What's new in the world of Creationism vs Evolution?

[pitabread]

The quality of Creationist participation here has, sadly, diminished to nearly nothing. These days it's really just AV's tired antics, dad's well... being dad, and newbies joining and posting PRATTs that literally have been refuted a thousand times in this very subforum.

So basically the same as it's always been. I guess some things never change.

 

[pitabread]

<snip>

Those are three examples that come to mind. "Edge of Evolution" may be from your previous stint here at CF, but I think the others may be new to you.

Hi Loudmouth!

Edge of Evolution I do vaguely remember. I seem to recall people talking about how it demonstrated Behe did accept common descent.

The Tomkins thing is new to me though; kind of boggles my mind that anyone would even come up with something so obviously flawed (then again, this *is* creationism...).

 

[Loudmouth]

The Tomkins thing is new to me though; kind of boggles my mind that anyone would even come up with something so obviously flawed (then again, this *is* creationism...).

You always have to keep their intended audience in mind. Your standard creationist probably doesn't understand what a gapped comparison is, much less why an ungapped analysis would be inappropriate for the comparisons that Tomkins was doing. On the good side, creationist organizations are starting to distance themselves from Tomkins' claims, even though they rabidly embraced those flawed findings when Tomkins first released them.

 

[Queller]

...science hasn't solved the problems of crime, war, hunger, etc.

Neither have Christians.

 

[AV1611VET]

Neither have Christians.

We're not the Prince of Peace.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Neither have Christians.

God is about saving his people at this time, not the world. But he has revealed to the world how it can 'save' itself (please note the 'qualifiers').

 

[Queller]

God is about saving his people at this time, not the world. But he has revealed to the world how it can 'save' itself (please note the 'qualifiers').

What a completely irrelevant reply. We were talking about war and hunger, not sin.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

...and science hasn't solved the problems of crime, war, hunger, etc.

Human nature, as with any life in general, lives to the very edge of its capacity. Go ask anyone who earns an income & ask how much they'd need to live comfortably within their means, and generally it's about 10% more on whatever they're making now regardless their salary. Life is the same & since the scientific method has properly taken root in our civilization (17th century, give or take), we've increased in population almost exponentially! We'd be more than comfortable if we were able to increase our technology & scientific knowledge while constraining our population growth to pre 17th century rates... Heck, even global warming wouldn't be a thing right now...!!

Actually I question that ... at least from their perspective.

They have a good explanation; they just don't use it anymore for some reason.

It's called "Malthusian catastrophies."

See above Human nature means we consume the benefits and live to the ever increasing limits, wherever they may be... Malthusian catastrophe is a little pessimistic though, I'd be more inclined to use 'Malthusian check'.

 

[AV1611VET]

What a completely irrelevant reply. We were talking about war and hunger, not sin.

According to the science of Malthusian catastrophies, war and hunger are the solutions to the problem,* not the problem itself.

* overpopulation

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What a completely irrelevant reply. We were talking about war and hunger, not sin.

The same book that reveals salvation also reveals the remedy for war and hunger.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

According to the science of Malthusian catastrophies, war and hunger are the solutions to the problem,* not the problem itself.

* overpopulation

It was once quipped that "AIDs was the cure for homosexuality".

 

[Speed112]

War and hunger are more the result of (someone's) sin than anything else.

War and hunger are pretty natural results of socio-economical pressures and biological reactions.

There are many species of animals in the world that suffer the same things, like ants, primates, bees, etc.

Doubt sin, especially a personal one, has much to do with entire populations perishing through either direct conflict or improper resource distribution.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

War and hunger are pretty natural results of socio-economical pressures and biological reactions.

There are many species of animals in the world that suffer the same things, like ants, primates, bees, etc.

Doubt sin, especially a personal one, has much to do with entire populations perishing through either direct conflict or improper resource distribution.

Sin is a state of mind, that leads to most social problems, including war and hunger.

 

[Speed112]

Sin is a state of mind, that leads to most social problems, including war and hunger.

Ok, I guess insects who react directly and predictably to stimuli and spark massive organized wars or completely ignore their starving kin do so because of their state of mind.

Humans aren't much different than that and psychology is pretty much as predictable as pheromone reactions in basic creatures.

 

[AV1611VET]

It was once quipped that "AIDs was the cure for homosexuality".

AIDS is God's judgement on homosexuals.

Heterosexuals that denied this ended up getting the same thing.

 

[Speed112]

AIDS is God's judgement on homosexuals.

Heterosexuals that denied this ended up getting the same thing.

What about Malaria? What about Cancer? What about every disease in the world?

Are they all judgement? What are the sick people being judged for? To what end?

It's easy to claim things about matters that don't affect you, but what if you accidentally stepped on a needle somewhere that was contaminated with HIV... would you be judged in that case?

Help me understand how an ailment that has a predictable cause, way of prevention, way of distribution or control, etc. is in any way affected by a higher power.

 

[pitabread]

AIDS is God's judgement on homosexuals.

That is the biggest crock of horse-doody I've ever seen from you. Go pollute some other thread with your bigoted nonsense.

 

[Skreeper]

AIDS is God's judgement on homosexuals.

That just SCREAMS merciful. What a nice god you have there.

 

[AV1611VET]

What about Malaria? What about Cancer? What about every disease in the world?

What about them?

I can't speak for Malaria or 'every disease in the world,' but I also believe cancer, along with AIDS, is one of God's ...

Deuteronomy 28:59 Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.

Are they all judgement?

No.

What are the sick people being judged for?

The same thing we're all judged for ... our sins.

To what end?

Death.

James 1:15b ... and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

It's easy to claim things about matters that don't affect you,

I'm not exempt.

I'm going to die of the "ultimate disease" too.

And when the time comes, it will be cancer, AIDS, an accident, whatever ... compliments of a sin-cursed universe.

... but what if you accidentally stepped on a needle somewhere that was contaminated with HIV... would you be judged in that case?

I believe I already addressed that.

I'll die of a disease that was initially meant for those engaging in beastiality and homosexuality.

Help me understand how an ailment that has a predictable cause, way of prevention, way of distribution or control, etc. is in any way affected by a higher power.

God sent it, then He gave us doctors to observe it.

 

[pitabread]

I'll die of a disease that was initially meant for those engaging in beastiality and homosexuality.

I'll say it again. Take your bigoted, nonsensical crap to some other thread. It's not welcome here.