Homology is not a problem for creationists; we have a different but reasonable explanation. It is the result of common design
Sorry; explanation FAIL. A "common design" that incorporates elements of Design A into Design B even though they are inferior or downright dysfunctional in the context of Design B cannot be explained as "design", unless it is postulated that the designer is an imbecile. I suppose one could rescue creationism with the postulate that God is an imbecile, but for some reason creationists just won't go there....
posted on 12/15/2009 11:46:47 AM PST
(Intelligent Design -- "A Wizard Did It")
Creation does not function properly because of the fall of Adam. The earth is fallen and so our bodies. We malfunction all the time and our bodies are living evidence of that. Adam's sin subjected our earth and every living thing to decay and degeneration--mutational degeneration is one example.
posted on 12/15/2009 11:50:40 AM PST
("When I survey the wondrous cross...")
A "common design" that incorporates elements of Design A into Design B even though they are inferior or downright dysfunctional in the context of Design B cannot be explained as "design", unless it is postulated that the designer is an imbecile.
This really boils down to the notion that, when discussing the possibility of an omnipotent Creator of all living things, if we see some aspect of the creation which has not been carried out in quite the way that WE would have done it, then we can conclude that God does not exist.
That's a bold position.
posted on 12/15/2009 11:54:49 AM PST
(Macbeth is ripe for shaking, and the powers above put on their instruments.)
IMAGINE you get to have YOUR face to face with the Creator that created your very unique being and YOU get to answer for what YOU did through the passage of this flesh age. Will YOU play dumb or will YOU beg for forgiveness?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson