Science.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure those things aren't mutually exclusive, but hey, to each their own.

Me: I should note, I consider it extremely likely that you won't answer either question

Aman777 said:

Wrong again.

Click to expand...

Followed by.... no answers to either question.
Instead, just more preaching of your rather bizare and unique bible interpretations that you can't even get christians to agree on.

Why don't you tell us HOW Humans (descendants of Adam) managed to descend from creatures made long AFTER Adam was made?

Click to expand...

loaded question much?

Tell us the process if different from INHERITANCE. No magical processes please.

Click to expand...

You are the one that needs to appeal to magic....

FEZZILLA said:

Wrong! Evolution theory teaches moral relativism and survival of the fittest.

Click to expand...

Evolution theory teaches nothing about morality at all.

There is no binding moral law in evolution theory.

Click to expand...

Correct. There is no binding moral law in any scientific theory. There is no binding moral law in the theory of evolution, nor in quantum theory, nor thermodynamics nor any other scientific theory. If you want binding moral law you have to look elsewhere for it. You might as well complain that there is no binding moral law in auto mechanics or house painting. It wouldn't be any sillier.

Every single person I have ever known--with no exceptions--who lost their faith in God and accepted evolution, became morally bankrupt.

Click to expand...

What about those millions who have accepted the theory of evolution who have not lost their faith in God?

Every single person I have ever know--with no exceptions--who tried to argue falsely that the theory of evolution denied the existence of God was trailing a red herring. The real issue is always the Bible, not the existence of God.

TagliatelliMonster said:

Followed by.... no answers to either question.
Instead, just more preaching of your rather bizare and unique bible interpretations that you can't even get christians to agree on.

Click to expand...

Then refute me scientifically or historically or genetically IF you can. God's Truth is the Truth in every way.

FEZZILLA said:

Ignore me if you like. You have that freedom here to use that feature.

Click to expand...

I shall try not to trouble you in future: your self indulgent delusions, distortion of history, outright lies and grossly offensive implicit racism create a stench that demeans the forum. Fortunately, the majority of Christian members here actively avoid self-indulgence, seek accuracy, eschew lying and respect their fellows regardless of their ethnicity. I'll spend more time reading their posts.

Aman777 said:

Then refute me scientifically or historically or genetically IF you can. God's Truth is the Truth in every way.

Click to expand...

Waiting..........

Speedwell said:

There is no binding moral law in any scientific theory. There is no binding moral law in the theory of evolution,

Click to expand...

Sure there is. To teach our children that they are nothing but evolved animals is to teach them a lie convenient to employers who wish to treat them like dogs. Teach them the Truth, that they are God's children with the highest intelligence in creation. That is a much better way to avoid teaching them the false ToE which cannot be supported by facts.

FEZZILLA said:

Gees, had it not been for Bill Clinton giving China a super-computer they would still be a third world country. After we give them a super computer they want us to become a third world country.

Click to expand...

A third world country is a country that didn’t ally with NATO or the Comminist Bloc during the Cold War. China has never been a third world country, and even if it ever was, its status as such would never.have a thing to do with Bill Clinton.

This, of course, has nothing to do with the meat of the conversation, really, but I think it’s a good example to show just how little thought and substance you put into the things you write.

Aman777 said:

Sure there is. To teach our children that they are nothing but evolved animals is to teach them a lie convenient to employers who wish to treat them like dogs. Teach them the Truth, that they are God's children with the highest intelligence in creation. That is a much better way to avoid teaching them the false ToE which cannot be supported by facts.

Click to expand...

That "nothing but" is your editorial comment.

Speedwell said:

That "nothing but" is your editorial comment.

Click to expand...

Do you teach them that they are animals who evolved from other animals? What do you expect them to believe? Are they nothing but animals? Is it easier for the doomed to go quietly into the night? I prefer God's Truth which tells us that we are destined to have dominion or rule over everything He owns, forever. Amen?

Aman777 said:

Do you teach them that they are animals who evolved from other animals? What do you expect them to believe? Are they nothing but animals? Is it easier for the doomed to go quietly into the night? I prefer God's Truth which tells us that we are destined to have dominion or rule over everything He owns, forever. Amen?

Click to expand...

Well, we could teach them that they were made from dust and sweep them into the trash. After all, they are nothing but dust. Amen?

Speedwell said:

Well, we could teach them that they were made from dust and sweep them into the trash. After all, they are nothing but dust. Amen?

Click to expand...

Of course not since their Creator molded them from the dust, air and water like a Potter lovingly molds clay. This same Creator would later die for the sins of mankind but He arose the third day and will soon return for them, according to His Holy Word.

IOW, they are a Special Creation, made with a body and intelligence, like God's. Genesis 3:22

Aman777 said:

Are they nothing but animals?

Click to expand...

Taxonomically speaking we are members of Animalia, and therefore by definition animals.

That's just biology though and nothing to do with any moral imperative one might derive from that. This seems to be the challenging point for creationists as they often seem confused about what that means. That you use the qualifier "nothing but" is a perfect example.

pitabread said:

Taxonomically speaking we are members of Animalia, and therefore by definition animals.

That's just biology though and nothing to do with any moral imperative one might derive from that. This seems to be the challenging point for creationists as they often seem confused about what that means.

Click to expand...

The incorrect definition I might add since it cannot be supported by actual evidence.
God tells us that Humans (Adam) were made long BEFORE any other living creature. on the 3rd Day. Genesis 2:4-9 Every other living creature that moves, was made on the 5th Day Genesis 1:21 which is some 9 Billion years, in man's time AFTER Adam was made. Creationists are NOT confused but today's incomplete unsupported theory of evolution is not true either Scripturally, scientifically, historically, nor genetically.

Aman777 said:

The incorrect definition I might add since it cannot be supported by actual evidence.

Click to expand...

Of course it can. You just need to look at the criteria for what constitutes a member of Animalia and then see if humans fit that. We do.

Arguing against this is like claiming water isn't wet. It's a rather pointless contention.

Creationists are NOT confused but today's incomplete unsupported theory of evolution is not true either Scripturally, scientifically, historically, nor genetically.

Click to expand...

Given that belief in creationism is inversely correlated with understanding of science and evolution, the opinion of creationists about the science of evolution doesn't mean much. That's been my general experience dealing with creationists over the years.