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

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 08/28/2003 9:47:36 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:

flamewar



Skip to comments.

Lice offer clues to origin of clothing
USA TODAY ^ | 8/18/2003 | Tim Friend

Posted on 08/20/2003 3:05:55 PM PDT by demlosers

Edited on 04/13/2004 1:41:04 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 381-394 next last
To: balrog666
I was responding to f. Christian. Not the thread itself.
41 posted on 08/26/2003 1:42:49 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
I was responding to f. Christian. Not the thread itself.

Can you not read? You were responding to a Dakmar post as bizarrely reposted by f.C.

42 posted on 08/26/2003 1:44:40 PM PDT by balrog666 (Wisdom comes by disillusionment. -George Santanyana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Watch it balrog. There is a snappy comeback for your post, but I won't go there.
43 posted on 08/26/2003 1:45:27 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
pathetic mental breakdown placemaker !
44 posted on 08/26/2003 1:45:59 PM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
Start your own thread on it then.
45 posted on 08/26/2003 1:46:28 PM PDT by balrog666 (Lions 21, Christians 0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
f.Christian flagged me. This forum is still a free forum and I can respond as I wish to whom I wish. If I choose to talk about lice, then I will talk about lice just as you chose to talk about STDs in the middle of a lice thread. You may not like my speech, but I'm not attacking you (or even evolution) with the Nazi posts. I'm stating historical fact.
46 posted on 08/26/2003 1:47:16 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
No.
47 posted on 08/26/2003 1:47:45 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Oh, yes, let us thank Him for head lice, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, Herpes Simplex Virus Type II, Hepatitis B, Syphilis, HPV or Venereal Warts (Condyloma Acuminata), Trichomoniasis, Crab Lice (Pediculosis Pubis), and Scabies.

Praise Him for His wonderous works!

No - those are the result of sin entering the world. Creation has been cursed, but will be restored. Disease and suffering were not part of the original design. But, God has provided a remedy in His Son. Your references above are part of a sin-afflicted world.

48 posted on 08/26/2003 1:52:02 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Hairless hokum: New study of body lice disproves the Bible?
49 posted on 08/26/2003 1:53:19 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Lice??? Oh my I hate them little buggers.
50 posted on 08/26/2003 2:14:56 PM PDT by goodseedhomeschool (returned) (If history has shown us anything, labeling ignorance science, proves scripture correct)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
Calculus does not try to get rid of the moral law-giver. It does not presuppose a world without a creator.

Nor does evolution. All evolution states is that the origins of the living organisms we see can be explained by natural processes; just as calculus states that dynamical systems can be explained by a particular kind of mathematical equations. By showing how x changes with time, does calculus try to get rid of God, in saying that x does not change simply according to His will, but according to a set of mathematical laws? By doing medical research, do we try to get rid of God in curing the sick?

51 posted on 08/26/2003 2:16:52 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
There's far better grounds for arguing that Naziism is a logical offshoot of the long-standing and deep-rooted antisemitism within German Christianity, than there is for claiming it's a result of evolution.. For example, consider the following statements by the founder of German Protestantism (and the father of the Reformation), Martin Luther.

Did I not tell you earlier that a Jew is such a noble, precious jewel that God and all the angels dance when he farts?

I brief, dear princes and lords, those of you who have Jews under your rule-- if my counsel does not please your, find better advice, so that you and we all can be rid of the unbearable, devilish burden of the Jews, lest we become guilty sharers before God in the lies, blasphemy, the defamation, and the curses which the mad Jews indulge in so freely and wantonly against the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, this dear mother, all hristians, all authority, and ourselves.

What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Since they live among us, we dare not tolerate their conduct, now that we are aware of their lying and reviling and blaspheming. If we do, we become sharers in their lies, cursing and blaspemy. Thus we cannot extinguish the unquenchable fire of divine wrath, of which the prophets speak, nor can we convert the Jews. With prayer and the fear of God we must pratice a sharp mercy to see whether we might save at least a few from the glowing flames. We dare not avenge ourselves. Vengenance a thousand times worse than we could wish them already has them by the throat. I shall give you my sincere advice:
First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly - and I myself was unaware of it - will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.
Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.
Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them. (remainder omitted)
Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. For they have justly forfeited the right to such an office by holding the poor Jews captive with the saying of Moses (Deuternomy 17 [:10 ff.]) in which he commands them to obey their teachers on penalty of death, although Moses clearly adds: "what they teach you in accord with the law of the Lord." Thoses villains ignore that. They wantonly employ the poor people's obedience contrary to the law of the Lord and infuse them with this poison, cursing, and blasphemy. In the same way the pope also held us captive with the declaration in Matthew 16 {:18], "You are Peter," etc, inducing us to believe all the lies and deceptions that issued from his devilish mind. He did not teach in accord with the word of God, and therefore he forfeited the right to teach.
Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let they stay at home. (...remainder omitted).
Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us all they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble. For such evil gains are cursed if they are not put to use with God's blessing in a good and worthy cause.
Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen 3[:19]}. For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.

So DittoJed2, are you going to claim Martin Luther wasn't a real Christian?

52 posted on 08/26/2003 2:35:33 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Nor does evolution. All evolution states is that the origins of the living organisms we see can be explained by natural processes;
Which is contrary to how Scripture said it happened. There is NO basis for moral law in evolution other than human preference. If you can make a case that there is a basis for such, do so. However, your friends tried to use nature as the basis which in and of itself can't explain why one man's moral law in America is different from another's in Saudi Arabia which is different from another's in the jungles of Indonesia. God's law is seen in creation to a certain extent, but the fact that man has so wide a range of opinions on what is moral and what isn't is proof that there is no self-evident basis for moral law outside of a Creator who has given His moral law. Again, if you can make the case on how evolution has a basis for moral law, by all means. Saying it is neutral doesn't work, because in standing against Scripture and the supernatural it has forfeited such neutrality.

just as calculus states that dynamical systems can be explained by a particular kind of mathematical equations. By showing how x changes with time, does calculus try to get rid of God, in saying that x does not change simply according to His will, but according to a set of mathematical laws? By doing medical research, do we try to get rid of God in curing the sick? You are comparing apples with oranges. Scripture makes distinct truth claims for itself. In postulating that these things did not occur the way Scripture says they occurred, Evolution is setting itself up over Scripture. Calculus, by itself, is pretty neutral. Medical research is nowhere prohibited in the Bible. It's apples and oranges. Evolution deals with origins, specifically. It specifically sets itself against the biblical account. Darwin knew he was doing this as did every "churchman" who joined him in the apostasy (study Crawford Toy for example) of the late 1800s. It sets itself up as anti-biblical. If you don't agree with this, just look at how these threads go "see, science say that lice came about 70,000 years ago (or whatever, I can't see the thread right now). The Bible can't be right!" It's not neutral, and any claimed neutrality is feigned.
53 posted on 08/26/2003 2:45:47 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
RWP. Try to keep up. #1, I never said that an evolutionist couldn't be a Christian. Didn't say it. You can search. You won't find it. #2, I never said that Darwinism was the sole cause of Hitler's ideology. As a matter of fact, I mentioned that anti-semitism was rampant in Eastern Europe long prior to Hitler. As for Luther, I believe he was a Christian who was dead wrong regarding the Jews. This post of yours is a diversion from Hitler's own stated influences, and I can make a far greater case that Hitler used Darwinism in support of his ideology as opposed to Christianity. Yes, Hitler occasionally invoked the name of Jesus and stood outside to have his picture made in front of a Catholic cathedral. By I defy you to find a single solitary Christian doctrine found in the Bible that would promote Nazism. You can't do it (and stay in any form of context). I can however point to Darwin's own statements and those of some of his followers as helping to produce soil in which their theory could be used for such (again, I didn't say their comments necessitated Hitler. He bears the responsibility for his own actions, but they fertilized the soil).
54 posted on 08/26/2003 2:52:21 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
There is NO basis for moral law in evolution other than human preference. If you can make a case that there is a basis for such, do so.

This is like talking to a brick wall.

Saying it is neutral doesn't work, because in standing against Scripture and the supernatural it has forfeited such neutrality.

Evolution contradicts a literal reading of your personal favorite creation story. It does not contradict any moral teaching, per se.

"see, science say that lice came about 70,000 years ago (or whatever, I can't see the thread right now). The Bible can't be right!"

The first person to bring the Bible into it was an anti-evolution poster.

55 posted on 08/26/2003 2:57:11 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Evolution contradicts a literal reading of your personal favorite creation story. It does not contradict any moral teaching, per se.
It has no basis for moral teaching other than preference. You can choose to be a Mother Teresa or a Hitler and there is no foundation other than preference to say that you are wrong. Evolution produces a relativistic society because it makes man equal with animals, evolved from primordial goo, with no real dibs on any moral claim. IF your society says Hitler was a genocidal monster, according to that opinion, you can prosecute him by the rules of that society. However, another society may beg to differ. Without an immovable moral law, given by one higher than human beings, then you have an unstable democracy - at best.
56 posted on 08/26/2003 3:00:33 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
By I defy you to find a single solitary Christian doctrine found in the Bible that would promote Nazism

I believe Luther's words speak for themselves, and I would not dream of setting myself up as an authority on Christianity in opposition to a man whose name graces Protestant churches all over the world.

If you're going to dive into a thread on biology with a bunch of irrelevant nonsense about the origins of the Naziism, then be prepared to have a real, unrestricted discussion on all the social factors that gave rise to Naziism. Have you read Goldhagen's book?

By the way, you never answered my query on another thread about whether evolution was widely taught in the South betwen 1865 and 1965? the South was definitely Christian during that period. Was it Darwinist?

57 posted on 08/26/2003 3:04:26 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I believe Luther's words speak for themselves, and I would not dream of setting myself up as an authority on Christianity in opposition to a man whose name graces Protestant churches all over the world.
BR> If you're going to dive into a thread on biology with a bunch of irrelevant nonsense about the origins of the Naziism, then be prepared to have a real, unrestricted discussion on all the social factors that gave rise to Naziism. Have you read Goldhagen's book?

No, I haven't. But I know all of the social factors leading to Nazism. Remember, I got a 106 in the course on Nazi Germany. I've also studied Austrian-Prussian history and can testify that the world has been a very antisemitic place for most of its history. The Jews were thrown out of England and Spain and during WWII we wouldn't take them in. Antisemitism is an ugly thing with many causes. Hitler used Darwinism to justify it, and comments by Darwin (less so) and some of his supporters lend credence to his usage of the theory.


By the way, you never answered my query on another thread about whether evolution was widely taught in the South betwen 1865 and 1965? the South was definitely Christian during that period. Was it Darwinist?

I'm not even sure what your point is here. I'm assuming you are talking about racism and integration. Did I somewhere say that Darwinism was completely responsible for Racism? I don't believe I did. The south had problems with Racism prior to Darwin and after. They did not get these notions from Christianity. Yet, even Gould (I think, or Dawkins) acknowledges that while it did not create racism Darwinism contributed to it.
58 posted on 08/26/2003 3:12:02 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I think we need to define what I am talking about when I say Christianity. To paraphrase the words of Billy Sunday, going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car. When I refer to Christianity, I am referring not to what any church has taught or biblical scholar has believed. I am referring to the teachings of the New Testament. The teachings of Jesus, Paul, and others.

Based upon those teachings, I would conclude that Hitler was not a Christian, while Luther was. Christians are not perfect, but they do hold to certain essentials in belief- chief of which is the need to repent and received Christ as Savior for the remission of sins. If one claims to be a Christian but does not follow this essential teaching of the Bible, then in my estimation and Scriptures, they are not a Christian.
59 posted on 08/26/2003 3:15:29 PM PDT by DittoJed2 (Romans 1:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
just as calculus states that dynamical systems can be explained by a particular kind of mathematical equations. By showing how x changes with time, does calculus try to get rid of God, in saying that x does not change simply according to His will, but according to a set of mathematical laws? By doing medical research, do we try to get rid of God in curing the sick? You are comparing apples with oranges. Scripture makes distinct truth claims for itself. In postulating that these things did not occur the way Scripture says they occurred, Evolution is setting itself up over Scripture.

Yes, but what about astronomy? Most of today's creationists have given up the game before they even started, but there are some creationists who are able to see the Big Picture:

Once Satan's counterfeit of God's Truth of an earth-centered geocentric universe gained control of "higher" education, the way was clear to foist his evolutionary counterfeit into the corridors of academia with very little opposition! The real spade work had already been done!

Copernicans Voltaire and Erasmus Darwin (Charles' grandfather) were developing "ape-man" theories in the 1700's. ... Is there anyone anywhere who will not give 100 to 1 odds that the earliest proselytizers of evolutionism were not avowed Copernicans, having just received that great quantum leap in "wisdom" from their grandfathers?? I can find none.

...

Thus, secure from any credible attack on their Copernican "science" front, the new Darwinian "science" offensive could then link hands with the "established scientific truth" of a rotating, orbiting Earth and forge boldly ahead toward the goal of pushing the Bible completely off stage as a repository of Truth.

In all this, as many of you know, Ernst Haeckel was a powerful force early in the establishment of Darwinism. This biological note about Herr Haeckel succinctly tells what happened and why it happened: "Ernst Haeckel wedded the idea of classical physics [Copernicanism] with the new Darwinian history of nature to form a comprehensive materialist cosmology, or `anti-theology'..."14 (More on Haeckel HERE.)

This "comprehensive materialist cosmology" is what Creationists today are up against and, excepting a handful, they do not know it! Evolutionism does NOT stand alone as a Bible-wrecking, contra-scientific deception, Satanically conceived. Oh no! Evolutionism is historically, philosophically, scientifically, and spiritually WEDDED TO a previously conceived Bible-wrecking, contra-scientific deception called Copernicanism! The Creation "movement" today denies or ignores this wedded union and thus is not 1/50th the threat to Satan's kingdoms in this world that it can and should be.

Fellow Creationists: It's wake-up time!!

...

While knowledgeable Creationists have known about the Communist-Socialist-Humanist dependency upon evolutionism, they have not generally known or thought about the Copernican connection to the same "isms". It is now time to understand this connection! It is now time to understand how Copernicanism PAVED THE WAY for the acceptance of Darwinism, and how Darwinism, in turn supplied the basis for conquest of the Social and Behavioral "sciences" (and the Arts, Mathematics, and Religion). It is time to understand that Communism and Humanism are equally dependent upon that other foundational "scientific" principle that goes hand in glove with evolutionism. That pre-evolutionary principle was and is Bible-bashing Copernicanism....

Does someone say they aren't convinced that the very heartbeat of Communist and Humanist ideology is the anti-Bible moving earth concept we call Copernicanism??

Let such a one lend an ear to what a gathering of Communist scientists in London in 1931 were saying. They knew that their system absolutely depended on a conviction that nothing in the universe can be motionless. (If anything could be motionless, then the earth could be as the Bible says, and the game would be over!)

See? Copernicanism had already "fertilized the ground" for both Darwinism & Communism 300 years earlier!

60 posted on 08/26/2003 3:20:53 PM PDT by jennyp (http://crevo.bestmessageboard.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 381-394 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