Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Far from it; The Genome project proved that all humans are one species and the differences are so minute genetically as to render them unimportant. A blonde Swede may be more genetically compatible with a Nubian African than with a fellow Swede.ToE leads to all kinds of fallacies, including racist eugenics thinking.
For the same reason I have Columbus coming to America being taught in mythology class.OK AV still hasn't responded to this so I'm going to ask again:
AV could you please tell me in your own words why you have a problem with creation being taught in a mythology class?
Nice word change -- but it's not fooling me.In short: AV thinks the bible is every bit as historically accurate on it's own as events that have material evidence and records. He doesn't know his religion is just a religion.
Nice word change -- but it's not fooling me.
Did you mean to say, "I don't think my religion is just a religion"?
Or are you the one saying my religion is just a religion, but using me to say it?
If we are to accept that Biblical creation is not mythology then you have to accept all the various creation stories of all religions to be historical facts too. This will obviously lead to a mess worse than the which Bible translation is the true!For the same reason I have Columbus coming to America being taught in mythology class.
Creationism is history -- not mythology.
And I'll post this passage a second time:
2 Corinthians 6:15a And what concord hath Christ with Belial?
Now what? are you going to ask me a third time?
Okay.It's pretty well established that a duck is a duck and a religion is a religion.
I prefer to call it a 'relationship' -- but I'll answer from your perspective.You follow a religion.
I wasn't there, and neither were you -- but you're running on popularity and opinions, and I'm running on faith.You simply don't realize the difference between your religion and actual historic events.
Ya -- why wouldn't I? do you blame me? (please answer this one.)Hence, why you think creationism (a part of your religion) should be taught in history class.
I wasn't aware of that.You are simply opposed to freedom of religion and think everyone should believe the same thing you do.
No, I haven't.At least, that's what you've shown us thus far.
Just the opposite.If we are to accept that Biblical creation is not mythology then you have to accept all the various creation stories of all religions to be historical facts too.
Let me use one of your examples to pwn this point:This will obviously lead to a mess worse than the which Bible translation is the true!
Actually the building of the Great Pyramid by the Egyptians is Creationism. Within that you have the Egyptians who are humans and would belong to a biology class, the building of the Great Pyramid which is Engineering, and the study of ancient civilizations which would belong in a history class. Intelligent Design is the engineering aspect of biological organisms and the only reason we don't teach intelligent design for the Great Pyramid is because everyone has faith that it was designed.If we are to accept that Biblical creation is not mythology then you have to accept all the various creation stories of all religions to be historical facts too.
No it just shows that purely naturalistic processes including the reigning king of this epoch [Random mutation and Natural Selection in tandem) is impotent. The leap of distraction is a part of the whole "run" set, which includes "messes" like "Who created God?",This will obviously lead to a mess worse than the which Bible translation is the true!
You have man.Sorry AV but Biblical creation belongs to the realms of faith. For it to be Historical fact we need to know the author(s), time, and supporting evidence of the happening. All we have is a story that is based on ancient Summerian and Greek mythology.
Because the beginning occurred in Greece. Everywhere else was without one.The adam and apple part complete with the snake is Summerian while the "in the beginning" part it is based on Greek mythology.
Which through analysis outline that man was intelligently designed.You could claim that all this proves is that it is supporting evidence that it happened since both the Greeks and Summerians have the same story. Well they don't; It is two completely different stories knitted into one.
Science merely deals with the study and documentation of repeatable effects through a given cause.I do not wish to attack your faith AV; far from it. All I am saying is that we must not confuse Spiritual Faith with science. After all science can take a hike eh
Okay.
I prefer to call it a 'relationship' -- but I'll answer from your perspective.
I wasn't there, and neither were you -- but you're running on popularity and opinions, and I'm running on faith.
Ya -- why wouldn't I? do you blame me? (please answer this one.)
I wasn't aware of that.
Would I be better off if I believed the way you do?
No, I haven't.
If you read some of my posts, you should notice I've brought up freedom of religion several times.
You, on the other hand, seem to want freedom from religion.
All of which skates on ice and consistently plutoes itself.You forgot evidence, logic, and rationality as well.
'Fantastical', I'll agree with; 'absurd', I'll hold in abeyance; and speaking of forgetting, you forgot 'miraculous'.Things that happen in the bible are fantastical and absurd...
That's right.... in addition to not having a lick of evidence:
Nice sentence -- subject without a predicate.Water to wine, multiplying fish to eat, walking on water, curing leprosy with a touch, talking snakes, unicorns, etc.
You're going to discuss everything but creationism, aren't you?This is why it doesn't count as history, but religion.
I'm sure it still is too.Just to remind you, polytheism used to be a popular religious belief, and is not considered mythology.
I suppose you think you have -- and that's all that counts, isn't it?I've already answered.
At least I know the difference between 'my religion' and someone else's.You fail to recognize the difference between your religion and historic fact.
I'll say this for about the 10th time: Creationism should be taught as history, not science.Which is why you think your religion should be taught in history.
Why?If you wish to know the difference, read my previous paragraph in this post.
Have a good day -- this is a good place to end this nonsense.This is common among many theocratic people and fundamentalists. They have rarely have any idea they are a component of fascism.
still waiting on pre-cambrian explosion evolution evidence...............
I'll say this for about the 10th time: Creationism should be taught as history, not science.
You seem to be hearing: My religion should be taught as history, not science.
Do you even recognize that the creation story you believe is merely a component of your religion? "Teaching creationism as history" is the same as "indoctrinating students to your religion".
What, pray tell, regarding Creationism should be taught as history? Are you talking modern day movements like the Discovery Institute and their predecessors or centuries old creationist thinkers? Or both?AV said:I'll say this for about the 10th time: Creationism should be taught as history, not science.
I sure hope so.Do you even recognize that the creation story you believe is merely a component of your religion?
Creationism is a religion, is it? is evolution?"Teaching creationism as history" is the same as "indoctrinating students to your religion".
You can read about it yourself in Genesis 1, which would be the sole text.What, pray tell, regarding Creationism should be taught as history?
Does teaching evolution as history indoctrinate students to your religion as well?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?