Definitely a fag.
Posted on 01/16/2013 4:41:13 PM PST by EveningStar
For Zack Kopplin, it all started back in 2008 with the passing of the Louisiana Science Education Act. The bill made it considerably easier for teachers to introduce creationist textbooks into the classroom. Outraged, he wrote a research paper about it for a high school English class. Nearly five years later, the 19-year-old Kopplin has become one of the fiercest — and most feared — advocates for education reform in Louisiana. We recently spoke to him to learn more about how he's making a difference.
(Excerpt) Read more at io9.com ...
In fact, I would contend that such a claim is in direct contradiction to Scripture.
Which states that God created all things, excluding himself, that is, but including all living things, both spirit and flesh.
If souls were pre-existing from eternity, in what sense are they "children of God?" They would be his co-equals in longevity, although not in power.
The Declaration of Independence says men endowed by "their Creator" with inalienable rights. The term "Creation" by definition means a new existence, not a recycling.
A phase shift might entail suddenly collecting information in a planar temporal fashion, thus shifting our 'assimilation' potentials to a completely different frame of reference. ... 'We shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye.'
Good post.
You allege that Creationism “as defined” is useless. “As defined” by whom? Your allegation “as defined” is an abject confession that you can only proceed if you are allowed to dictate terms and meanings, and your incessant crying and moaning is an abject confession that you are aware that you are not being allowed to advance your propaganda unopposed. And in front of the entire Forum assembly too! How shameful and embarrassing for you!
Now, you allege that my use of definitions is “non standard.” Which definitions?
the Compact Oxford English Dictionary, revised edition 2003?
the Webster’s Universal Dictionary of the English Language, unabridged, 1937?
the The original 1828 Webster’s Dictionary?
the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary, 11th Edition – which shows no change since 1880?
the Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Ed. 2005?
the The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.?
the Webster's Revised Unabridged, 1913 Edition?
or, perhaps the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA?
How are they “non standard”? Do you rate yourself superior to all the authorities represented by the above publications? By whose authority are they deemed “non standard”? Explain in detail how this is so, or stand exposed as a fraud.
You are quite correct in saying that Christianity and Creationism are not synonymous. Of course not. Creationism is a tenet of Christianity; the most important tenet; That the Judeo-Christian God is the Creator of the Universe, and of Mankind. What is your point in asserting something not in dispute? Do you think it somehow salvages your soiled reputation?
Your sad pitiful song and dance was tiresome four years ago. Go cry somewhere else. Your pitiful special creationism is as useless as your same song and dance.
“It just goes to show that one person CAN make a difference!”
One person with the support of the mainstream media.
One person swimming against the media stream will not have such an easy time. He has a cause they agree with so they pick him up and carry him in their boat.
So you assert, but the assertion does not prove the fact. You expose yourself as a mere poser, incapable of supporting anything you say. Reduced, like the ape your superhero Darwinian Mullahs claim we all are, to slinging poo. And in front of all the assembly! How humiliating! How sad! How pathetic!
How are my definitions “non standard”? Explain in detail how this is so, or stand exposed as a fraud. Oh wait! Too late! You are a fraud. Your ineptness is even an embarrassment for Alinsky or Goebbels. How sad! How deliciously droll!
What a pitiful display! Better get on the phone to the Creationist Museum showing people having a yabba dabba do time with dinosaurs and tell them they are misusing the word creationist and must add a modifyer. The gospel according to Fred Flintstone! LOL!!!!
Understood -- my remark was for the lurkers, based on your comment
While I don't rank these various types of belief, I think it odd to claim that the only one we can demonstrate to be true is the "lowest" on the scale, while those supported solely by mental gymnastics are the "highest."
One might note also C.S. Lewis's essay On Belief in which he ranks other kinds of evidence based knowledge, e.g. historical, forensics (e.g. sworn testimony), and the like -- more accurate than "I believe" but less accurate than experimentation.
Another feature not touched on much was covered in the book Galileo's Daughter which pointed out the change in questions from "Why?" (as in, why did God make things like this) to "Why?" (as in, what is the mechanism underlying what is observed).
Cheers!
Your avoidance in responding to YHAOS’ challenge is duly noted and expected.
My kids have a term they use for someone in your position that fits quite well.
PWND.
More poo slinging. How humiliating. Cringe, poser!
Cheers!
Sorry, not familiar with that offering from Lewis.
Pwnd was when you incorrectly invoked Godwin then lamely made putrid excuses. Pwnd was when you cannot admit the Pope is a Christian. Pwnd is when you cannot come up with a single practical application for your useless creationism.
Cheers!
You might want to get back on your meds ...
While I am reluctant to put my foot into the "in-between" of a dispute between two such beloved brothers....
At first, I thought it was only a "semantic problem." I.e., the "meaningful" difference between "creation" and "formation."
But that didn't satisfy....
Then the thought occurred to me that this entire "dispute" is resolvable in terms of the concept of ex nihilo Creation, which the Holy Scriptures inerrently proclaims and attests.
From there, I wondered: What is the basis of the supposition that "'ex nihilo' creation" must be a one-time, one-off event?
There are a few folks around FR right now who are paying attention to "time problems," to problems of spatio-temporal dimensionality, of how space and time seem to go hand-in-hand in ordinary existence, and yet manifest to our individual consciousness in ways that point beyond spacetime itself.....
On that basis, I am not insisting that "ex nihilo creation" must be a one-off, one-time creation "event."
And so I'd give points to marron on this question....
Dear TXnMA, dear marron: May God ever bless you and all your dear ones!
Thank you so very much for sharing your views!!!
And certainly, if the universe were not reliably made, we could not have form, substance, reason or language - much less be able to say anything useful about it whether science, math, philosophy or whatever.
And yet when we see a newly born child, we see a new creature in this universe. And that little creature may grow up to add never-before-envisioned arts, technology or whatever to the body of knowledge within this universe.
The Creation was God's doing. His alone. Man cannot undo it or remake it no more than he can end it or prevent its end. And yet it was God's will to let us be a part of what it'll become, whether for good or ill.
Thank you all so very much for your wonderful essay-posts!
I’m Just “hoseing” around... you understand...
WHAT IF?... Tele-Kinetic intelligent creative power is possible..
You know.... “Psychokinesis”
Surely not among humans but available somewhere in this vast “universe” -OR- beyond...
Humans might call this energy “God” or something..
Whether one entity or a committee, cabal, junta, or group one cannot tell..
Seems far more possible than Barry Obama trying to SPEND the U.S.S.A. out of debt..
OR provide Utopia for the Poor by stealing from the Rich...
OR making celebrities of useless eaters at the expense of the productive ones.. whom are milked and sheared like animals..
Under “Psychokinesis” time may be just a commodity, linear or circular depending on the need..
The human mind “jokes” about dimensions disregarding the implications of them..
Under this scenario “made by God” is quite logical..
If one considers “made” to mean “imagined”...
Creationism is not a scientific theory it is a religious belief.
Evolution is a religion embraced by atheists and and s disproven by one simple fact: one genus or species cannot procreate with another to create a truly new species.
It may be..............
Seldom, indeed, is it that I find three of my esteemed and beloved siblings in Christ in disagreement with me on so fundamental point as to whether ex nihilo creation was -- or was not -- uniquely confined to "the creation week".
(Point of distinction: I said, "was not", rather than "could not be" ...)
~~~~~~~~~~~
Therefore, I must re-examine my position and ask myself a few questions:
While I cogitate on these questions -- and (re)-search Scripture for answers -- I hand them to you, my Sisters and Brothers in Christ, so that you can be ready to deal with whatever conclusions I reach...
~~~~~~~~
For those who have access to it, I refer you to
Schroeder, Gerald L., Genesis and the Big Bang -- specifically the chapter, "THE SOUL OF LIFE", PP 149-152.
~~~~~~~~~~
FWIW, marron my discussion of "created" vs "formed" was not nearly so much a disagreement with you as it was intended to be a lead-in to discussion of a couple of points I raised in my (mostly ignored) #143... But, I was "blindsided" into this "sidetrack" by my esteemed and beloved Sisters... ;-)
Yet, in all of this, my intended focus remains on the subject of this thread: "evolution vs creation"...
Evolution is not speciation. Two different species can produce fertile offspring. And that isn’t how new species come about. Nobody but you seems to think that the theory proposes that the way to get a fox is to interbreed a coyote and a weasel or some such bit of idiocy.
Sorry I don’t buy the Evolution theory. Too many holes in it. Adaptation yes. Evolution no.
The only real life example I can think of for evolution is dog-breeding
How can you change chjaracteristics of a dog over hundreds of years of breeding, but you still have a DOG DNA
Selective breeding can bring out characteristics, but not change DNA from dog DNA to cat DNA (or anything else)
If I had to pick instances of possible ex nihilo events in the Bible other than creation week, I’d go with these:
water to wine
multiplying loaves and fishes
healing any leper insofar as there is the assumption that any missing body parts were restored.
widow’s oil multiplied
Aaron’s rod becoming serpent
water becoming blood (depending on if that means “red” or “blood”)
I don’t consider dog breeding as evolution. What the evolutionists claim is that one species evolved into another ( if you look at it in it’s whole context). Dog breeding would be more similar to adaptation IMHO of course.
What mechanism do you propose accomplishes this adaptation? For example, a strain of e.coli started from a single cell adapted to be able to metabolize citric acid. How do you suppose this happened? What scientific theory best explains the evidence?
Breeding of dogs would be a great example of evolution fast-track because you are not randomly hoping for changes, you are purposely trying to direct those changes. The infinite number of random chance possibilities have been eliminated- but after thousands of years you still have a dog.
DNA changes by random selection over millions of years seems possible but highly improbably, to me. But it is only a theory anyway.
Ah, but one genus, humans, CAN bring into existence organisms which have never (as far as we know anyway) existed before we humans manipulated DNA to bring this new thing into existence. It is becoming all too common in agriculture ... and perhaps eventually in the animal kingdom, too?
I suggested that a new soul is not formed from a previous one (reorganization of energy/matter space/time) - but rather is a new creation that God has allowed us to be a part of, on the material side, the reorganizing side, procreation.
I also suggested that knowledge (information content) such as art, literature, scientific theories can be "created" by man. But I withdraw that suggestion because they are not ex nihilo since, at the very minimum, creatures and successful communication must pre-exist their coming into existence in the knowledge base.
The operative part, IMHO, is this:
8. Does God perform a new act of ex nihilo creation every time a human is born? Every puppy? Every seed that germinates? Every microbe that undergoes mitosis?
Indeed, the physical body seems first relevant to me in God’s covering Adam and Eve’s shame with coats made of skins:
Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. – Genesis 3:21
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. – Hebrews 9:22
Concerning the spiritual body, Jewish mystics point to the Hebrew words nephesh, neshama and ruach in Scripture used to describe the soul/mind/spirit.
More specifically, nephesh is the ordinary soul which all living creatures have (Genesis 1) and is returned to the earth upon death.
And neshama as you pointed out, is the breath of God which Adam received in Genesis 2 whereby he became a living soul.
Further, according to the mystics, the ruach is the soul pivot whereby the man chooses to be Godly-minded (neshama) or earthly-minded (nephesh.) That choosing parallels Romans 8.
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. – John 1:33
In that view, everything returns to the earth at death and new epiphenomenons begin at birth or conception.
But the Scripture speaks of creation being mindful:
Conversely then, the living souls which have ruach (choice) and/or neshama (breath of God) would "phase shift" (if P.S. Wesson is right) and continue onwards "in" the creation past the death of the physical body.
Moreover, we creatures called Christian being indwelled by ruach Elohim already exist "beyond" anything physical at all (including a phase shift):
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. - Romans 8:1-9
What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? - I Corinthians 6:19
God's Name is I AM.
Thanks for your insights, Sister A-G. As you say, all of those I mentioned are possibly explained elsewise. I suggested that in that all those were only possible examples of ex nihilo, imo.
You explain that they could be a formation from something else. That is entirely possible.
However, it is not necessarily so. Since already baked bread and already cooked fish does not procreate, we have baskets of bread and fish instead of a few of each.
If I have one marble and suddenly have a half gallon of marbles, then I either found all my marbles (AT LAST! :>) or, my marbles procreated, or marbles just kept appearing.
It seems the mass of marbles may have multiplied, and mass can neither be created nor destroyed, so at least it’s a possibility, but Perhaps I’ve lost my marbles.
AGAIN.
:>)
(”Could you help me find them?” he asked the nice young lady. “Of course, Sir,” she replied and helpfully asked “Where were they last you saw them?” Hanging his head, he mumbled, “In a crevo discussion.” Shaking her head, the lady took his hand and gently inquired, “First, tell me your name...and what date do you think it is.”)
Indeed, the point about the multiplication of loaves and fishes is well taken. That may indeed be ex nihilo.
I have the sneaky intuition that the gallon of marbles where moments before there was only one may be a manifestation of a temporal reality which may be manipulated by one of ‘superior knowledge’ of same ... and thus the gallon marbles are ‘collected’ from temporal linear realities rather than created from ‘no thing before’. Even thoughts have some for of temporal and spatial reality, or so I am led to believe. The key is finding a way to define/express the dimensional variables in a new fashion which allows for finding the ‘spatio-temporal limits’.
Ah, but one genus, humans, CAN bring into existence organisms which have never (as far as we know anyway) existed before we humans manipulated DNA to bring this new thing into existence. It is becoming all too common in agriculture ... and perhaps eventually in the animal kingdom, too?
Man has been interbreeding dogs and crops for eons. This is nothing new. But to creat life. No. Man can only manipulate what he has to work with. He cannot create matter from nothing any more than he can create a new life form. But child’s play for God:
http://www.getyourowndirt.com/
I didn't read any of the replies as particularly a disagreement so much as a continuation of the discussion started in 143, trying to draw some distinctions that I did not make, between “ex nihilo” events and divine interventions that do not (apparently) generate something from nothing but rather redirect or choreograph events. The latter might fall under your “formation” heading.
One question is whether the “big bang” was a single explosion that carried within it the basic formula from which everything we see has unfolded, or was it rather more like the opening of a valve from which a steady stream is emitted (though still with those same basic formula governing physical behavior). I couldn't even begin to answer that kind of question.
My belief is that “creation” is a fundamental element in God's essence, like love, it is in part who he is. Furthermore that, since we are made in his image, it is a fundamental part of who we are. And to push my line of reasoning a bit further, that it is an important part of why he created us; first, because thats what he does, but more as a way of furthering the process of creation. We are tools who are intended to join in creation.
Its important to notice that parts of the process are mechanical, and are predictable, and parts of it have been given independent intellect and will which adds an element of spontaneity to the process. This seems to be by design. Rather than a universe of telephone poles he seems to prefer forests of unique trees whose final shape is not entirely predictable or controlled.
He can work with that kind of uncertainty the way a sailor uses winds he doesn't control to go to a destination he does control. He doesn't need to control everything to remain in control of everything.
Most people picture heaven as a kind of static place but I don't. If creation is, as I say, fundamental to God's nature then it continues today and on into eternity. We have roles to play and will continue to have roles to play on into eternity. I could be wrong, but I hope to find out (and hope to see you all when we get to the other side).
With this, I have batted the ball back over the net. I look forward to the responses.
I cherish you as a Brother in Christ, and thank you for your service for all of us! A big USAF salute to you and all your brother Chaplains! IMO, you are the "glue" that holds our military forces together when times really get tough!
~~~~~~~~~
All of your examples/instances consist of manipulation of objects / materials that already existed here on earth, of materials created at the initial (only?) ex nihilo event -- to change them into recognizable materials / objects that had already existed here on Earth. IOW, one created thing was changed in extent or into another created form. Some even may incorporate transmutation of one material into another.
As a physical chemist, I consider your cited items to be instances of what I think of as "Class one (1) maintenance miracles" -- as I described in my #190 0n this thread:
But, personal experience has proved to me that He, on occasion, does directly intervene in the progress of His creation. There are instances where He, IMHO, "puts things back on plan" by overruling his own physical laws and making adjustments that ignore those laws. We believers call those events, "miracles"...
Transmutation (the goal of ancient alchemists) is a known and demonstrated class of phenomena -- and is routinely observed in natural processes: nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. What I find particuarly "miraculous" about the items you cited is that they occurred with no reported release or consumption of excess energy!! Can you say, "putting E - MC2 on hold"?
Bottom line: "Miracles" -- most certainly. "Ex nihilo creation" -- IMHO, no.
Again, Thank You!!
Whatever label we put on your examples, none but our Creator God could have accomplished them as observed. IMO, There is no more obvious -- publicly witnessed and documented -- proof of the deity of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, than His miracles.
To Him be all the praise and glory!!
LOL!!! Thanks again! You, Sir and Brother, are a genuine prize!!! :-|
"He can work with that kind of uncertainty the way a sailor uses winds he doesn't control to go to a destination he does control. He doesn't need to control everything to remain in control of everything."
Ab-so-lutely beautiful! May I copy and print that and hang it on my wall? I am facing uncertain times, (aren't we all?) and that statement landed upon me with a calming, soothing effect that still resonates within me!
Thank you!!
You missed (in #228)the most important EX NIHILO event to modern christians.. wonder why..
AKA... the creation of the New Testament by the Roman Catholic Church.. much as the Jews created the Talmud..
and to some extent the Quran for muslims..
Most of the Christians and Jews(and muslims) worship their God-Lore much like idols.. but some worship holy places..
Relegating “God”, to most, a literary and honorary presence..
When Jesus came to and did make quite literally all religion (on this planet)-
1) Obsolete..
2) went on vacation... (otherwise how could he “come back”)
3) delegated all authority (on this planet) to the Holy Spirit..
A good creative (and management) enterprise overlooked by most.. in my search..
raising “having an invisible friend” to an ex nihilo event..
not just for young people but for adults as well..
As usual, what God has provided through you is both enlightening and a true blessing!!
I perceive that we are, (again, as usual) on converging courses... :-)
~~~~~~~~
I AM is still in control!!
Could you please explain how that process was "ex nihilo" (something where nothing had existed before)?
Could you please explain how that process was “ex nihilo” (something where nothing had existed before)?
OK... A collection of “loose” writings, written when very few people could even read or wanted or needed to read.. assembled into a “library”(bible) and given “a stamp” of approval and “canonized” as special.. was a creative event..
This “lifted” those writings from lore to dogma status.. creating an addendum to the “Torah” and adjacent supplementary “scripture”(prophets/psalms) making them Old Testament and New Testament.. although some writings were omitted as questionable in authorship.. or were written by some unauthorized heretics.. Heretic being a nebulous term.. that Jesus never used.. as far as I know..
Does this make the Bible unworthy of study?.. I say no.. even though “WE” are admonished(by Jesus) according to legend to go to the Holy Spirit if we need to “know” anything.. You know “our invisible friend”.. Which has always worked for me.. But the Bible has provided for me some very good entertainment.. and I’m grateful for it..
My belief of the power and inerrancy of the truth of the canonized Scripture (aka the "Word of God") does not descend to the level of "entertainment". I hold it in infinitely higher regard. Again, we differ...
Hence, we differ on that point.
Nobody’s perfect... I tolerate partial perfection... d;-)~....
In some (leftist) circles, difference is elevated to near-deity status. They worship
Who are we "Right-wing bitter clingers" to argue with such "enlightenment"? '-)
LOL!!!
Who are we “Right-wing bitter clingers” to argue with such “enlightenment”? ‘-)
I’ve looked for anything right wing.. and am coming up empty..
If I could find a right wing I would join it..
FR is not right wing theres too many Romneyoids and McCainiacs and Bush-whackers out here..
And a few Loosertarians..
But there are a remnant of right wingers.. so I stay put..
at least they say they are right wingers.. may be so..
As always I remain available to pull the trap as a volunteer on
a gang gallows set up on the White Hut lawn.. for mass processing of malefactors..
Would take special pleasure in processing media moguls..
and denizens of Hollyweird and academia..
RAP artists I would do foregoing my lunch time as a patriotic duty..
Would not like being robbed of the chance to send them on to a meet and greet with Jesus..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.