Posted on 02/19/2009 9:24:24 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
What Is Science?
"Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic."
—Dr. Scott Todd, Kansas State University, Nature 401(6752):423, Sept. 30, 1999
What You Will Learn
Many people do not realize that science was actually developed in Christian Europe by men who assumed that God created an orderly universe. If the universe is a product of random chance or a group of gods that interfere in the universe, there is really no reason to expect order in nature. Many of the founders of the principle scientific fields, such as Bacon, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton, were believers in a recently created earth. The idea that science cannot accept a creationist perspective is a denial of scientific history...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
So is it correct to conclude that if one does not adhere to the literal truth of the bible then one is not a Christian?
If you don’t have an answer say so but a question on something else is not an answer.
“What aspect of Christianity does evolution conflict with?”
Genesis. Although Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 conflict with each other as well.
Christianity is not defined by Genesis.
No, they don't. They just fill in some detail from Chapter One.
Genesis 2 paraphrased. God found Adam lonely with companion so he created animals and brought them each before Adam to 'evaluate' as companions. Finding animals lacking for Adam, God created Eve. Why didn't God know that Adam was needing an Eve and create her at the same time as Adam instead of putting Adam through torture? What lesson was God providing in this?
If you don’t have an answer say so statement about an earlier post is not an answer.
Where do you get that God was torturing Adam by having him name the animals and showing him that they didn’t provide for him adequate companionship?
And simultaneously highlighting the difference between human design and design via descent with modification.
We already have a working theory that explains the history of life. If you intend to replace or supplement that theory, you need to provide something new that can be tested.
So far, claims that certain complex mechanisms could not have evolved incrementally have been whittled away. There rather impressive news on the flagellum developed recently. Seems there are lots of partial flagella in living organisms when you start looking for them.
The biggest flaw in ID is that it doesn't suggest looking for them.
holding-breath placemaker.
If you wish to carry Buck’s water foe him perhaps your moniker should be CarryWater instead of ColdWater.
No.
The essence of ID:
1. Life on earth originated billions of years ago in a pond of scum.
2. Man evolved from this early life over a span of hundreds of millions of years.
3. God may be dead since there is no evidence of his existence over the last few hundred million years.
Uh, trying out all the animial to see if they could suit him was NOT torture? Imagine being presented with millions of animals, one by one and, uh ... , never mind.
“No, they don’t. They just fill in some detail from Chapter One.”
In Gen 1 Animals are made a day before man. In Gen 2 they are made after man.
If you don't want to or can't answer the question just say so. Don't jump on me!
God knew that Adam was needing Eve. How do you expect someone to be able to answer you seriously when you start with false premises like that?
Operational science in biology is based upon the theory, and the theory of creating useful features from random generation of genetic diversity is used to create novel enzymes for industrial functions.
Nobody is stopping Creationists from doing their thing. Unfortunately their “thing” is mostly pretzel work apologetics, laughable PR releases, and a “critique” of real scientists doing real science.
Biology has never been a more productive field in terms of research and application (industry, food, medicine), NONE of it from Creationist universities. Not many test tubes in Dr. Dino's basement.
“Uh, trying out all the animial to see if they could suit him was NOT torture? Imagine being presented with millions of animals, one by one and, uh ... , never mind.”
I wonder why god didn’t already know what would please Adam?
Oh I remember, its a myth from bronze aged Nomads.
“The biggest flaw in ID is that it doesn’t suggest looking for them. “
I sometimes refer to ID as “educated surrender”.
Then why was Adam presented all the animals first? What was the moral to that story?
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.