Is the fundamental gap between creationists and non-creationists...

[Bungle_Bear]

are you ducking it.

The person ducking us you. You have been asked to provide evidence supporting historical accuracy of the gospels and empirical evidence of ID. Your response was to link to a gish gallop of PRATTs which did not contain any of the requested evidence. Do you have anything to support your claims, or do you accept you made unsupportable assertions and move on?

 

[disciple Clint]

The person ducking us you. You have been asked to provide evidence supporting historical accuracy of the gospels and empirical evidence of ID. Your response was to link to a gish gallop of PRATTs which did not contain any of the requested evidence. Do you have anything to support your claims, or do you accept you made unsupportable assertions and move on?

You have to opportunity to refute anything in the evidence I provided, but that would require that you actually read it and not just make some unsupported assertion that it is PRATTs. It appears that you are unable to support your assertions.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

You have to opportunity to refute anything in the evidence I provided, but that would require that you actually read it and not just make some unsupported assertion that it is PRATTs. It appears that you are unable to support your assertions.

Is that your admission that you have nothing? If you think there is some relevant evidence in your gish then post it here. No more prevarication - post your evidence in your own words or admit you have nothing.

 

[disciple Clint]

Is that your admission that you have nothing? If you think there is some relevant evidence in your gish then post it here. No more prevarication - post your evidence in your own words or admit you have nothing.

I have provided the link, you have the ability to obtain the information, access it or stop complaining .

 

[Speedwell]

Go read it then decide.

I did read it. I find no evidence of ID anywhere in it or even any mention of ID or evolution. Not surprising as the subject of the article is the divinity and resurrection of Christ. Fr. Spitzer is a Catholic, duh! Why would a Catholic--or any Traditional Christian--support a pseudoscientific hoax concocted by radical Calvinists anyway? Maybe you should read it again.

 

[Speedwell]

I have provided the link, you have the ability to obtain the information, access it or stop complaining .

Yes, we are supposed to find the information ourselves because you don't want to admit that you cannot--because it isn't there.

 

[disciple Clint]

I did read it. I find no evidence of ID anywhere in it or even any mention of ID or evolution. Not surprising as the subject of the article is the divinity and resurrection of Christ. Fr. Spitzer is a Catholic, duh! Why would a Catholic--or any Traditional Christian--support a pseudoscientific hoax concocted by radical Calvinists anyway? Maybe you should read it again.

Module 2, Volume 1, Chapter 1. Let me know if you cant find it.
The 7 Essential Modules - Credible Catholic

 

[disciple Clint]

Yes, we are supposed to find the information ourselves because you don't want to admit that you cannot--because it isn't there.

I just gave you the link again in post 207 the information is there.

 

[Speedwell]

Module 2, Volume 1, Chapter 1. Let me know if you cant find it.
The 7 Essential Modules - Credible Catholic

Sorry, I thought you were referring us to module four for evidence of ID. But now, having read it, I can say with certainty that there is no evidence for ID in module 2, either.

 

[Frank Robert]

one question: did you read them and check the footnotes?

No I didn't. Here is why. From Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: I had a very amusing experience, which might be well worth telling. I was in the New York Athletic Club swimming pool, and you know, you don’t wear your collar this way or that way when you’re in a swimming pool. And I was introduced to a priest, “This is Father So-and-so, this is Joseph Campbell.” I’m a professor, he’s a professor at one of our Catholic universities. So after I’d had my swim, I came and sat down beside, in what we call, you know, the horizontal athlete situation, and the priest is beside me. And he said, “Mr. Campbell, are you a priest?” I said, “No, Father.” He said, “Are you a Catholic?” I said, “I was, Father.” He said, and now he had the sense to ask it this way, “Do you believe in a personal God?” I said, “No, Father.” And he said, “Well, I suppose there is no way to prove by logic the existence of a personal God.” And I said, “If there were, Father, what would be the value of faith?” “Well, Mr. Campbell, it’s nice to have met you.” And he was off. I really felt I had done a jujitsu trick there.​

 

[Speedwell]

The part I don't get is trying to prove ID, a doctrine which the Roman Catholic Church rejects, by citing articles written by Roman Catholic theologians, articles which don't even mention ID.

 

[Astrid]

are you ducking it.

I never walk away from a legitimate challenge,
I' d be ever so happy to see one.

You have no legitimate challenge.
If you did, you'd not shamelessly launch
a gish.

A reasonable thing-if there were a wish to
be reasonable- would be to pick ONE
item to discuss.

All thats needed is one fact contrary
to ToE, but asno such is known to anyone,
all there is is to gish and grab for a
shabby"win" as honorable as upsetting
the chess board.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Module 2, Volume 1, Chapter 1. Let me know if you cant find it.
The 7 Essential Modules - Credible Catholic

In your own words, what is the compelling evidence? I have read all those arguments before, and none of them is compelling. More to the point, none of them supports historical accuracy of the gospels or ID. So which do you consider to be unassailable evidence of either of your assertions?

You appear to have nothing.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I have provided the link, you have the ability to obtain the information, access it or stop complaining .

No, you need to tell us which PRATT you consider to be compelling. It is not down to me to pick your argument for you.

 

[AV1611VET]

All thats needed is one fact contrary
to ToE,

Lack of total observation.

My Daisy Chain Challenge

 

[dlamberth]

Lack of total observation.

My Daisy Chain Challenge

But way, WAY more than the Biblical Creation myth story.

 

[AV1611VET]

But way, WAY more than the Biblical Creation myth story.

Are you mything the facts expressed in Genesis 1?

 

[Speedwell]

Are you mything the facts expressed in Genesis 1?

The fact that it's a myth?

 

[dlamberth]

Are you mything the facts expressed in Genesis 1?

Pretty much.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Lack of total observation.

My Daisy Chain Challenge

the old "if we don't know everything, we don't know anything."

Another foot shot when you apply that logic to the Bible.