is the only thing, not this ... 
someone tell 
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 ...
Except for the education part.
c-y-c:
“If you wish to carry Buck’s water foe him perhaps your moniker should be CarryWater instead of ColdWater.”
That’s really uncalled for.
Education does not imply wisdom or intelligence!
is the only thing, not this ... someone tell
What do you mean, *trying out all the animial to see if they could suit him*? Trying them out how?
Why do you say *all* the animals? The Bible doesn’t say that Adam named ALL the animals on the planet.
How do you know how many God presented to Adam? Or are you just ASSuming that as well?
Hey, noob. What was your previous screen name?
>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?<
That’s not how the Bible reads. God says he will make a helper fit for him and “Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast ... But, for Adam there was not a helper fit for him.”
Obviously, either God didn’t know what was a fit helper or he was teaching Adam a lesson. Which?
18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for [5] him.” 19 Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed [6] every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam [7] there was not found a helper fit for him.
Something scientists could well learn.
They're one on the most arrogant bunch of people around because of it.
“Hey, noob. What was your previous screen name?”
I don’t post here usually. LP mostly, but that site is off the deep end right now. I’m Rhino on LP.
You had better read your Bible!
Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed [6] every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field.
I probably should read at least one other post in this thread before I weigh in. However, I am not famous for my abundance of discretion.
The biggest thing that the TOE has going for it these days is the evidence found in mitochondrial DNA!
So we all share DNA and we all have common ancestors. I never had to read an Evolution Book to learn that.
The absence of physical evidence sustaining the notion that one critter grew into another is actually revealing. Academic square-heads still tend to run around the world proselytizing dumb hicks (like me) that something came from nothing and that any thought contrary to that must indicate a need for more education.
Darwin's 5 year voyage around the world on the Beaver sure seems to have involved a lot of wasted time. How much of that 5 years was actually spent watching some finches on the Galapagos? Think about it!
It is all BS, but gosh, I can't say BS out loud here on FR.com.
That is not enough for the proponents of a logically flawed "Science" that is in all but acknowledgment a secular religion. That is a religion that has no God.
I wish that it weren't bedtime already.
The best way to deal with an arrogant scientist is to prove him wrong. Where’s that YEC proof?
Quoting Adam:
"This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh;"
My bolding.
“If you don’t have an answer say so statement about an earlier post is not an answer.”
Particularly so since I had not spoken to him at all.
Who sets your bedtime?
“Christianity is not defined by Genesis.”
I’ll give you that I guess. The majority of Christians just don’t believe in parts of the bible that have been exposed as false.
Its certainly more rational the literalism, but they can never explain why they believe the rest of it.
Though I do find it funny that most people who consider themselves bible literalists think catholics are crazy for taking the last supper story literally about the body and blood.
Christianity is funny from the outside looking in.
Not near as much time as Adam wasted trying out all the animals for suitability as companions before God figured out he needed a woman.
Its not your question so you have no right to demand an answer from me and then decide which answers I’ve given to SOMEONE ELSE are acceptable.
You want to ask a question, do so, but do not tell me how to answer another person’s question.
It called “manners”.
Are you saying that he lied about that when He did it?
Buck I would like to hear a real answer to this question. Also what is your definition of a Christian
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.