Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dear Darwin Central
bibletools.org Isaiah 55:8-9 ^ | Feb 19, 2011 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 02/19/2011 12:01:04 PM PST by Jim Robinson

Dear Darwin Central,

Thank you very much for the nifty Darwin Central coffee mug we received in the mail from you. Sheila uses it every morning for her tea. She loves evolution. Says it's one of our awesome God's greatest creations. It's kinda like his autopilot.

I don't know about that, but do believe that God works in mysterious ways.

Isaiah 55:8 (KJV)

55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

55:10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:

55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

55:12 For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.

55:13 Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree: and it shall be to the LORD for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.

Keep the Faith!

May God bless you always,

Jim & Sheila


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: gagdadbob; onecosmos; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

1 posted on 02/19/2011 12:01:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Love it JR .....LOL


2 posted on 02/19/2011 12:03:00 PM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

lol! Gotta love it... (and Amen)


3 posted on 02/19/2011 12:03:33 PM PST by Outlaw Woman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
She loves evolution. Says it's one of our awesome God's greatest creations. It's kinda like his autopilot.

I agree completely.

4 posted on 02/19/2011 12:06:23 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

LOL! Good one!


5 posted on 02/19/2011 12:09:27 PM PST by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

was it made in China from radioactive elements?


6 posted on 02/19/2011 12:09:53 PM PST by 1000 silverlings (everything that deceives, also enchants: Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
She[ila] loves evolution. Says it's one of our awesome God's greatest creations.

I don't know if you thought of that Jim, but it's brilliant.

7 posted on 02/19/2011 12:12:52 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings

most likely :)


8 posted on 02/19/2011 12:13:12 PM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Very nice post, good response.


9 posted on 02/19/2011 12:13:25 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
That'll roast their chesnuts on an open fire!

Thanks for posting it.

10 posted on 02/19/2011 12:18:41 PM PST by backwoods-engineer (Any politician who holds that the state accords rights is an oathbreaker and an "enemy... domestic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

yeah, brilliant idea..Our loving, caring God using a process of death and agony of billions of beings/creatures over supposed billions of years......(insert sarcastic eye-roll here)


11 posted on 02/19/2011 12:26:42 PM PST by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Amen!!!!!!!!!!


12 posted on 02/19/2011 12:27:25 PM PST by marmar ((Although, I may look different then you....my blood still runs..RED, WHITE, & BLUE. RETIRED USAF))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Most excellent!

{Applauding}

13 posted on 02/19/2011 12:29:53 PM PST by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
"Now man comes from monkey, so some folks say

but the Good Book don't quite tell it that way

If you believe that monkey business as some folks do

then I'd rather be that monkey's brother than you ..

and thats all, yes that's all..you got to change your way of livin' before the Good Lord say's thats all"...

That's all, ...lyrics by Merle Travis

14 posted on 02/19/2011 12:30:47 PM PST by tflabo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Ain’t it wonderful. All the great advances scientists have made. They have used public funds to learn many new things about this world.

But, at the same time, as they fight to eliminate God from His creation, they just can’t seem to prove it. In fact, some people, while trying to disprove Him, found His loving hand and took it.

Such a shame that something, like science, that requires an open mind, can be so tightly shut to the truth. Until...


15 posted on 02/19/2011 12:37:52 PM PST by wizr (Keep the Faith! Even when it gets tough! Nothing else will do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim, I LOVE you and Sheila. You are in my prayers daily in two forms: first, in my thanks as being among my many blessings, and second, in prayer that God bless you and yours with good health, safety, and financial prosperity through your work and investments.

I am with Sheila. What is interesting about "evolution" is that it boils down to this: that every living creature on earth has always had to adapt to a constantly changing physical environment in order to survive; those that fail to adapt, perish. This is on a worldly, material, physical plane. Yet the same holds true spiritually, by God's great design, and to me, evolution is His "worldly" way to show us the spiritual way. We humans must likewise ADAPT our behavior to the rules set forth in the Bible; those civilizations that have failed to adapt HAVE PERISHED.

Many make the mistake of thinking "survival of the fittest" means "survival of the most ruthless." Yet in truth, ruthlessness in the material, physical sense has nothing to do with species' adaptation to changing environments. And it is clearly true that ruth (pity, sorrow, remorse), and compassion are STRENGTHS, the very things that have made Judeo-Christian societies survive and thrive, whereas those heathen and pagan societies that are ruthless and lack compassion in how they treat fellow humans and themselves, are destined to result in misery, deprivation, and to eventually perish.

The bible is an instruction manual that tells us how we can adapt and survive -- thrive, even -- in any physical environment; it would work as well for humans who went to Mars to terraform, as it did for our fouding Fathers who came to this continent. For example, if we suddenly faced an ice age and had to come up with ways to grow food and create heat to keep people alive, our Judeo-Christian "system" would guide us as to how to work together to make it happen, whereas rules in Islam, or rules of "environmentalists," would sabotage such efforts from the start. Those societies "adapting" by way of the bible would survive; those who didn't would perish.

God love you and keep you safe.

16 posted on 02/19/2011 12:55:25 PM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I have been authorized by Darwin Central to give JR a hearty thank you for his gracious post. We sincerely appreciate your kind words and look forward for the opportunity to reciprocate.

Jim, you also have my own best wishes, and best wishes specifically from RadioAstronomer.

We who still believe in the Constitution will defend to the death your right to free speech, your right to the free exercise of your religion, and your right to drink tea from a coffee mug.

17 posted on 02/19/2011 12:59:04 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

lol...


18 posted on 02/19/2011 12:59:57 PM PST by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Thanks for taking up this subject. I love your personal anecdote, it’s a great wonder of God’s universe that two people can view the same world and come up with different conclusions while still allowing God’s love to to be the common theme in their lives.

No matter how one views science and religion, the scientist and the religionist must both pass through the same portal to stand in God’s presence. The scientist observes God’s work in the physical realm, the religionist observes God’s work in the spiritual realm. Both must depend on faith to demonstrate that the prime mover, the first cause, of science is also the loving God of religion.


19 posted on 02/19/2011 1:03:41 PM PST by concentric circles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; JustAmy
Not as a spokesperson for any group, but as one who walks along many paths, (perusing, mostly), I wish to express for the group at Darwin Central this message of appreciation:
radioastronomer wrote:
"... I for one wish someone from here with an account still active on FR would reply a real very cordial thank you from all of us."
I don't recall precisely, but when we were discussing what to do with the extras after we had distributed our special mugs, (they are nice, aren't they? I like mine for hot chocolate), it may have been I who suggested that we gift you with one or two of the mugs.

Mr. Darwin had a birthday recently, along with his birthday buddy Abraham Lincoln, and as noted on the coffee mug, he and his Theory are "still evolving".

We all hope you enjoy your mug and its delivery of tasty beverages, as much as any of the rest of us do. You are still, for many of us, a respected "founder of the feast" that is our online camaraderie, in whatever channel we find ourselves.

20 posted on 02/19/2011 1:09:57 PM PST by NicknamedBob (Evolution hasn't stopped. "Fittest" just has a new meaning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

In Isaiah 55 the prophet speaks to Israel of Christ and the word (the word in 55:11), which is the Bible. Isaiah 55 draws an analogy between rain and snow on the the one hand and the Bible on the other. As Christ would come and speak the word of God, i.e., the good news of the Gospel, Isaiah 55 declares that like the rain and snow do not fall to no effect, but they bring forth life from the earth, so to the word of God would not just be spoken and disappear, but would also have it’s promised effects, which for 2,000 years we have seen.


21 posted on 02/19/2011 1:14:16 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (Huguenot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Look up the phrase “sense of humor” in the dictionary. Stop by “irony” on your way. Then, even if you don’t appreciate them, at least you’ll know what they mean.


22 posted on 02/19/2011 1:25:45 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I have no use for a site that regards global warming as sacrosanct. DC completely discredits itself with their embrace of this pseudoreligion.


23 posted on 02/19/2011 1:25:45 PM PST by denydenydeny (Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak-Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Why would God resort to “evolution” if He was able to see the end result before He started?

Gottlieb Daimler made a crude, topless motor buggy because he didn’t know what a Maybach 62 looked like. He couldn’t see into the future.

Get my point?


24 posted on 02/19/2011 1:41:32 PM PST by RoadTest (Organized religion is no substitute for the relationship the living God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny; Jim Robinson
"I have no use for a site that regards global warming as sacrosanct. DC completely discredits itself with their embrace of this pseudoreligion."

And whom would that be?

We're having a very lively discussion at this moment over there about the House cutting NASA's global warming science budget.

That group is about as agreeable as you might imagine they are, but some of us like a lively discussion.

25 posted on 02/19/2011 1:45:38 PM PST by NicknamedBob (Evolution hasn't stopped. "Fittest" just has a new meaning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

“yeah, brilliant idea..Our loving, caring God using a process of death and agony of billions of beings/creatures over supposed billions of years......(insert sarcastic eye-roll here)” ~ raygunfan

Poor thing. Let’s see if any of this will enable you to re-think your “sarcasm”:

Why Darwinists Reject Evolution
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-darwinists-reject-evolution.html

<>

The Fractured Fairy Tale of ___Darwinian___ Evolution
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2010/02/fairy-tale-of-darwinian-evolution.html

Realism, n., an accurate representation of human nature, as seen by toads. —Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary

Or blind lizards, as the case may be.

As we have discussed in the past, the irony is that evolution is strictly impossible if one accepts the materialistic presuppositions of metaphysical Darwinism.

Again, the idea of evolution was around long prior to Darwin, and in fact, in the first five editions of The Origin of Species, he didn’t even mention the word. Rather, he only slipped it into the sixth edition in 1872, apparently hoping that no one would notice that he was 1) redefining the plain definition of a word, in order to 2) take his theory well beyond science, and into the world of religion and metaphysics.

It is this novel fantasy of evolution-without-divinity that is so insane and destructive, not the mere science of natural selection, with which we have no problems at all. Only after Darwin was the word “evolution” widely imposed on his theory, a word that had previously referred to the idea that things unfold or “evolve” toward their prototype, like acorn to oak tree.

Thus, in point of fact, “Nothing is less like Darwin’s doctrine than the idea that new species should already be present in their ancestors, from which they only have to evolve in the course of time.”

As Gilson points out, when Darwin inserted the word “evolution” into later editions of the Origin, he was purloining a term “already in use to signify something completely different from what he himself had in mind,” i.e., “the inverse movement of in-volution, the un-rolling of the in-rolled, the de-velopment of the en-veloped.”

One might say that Darwin’s thinking devolved (in terms of philosophical sophistication) as he came to be increasingly dominated by his theory: “The more one comes to know Darwin, the more one is persuaded that, from the day when he conceived the idea of transformation of species, he felt charged with the scientific mission of revealing to men a truth which was in his eyes indubitable; but this scientific truth was at the same time the reverse of a religious certitude which he himself had lost. The antireligious always has a bit of the religious in it” (Gilson).

The reason for the latter well-documented phenomenon is that the person who has lost his faith in reality has an inner need to “proselytize” and convert others in order to not feel alone in his cosmic meaninglessness. This is the work of mind parasites. You might say that the kryptonite of mind parasites is that they must always induct others into their fantasy in order to go on being. They have no energy of their own, but must be “fed” by certain types of relationships with projected parts of the psyche — even if the relationships are frustrating, self-defeating, and growth-stifling.

This is the only way to account for the obnoxious proselytizing energy of the materialists, for if the psyche is just an illusory byproduct of matter, why should they of all animals care what others think? In contrast, if truth exists, human beings naturally wish to radiate it to others, in imitation of their Creator. That’s my position: I love truth, and just get a joy out of sharing it with other folks. But I fail to see how materialism can account for truth, love, and a passionate love of truth that has no immediate relevance whatsoever to genetic survival.

As Cardinal Schönborn points out in his foreword to Gilson’s From Aristotle to Darwin & Back Again: A Journey in Final Causality, Species and Evolution, “reductionist accounts of evolution” are only “the visible parts of an intellectual iceberg,” so that “the issues that lie under the surface of the current evolution debate are ultimately far larger and more important.”

That is, in case it’s not obvious, our contemporary zeitgeistberg goes much deeper than the often unedifying debates about intelligent design, or creationism, or separation of church and state, for ultimately it has to do with the preservation of man qua man, and the very possibility of truly human civilization.

Clearly, an unprecedented amount of change has occurred over the past three or four centuries. But change is obviously not synonymous with progress. And it is an absurdity to suggest that conservatives are somehow “opposed” to change.

Rather, what the conservative specifically wishes to conserve are the tried-and-true mechanisms that lead to progressive change, not just change for the sake of changing. Every conservative should know that a complex and dynamic system only preserves itself through change, and only changes through preservation (think of your body).

Something unique and unprecedented in human history occurred with the American founding. Somehow, Americans stumbled upon the very means to unleash human potential through liberty, individual initiative, free markets and representative democracy, to become the unrivaled economic, scientific, and political leader of the world. How did they do it?

I just recently read What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848, and there is an instructive passage about the American intellectual consensus of the early 19th century, at the very time we began our ass-kicking world-historical ascent (and bear in mind that this is a secular scholar with no religious agenda whatsoever):

“As this chapter is written in the early twenty-first century, the hypothesis that the universe reflects intelligent design has provoked a bitter debate in the United States. How very different was the intellectual world of the early nineteenth century! Then, virtually everyone believed in intelligent design. Faith in the rational design of the universe underlay the worldview of the Enlightenment, shared by Isaac Newton, John Locke, and the American Founding Fathers....

“The commonly used expression ‘the book of nature’ referred to the universal practice of viewing nature as a revelation of God’s power and wisdom. Christians were fond of saying that they accepted two divine revelations: the Bible and the book of nature.” (Raccoons, of course, accept three, including the mirrorcle of the human subject.)

Howe goes on to say that the belief that nature revealed the divine power and wisdom “constituted one of the principal motivations for scientific activity in the early republic, along with national pride, the hope for useful applications, and the joy of science itself.... The perceived harmony between religion and science worked to their mutual advantage with the public” (emphasis mine).

So, the very roots of America’s scientific dominance reflect precisely what we were saying yesterday about the balance and harmony of idealism/rationalism and empiricism, and the relevance of that balance to the progress of science. Do I wish to conserve this harmony? Indeed I do — not in order to prevent the further evolution of human potential, but to make it possible! Perhaps the radical materialists have failed to notice that it has only been with the ascent of secular fundamentalism and the stranglehold of liberals on our public schools that America’s educational decline commenced.

<>

The Children of Light vs. the Communist Maninfestation
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2006/10/children-of-light-vs-communist.html

“...You might say that God first created “horizontal man,” who is capable only of organic or biological growth. But he then corrected this deficiency by creating “vertical man” who is capable of spiritual evolution. This new kind of man, who had had a living soul breathed into him, “possessed in a latent state a potential that the purely animal world does not possess, that of passing on to the human and even superhuman stages of development.” ...

<>

Creation Myths of the Tenured
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2010/08/creation-myths-of-tenured.html

<>

And for the atheists:

On the Probability of God’s Certainty http://tinyurl.com/ykdvdcq

“...People who pretend to not understand the link between Darwinism or atheism and nazism or communism are just willfully obtuse, for the great mystery of the cosmos is not why evil, or falsehood, or oppression, or ugliness, exist.

Rather, as always, the question is how truth, or goodness, or beauty, can exist in a wholly naturalistic cosmos. Not why there are sinners, but why there are saints. Not why there is despair, but why there is hope and joy. Not why there are liars who take advantage, but why there is Truth to which a good person naturally wishes to conform his being. ....... “

<>

Tone Deaf Factsimians and Their Haudible Godlessness
http://tinyurl.com/24buzh

“...there is no reason to take anyone seriously who believes existence to be absurd, since anything they can say will be equally absurd. And no one is more proudly absurd than the atheist.


26 posted on 02/19/2011 1:52:44 PM PST by Matchett-PI (Trent Lott on Tea Party candidates: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them" 7/19/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

They sent you a mug? Too funny! Regards to Sheila from me, I’m glad she’s enjoying the mug.


27 posted on 02/19/2011 1:54:31 PM PST by Jean S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI; Jim Robinson

Jim, I just wanted you to know that somebody has gone and started preaching all over your nice thank-you note.

Good things never last long, do they?


28 posted on 02/19/2011 1:57:47 PM PST by NicknamedBob (Evolution hasn't stopped. "Fittest" just has a new meaning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Har! Lest there be any doubt I have proof positive that evolution is hokum: We STILL have liberals. How has that aberration in the gene pool survived??? I think it may point to the generosity and tolerance of long suffering and God fearing conservatives. The crosses we bear...
29 posted on 02/19/2011 2:00:26 PM PST by ForGod'sSake (You have only two choices: SUBMIT or RESIST with everything you've got!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

“I believe that Christianity can still be believed, even if Evolution is true.” ~ C. S. Lewis

<>

John Paul II:

“...What is the significance of such a theory? To address this question is to enter the field of epistemology. A theory is a metascientific elaboration distinct from the results of observation, but consistent with them. By means of it a series of independent data and facts can be related and interpreted in a unified explanation. A theory’s validity depends on whether or not it can be verified; it is constantly tested against the facts; wherever it can no longer explain the latter, it shows its limitations and unsuitability. It must then be rethought. Furthermore, while the formulation of a theory like that of evolution complies with the need for consistency with the observed data, it borrows certain notions from natural philosophy.

And, to tell the truth, rather than the theory of evolution, we should speak of several theories of evolution.

On the one hand, this plurality has to do with the different explanations advanced for the mechanism of evolution, and on the other, with the various philosophies on which it is based. Hence the existence of materialist, reductionist, and spiritualist interpretations. What is to be decided here is the true role of philosophy and, beyond it, of theology. Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter are incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground the dignity of the person. ...” - John Paul II October 22, 1996 Excerpted from: Theories of Evolution http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9703/articles/johnpaul.html

<>

“No science is ever frightening to Christians. Religious people don’t need the science to come out any particular way on IQ or AIDS or sex differences any more than they need the science to come out any particular way on evolution...If evolution is true, then God created evolution.” ~ Ann Coulter — P.277 Godless http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1657102/posts?page=45#45

<>

Chris Matthews’ question to Rush:: “You want to educate the American peep about science and its relevance. Do you believe in evolution?”

“Yeah. I believe in evolution.”

“Oh, you do? We got a Republican believes in evolution!”

“Yeah, wait, Chris! Wait, though! It can’t explain creation. I mean, we’ve got both. Where did it come from, Chris? Don’t give me the Big Bang. Don’t give me evolution for the Big Bang. Where did this all come from, what was it before it was what it is? Certainly things evolve. There’s no question. There’s no denying it. But evolution does not explain creation.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2245676/posts?page=23#23


30 posted on 02/19/2011 2:31:23 PM PST by Matchett-PI (Trent Lott on Tea Party candidates: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them" 7/19/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob

Now, don’t be bad-mouthing C.S.Lewis, the Pope, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, now.:)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2676523/posts?page=30#30


31 posted on 02/19/2011 2:36:51 PM PST by Matchett-PI (Trent Lott on Tea Party candidates: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them" 7/19/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
Why would I do that? I respect those people. They've written books.

Have you written a book?

32 posted on 02/19/2011 2:41:02 PM PST by NicknamedBob (Evolution hasn't stopped. "Fittest" just has a new meaning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Placemark


33 posted on 02/19/2011 3:18:05 PM PST by greyfoxx39 ("This administration has turned off America's beacon to the world for freedom and left darkness")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; Alamo-Girl; Jim Robinson
Heads up, Dear Sisters in Christ! ...a CREVO thread for the rest of us...

Thanks, Jim and Sheila -- and Amen!

34 posted on 02/19/2011 3:53:57 PM PST by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Is that a whiff of ozone in the air?


35 posted on 02/19/2011 3:56:32 PM PST by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Since I post on DC as well as FR I have been asked by a moderator there to reply with a very cordial thank you from all of us at Darwin Central.


36 posted on 02/19/2011 6:09:21 PM PST by saganite (What happens to taglines? Is there a termination date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

For some reason my first link in post #26 doesn’t work. Let’s try that again:

Why Darwinists Reject Evolution
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2009/09/why-darwinists-reject-evolution.html


37 posted on 02/19/2011 11:08:49 PM PST by Matchett-PI (Trent Lott on Tea Party candidates: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them" 7/19/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; betty boop; Matchett-PI

Please comment on matchett’s essay at #26. thanks to all of you.


38 posted on 02/20/2011 6:41:12 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain & proud of it: Truly Supporting the Troops means praying for their Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Please comment on matchett’s essay at #26. thanks to all of you.

Perhaps their delay is caused by the confusion over the "essay" at post 26. Since it is merely 100% Cut and pasted from the One Cosmos blog, who can be sure to whom we are responding?
39 posted on 02/21/2011 6:50:34 AM PST by whattajoke (Let's keep Conservatism real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

thanks for the info


40 posted on 02/21/2011 8:05:05 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain & proud of it: Truly Supporting the Troops means praying for their Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI; Alamo-Girl; xzins; raygunfan; spirited irish
What an outstanding essay/post, Matchett-PI! Thank you so very much, and for the links to the fascinating "GAGDAD BOB."

At the link "The Children of Light vs. the Communist Maninfestation," I found this delight:

Quoting Eric Hoffer's "The Ordeal of Change".

"To the intellectual the struggle for freedom is more vital than the actuality of a free society. He would rather work, fight, talk, for liberty than have it. The fact is that up to now the free society has not been good for the intellectual. It has neither accorded him a superior status to sustain his confidence nor made it easy for him to acquire an unquestioned sense of social usefulness. For he derives his sense of usefulness mainly from directing, instructing, and planning — from minding other people's business — and is bound to feel superfluous and neglected where people believe themselves competent to manage individual and communal affairs, and are impatient of supervision and regulation. A free society is as much a threat to the intellectual's sense of worth as an automated society is to the workingman's sense of worth. Any social order that can function with a minimum of leadership will be anathema to the intellectual."

Oh, so very true! A main problem is so many of these "intellectuals" are Darwinists of the metaphysical materialist type. As such, they don't "do" science; they do voodoo....

But they want to run things, to direct our personal and social lives in ever-increasing detail!!!

Doesn't look like a good idea to me. :^)

Plus I just loved this: "one must know the truth in order to lie about it."

And I gather that is what's so absurd about atheists....

41 posted on 02/21/2011 1:21:56 PM PST by betty boop (Seek truth and beauty together; you will never find them apart. — F. M. Cornford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan; Alamo-Girl; xzins; Matchett-PI; spirited irish; YHAOS; metmom; MHGinTN
yeah, brilliant idea..Our loving, caring God using a process of death and agony of billions of beings/creatures over supposed billions of years......(insert sarcastic eye-roll here)

Wow. What a one-sided view of things! Evidently you do not see the Life....

Socrates tells us that death is the separation of the soul from the body, and nothing more. The body perishes; the imperishable soul does not.

Christianity tells us the same thing.

The problem is that if the universe consists only of what you can "see" — here defined as what you directly observe through sense perception — then the problem of the soul surviving death cannot ever become meaningful for you.

And so raygunfan, your evident "angst" is most understandable.

42 posted on 02/21/2011 1:56:13 PM PST by betty boop (Seek truth and beauty together; you will never find them apart. — F. M. Cornford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

One of many reasons why I use the notion of a dimesnion from which life in individual organisms originates. A separate dimesnion makes the soul a timeless ‘thingy’ thus when detached from the physical body which is time bound, the soul exists in a timeless state. And the spirit is defined similarly, sourced in a separate nother dimension beyond even space, time, life, so not bound by time though it can be ‘mixed’ with variables of dimension time and dimension space so that events can occur. ... But to discuss such things with a determined to be anti-god mind is a fruitless exercise. ... As Monk would say, “I may be wrong now ... but I don’t think so.”


43 posted on 02/21/2011 2:04:32 PM PST by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest
You missed the brilliance of Shirley's statement. What you're trying to poopoo because it does not fit with the way your human mind considers the complexities is in fact the construction methodology God chose to use to arrive at the Maybach 62. And what makes you think God didn't use your inferred methodology when making the Angels? He may have made them without using a process of ‘evolution’, going right to the final model He planned for. Why can't God enjoy the process as it unfolds? Who are you to instruct God? You don't even know if the life force of every living thing terminates at death. What if it only gets loosened fromt he bonds of the anatomy and physiology?
44 posted on 02/21/2011 2:17:03 PM PST by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

They’re still around, eh?


45 posted on 02/21/2011 2:19:01 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Shirley? ... Who’s that? ... Sorry, Jim & Sheila, I meant to write Sheila but typed Shirley. My bad ... bad old fingers, sticky old brain!


46 posted on 02/21/2011 2:21:43 PM PST by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

Thank you very much!


47 posted on 02/21/2011 7:48:50 PM PST by Matchett-PI (Trent Lott on Tea Party candidates: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them" 7/19/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

“You missed the brilliance of Shirley’s statement. What you’re trying to poopoo because it does not fit with the way your human mind considers the complexities is in fact the construction methodology God chose to use to arrive at the Maybach 62. And what makes you think God didn’t use your inferred methodology when making the Angels? He may have made them without using a process of ‘evolution’, going right to the final model He planned for. Why can’t God enjoy the process as it unfolds? Who are you to instruct God? You don’t even know if the life force of every living thing terminates at death. What if it only gets loosened fromt he bonds of the anatomy and physiology?”

Whew!

To answer all your questions, if those were questions, God says he did it in six days.

Knowing therefore that God doesn’t lie, and men do, I’ll go with His account.


48 posted on 02/22/2011 5:08:12 AM PST by RoadTest (Organized religion is no substitute for the relationship the living God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

“You missed the brilliance of Shirley’s statement. What you’re trying to poopoo because it does not fit with the way your human mind considers the complexities is in fact the construction methodology God chose to use to arrive at the Maybach 62. And what makes you think God didn’t use your inferred methodology when making the Angels? He may have made them without using a process of ‘evolution’, going right to the final model He planned for. Why can’t God enjoy the process as it unfolds? Who are you to instruct God? You don’t even know if the life force of every living thing terminates at death. What if it only gets loosened fromt he bonds of the anatomy and physiology?”

Whew!

To answer all your questions, if those were questions, God says he did it in six days.

Knowing therefore that God doesn’t lie, and men do, I’ll go with His account.


49 posted on 02/22/2011 5:08:20 AM PST by RoadTest (Organized religion is no substitute for the relationship the living God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

“You missed the brilliance of Shirley’s statement. What you’re trying to poopoo because it does not fit with the way your human mind considers the complexities is in fact the construction methodology God chose to use to arrive at the Maybach 62. And what makes you think God didn’t use your inferred methodology when making the Angels? He may have made them without using a process of ‘evolution’, going right to the final model He planned for. Why can’t God enjoy the process as it unfolds? Who are you to instruct God? You don’t even know if the life force of every living thing terminates at death. What if it only gets loosened fromt he bonds of the anatomy and physiology?”

Whew!

To answer all your questions, if those were questions, God says he did it in six days.

Knowing therefore that God doesn’t lie, and men do, I’ll go with His account.


50 posted on 02/22/2011 5:08:25 AM PST by RoadTest (Organized religion is no substitute for the relationship the living God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson