Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Inerrant Bible?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 46 of 81 (10541)
05-29-2002 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Philip
05-29-2002 3:24 AM


Philip writes:

I believe the Bible is inerrant, if only due to the death, burial, and resurrection of the Christ for a sin-cursed creation.
The Bible is the only source of information about Christ's death, burial and resurrection. A source cannot confirm itself.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Philip, posted 05-29-2002 3:24 AM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Brad McFall, posted 05-29-2002 11:47 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 48 by Philip, posted 05-29-2002 8:19 PM Percy has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 47 of 81 (10564)
05-29-2002 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Percy
05-29-2002 4:37 AM


And order rains me a double rain-bow. I heard about chariots.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Percy, posted 05-29-2002 4:37 AM Percy has not replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 48 of 81 (10594)
05-29-2002 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Percy
05-29-2002 4:37 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:

1) The Bible is the only source of information about Christ's death, burial and resurrection. 2) A source cannot confirm itself.
--Percy

1) There are innumerable other sources of Christ's death, burial and resurrection in religions and in nature (already discussed under ID necessarily the Christian one).
2) I’m not sure what semantics are meant here. A source cannot always speak, true. But sources per se seem to confirm themselves, often scientifically. A rock ‘presents’ as a rock, etc. Philip as Philip, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Percy, posted 05-29-2002 4:37 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Percy, posted 05-31-2002 9:57 AM Philip has replied
 Message 56 by John, posted 06-03-2002 4:57 PM Philip has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 49 of 81 (10736)
05-31-2002 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Philip
05-29-2002 8:19 PM


Philip writes:

1) There are innumerable other sources of Christ's death, burial and resurrection in religions and in nature (already discussed under ID necessarily the Christian one).
Other sources derive their information from the NT, which are problematic. What you are left with is the testimony of believers rather than objective observers. If we are to give full credibility to Christian witnesses then we must do the same for witnesses of other religions, and you can't all be right.

2) I’m not sure what semantics are meant here. A source cannot always speak, true. But sources per se seem to confirm themselves, often scientifically. A rock ‘presents’ as a rock, etc. Philip as Philip, etc.
By "source" I only meant written sources. Your examples of "rock" and "Philip" seem more like evidence to me in the sense that you use them. I don't think the terminology I use is unique or unusual, but if it helps, I probably usually use the term source to refer to a written record/discussion/presentation of evidence and information.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Philip, posted 05-29-2002 8:19 PM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Philip, posted 06-01-2002 2:34 AM Percy has replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 50 of 81 (10781)
06-01-2002 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Percy
05-31-2002 9:57 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:
Philip writes:

1) There are innumerable other sources of Christ's death, burial and resurrection in religions and in nature (already discussed under ID necessarily the Christian one).
Other sources derive their information from the NT, which are problematic. What you are left with is the testimony of believers rather than objective observers. If we are to give full credibility to Christian witnesses then we must do the same for witnesses of other religions, and you can't all be right.
--Percy

--Redemptive and/or restorative events are everywhere seen and expected in nature, albeit to various degrees, so that the inferred Gospel is without excuse i.e.:
--Refreshment is expected occurs after sleep
--Expect to wake up tomorrow.
--Expect to see some light in the darkness.
--Expect to see a little compassion from someone amidst your travail.
--Expect to find some food in times of hunger.
--Expect to find transportation to that necessary event.
--Expect the water to cleanse the bodies filth.
--Expect the earth to produce for its ungrateful inhabitants.
--Expect creative ideas to resurrect within one’s ‘dull’ consciousness.
--Expect science to help man dominate his chaotic environment more and more.
--Expect men to haply feel after the Gospel in nature and the OT without NT sources.
Both ID and the nature of ID are observed and ‘believed’ upon via such numerous observed data-sources, despite men’s refusal to accept the theoretical facts of the Gospel faith they exploit. Such refusal appears as sin against science.
Want some more redemptive and/or restorative observed events of nature that infer a ‘Christ-like’ science taking place?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Percy, posted 05-31-2002 9:57 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Percy, posted 06-01-2002 11:02 AM Philip has replied
 Message 64 by gene90, posted 06-06-2002 11:01 PM Philip has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 51 of 81 (10789)
06-01-2002 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Philip
06-01-2002 2:34 AM


Well, that was Brad-like. I think you just responded to what I hope was a reasoned argument with a sermon. Do you have any responses to anything I said?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Philip, posted 06-01-2002 2:34 AM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Philip, posted 06-01-2002 10:08 PM Percy has replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 52 of 81 (10808)
06-01-2002 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Percy
06-01-2002 11:02 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:
Well, that was Brad-like. I think you just responded to what I hope was a reasoned argument with a sermon. Do you have any responses to anything I said?
--Percy

--Respectfully, who here has not been Brad-like in our self-deceiving generalizing ‘proofs’ based on science falsely so-called? Myself, Quetzel, Dr. Taz, Moose, Joe, TC, TB, JP? When it comes to boldly formulating the necessary mutations in the ToE, we’re ALL suddenly BRAD-LIKE, no?
--Respectfully, Percy, what other things did you really want to address?
--Wasn’t I merely invoking ‘natural’ non-NT proofs, with conclusions based on natural observations on the existence and the nature of ID (where did we mis-communicate)? I thought I provided you a short string of natural observations/potential proofs on the (ID) nature of ‘restorative’ events. This is not true sermon material (see below).
--Sermon material is I’m a miracle, you’re a miracle, I’m a sinner, you’re a sinner, we all justly deserve to be damned, Christ came to totally forgive the idiotical sinners, etc.
--Just because I stated much observable phenomenon appears ‘restorative’/’redemptive’ in nature.
--Albeit, my responses may indeed be ‘sermon-like’/sermonoid. Huxley spoke against sin as an evo-atheist. It seems impossible to come up with an ID that isn’t Gospel-like I’m afraid. With any other ID model, as it stands, they have NOTHING. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. ZIP.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Percy, posted 06-01-2002 11:02 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Percy, posted 06-02-2002 12:42 AM Philip has replied
 Message 60 by nator, posted 06-05-2002 6:48 AM Philip has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 53 of 81 (10812)
06-02-2002 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Philip
06-01-2002 10:08 PM


Sorry, Philip, if this is a response to anything I said it just doesn't ring any bells. I said that if we are to give full credibility to the testimony of Christian witnesses then we must grant the same privilege to witnesses of other reilgions. If you're addressing this point I just can't see it.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Philip, posted 06-01-2002 10:08 PM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Philip, posted 06-03-2002 12:01 AM Percy has not replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 54 of 81 (10852)
06-03-2002 12:01 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Percy
06-02-2002 12:42 AM


I think I agree with you here.
(Note: I'd like to see non-evangelicals give some scientific workup(s) of their ID(s) and the nature(s) thereof)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Percy, posted 06-02-2002 12:42 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by nator, posted 06-05-2002 6:51 AM Philip has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 81 (10902)
06-03-2002 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Philip
05-29-2002 8:19 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Philip:
1) There are innumerable other sources of Christ's death, burial and resurrection in religions and in nature (already discussed under ID necessarily the Christian one).

Uhh.... where? None of the known Roman records have anything to say about it, for example. And, in nature? Do we have fossils? What?
[QUOTE] 2) I’m not sure what semantics are meant here. A source cannot always speak, true. But sources per se seem to confirm themselves, often scientifically. A rock ‘presents’ as a rock, etc. Philip as Philip, etc.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, and a book 'presents'
as a book-- the Bible included. That's it. The end. But this doesn't have anything to do with it being a correct account of anything at all. The Hitchhiker's Guide may as well be your source. It'd make things a lot more fun.
John
------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Philip, posted 05-29-2002 8:19 PM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Philip, posted 06-04-2002 8:47 PM John has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 57 of 81 (10951)
06-04-2002 6:46 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Philip
05-29-2002 3:24 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Philip:
[b]I believe the Bible is inerrant, if only due to the death, burial, and resurrection of the Christ for a sin-cursed creation.[/QUOTE]
But why does this have any special meaning as far as inerrancy, compared to any other Bible story?
I mean, you can't use a story in the Bible to prove that the whole Bible is inerrant.
quote:
For this gospel is extremely conspicuous (as devised by God Himself) throughout those scriptures alone.
So says you. That's a nice theology, but it is based upon faith alone.
quote:
Science also bears witness to such a gospel via the appearances of ID (think Honda-Civic)
I'm thinking Honda Civic, but what does that have to do with ID?
When you can show me a Honda that reproduces itself by mating with another Honda, we might have something to talk about.
[QUOTE], a manifest multi-tiered ?curse?, and observed ?redemptive?/?restoring? events.
Care to hear more, anyone?[/b]
I'm not really sure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Philip, posted 05-29-2002 3:24 AM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Philip, posted 06-04-2002 8:52 PM nator has replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 58 of 81 (10975)
06-04-2002 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by John
06-03-2002 4:57 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Philip:
1) There are innumerable other sources of Christ's death, burial and resurrection in religions and in nature (already discussed under ID necessarily the Christian one).
--Uhh.... where? None of the known Roman records have anything to say about it, for example.

--I won’t contend on the Roman records, specifically.
quote:
And, in nature? Do we have fossils? What?

--I cited the thread above ‘ID necessarily the Christian one’; since you probably didn’t look there, I will quote some for you. You decide whether or not the data in nature at least suggests (to varying extents) the Christ crucified-risen ID model.
DATA (OBSERVED):
I. CREATION (SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM) PER SE
A) A great and terrible appearing darkness, formlessness, and void exists.
--A ‘cold’ yet ‘hellish’ outer darkness is seen to inundate >99% of universe. Temperatures are near absolute zero. No life-forms are detectable therein.
--Science and mathematics (to a great extent) appear useless in such a void.
B) The phenomenon light is observed/detected — electromagnetic radiation.
--‘Brightness’ and ‘Warmth’ is seen and felt here amidst the great ‘darkness’ of space.
--Sophisticated science with mathematically measurable parameters, are now detectable, including, ‘special relativistic phenomenon’ (‘E=MC2’).
II. UNIVERSAL EXPANSION/COSMOGENESIS
A)
1. Lower skies manifest violent meteorological instability.
--Hurricanes, lightning, tornados, violent storms, etc.
--Pollution has increased and Protective ozone is decreased in the upper atmosphere, etc.
2. An even greater darkness, formlessness, and void seen -- via Doppler waves -- expanding every moment within the universal ‘expanse’.
--Primordial(-like) atmospheric substrates detected on celestial orbs, e.g., CO2 ‘vapor canopies’, obnoxious gases, etc. (i.e., on Venus), appearing uninhabitable.
--Celestial ‘waste’, ‘death’, and ‘decay’ increasingly ubiquitous in the cosmos.
--Increasing cosmic randomization events, increasing entropic destruction.
B)
1. Lower skies manifest overall stabilizing effects.
--Hurricanes, storms, extreme seasonal changes, etc. --> necessary ‘purging’ of detrimental eco-networks.
--Many ozone, pollution catastrophes, etc. averted/post-poned (by ‘fortuitous’ advances in science and recent laws)
2. Universal expanse and expansion detectable as orderly:
--Earthly atmospheric substrates have sustained life for millennia.
--Expansion appears harmonious, symmetrical, well-aligned and proportional in great measure (per se).
--Relative infinitudes (black holes, worm-holes, etc.) are detected in the expanding universe, and with effects that are only explainable via abstract theoretical sciences (e.g., ‘general relativity’, etc.).
III. (1) GEOLOGY AND (2) BOTANICAL EXPANSION
A)
1. Ominous appearing ‘oceans of fire’ detectable below the earth’s strata and ‘oceans of water above’.
--‘Volcanic upheavals’, earthquakes, etc.
--Floods, tidal waves, etc.
2. Innumerable vegetations/fruits decay:
--Rotting, decaying, burning, etc.
--Many grains threaten extinction if neglected by human farming.
--Vicarious failures of harvests.
--Extreme ‘randomization’ forces threaten chaos in eco-systems.
B)
1. Powerful land boundaries/masses
--Geological strata appears to prevent much volcanic and seismic disturbances.
--Continental boundaries appear to prevent global floods of oceans.
2. Botanical treasures appear to be resulting amidst decay of vegetation
--Carbonaceous deposits --> massive global energy for present use.
--Innumerable flowering plants and trees taxonomically replenish/multiply with fruit and/or seeds.
--Technological farming and molecular botany exploitation (by man) --> abundant harvests.
--‘Randomization forces offset by finite taxonomical limitations, defense mechanisms.
IV. SPECIFIC LUMINARIES / ASTRONOMY
A) Innumerable battered moons and other celestial orbs that appear arbitrary and wasted.
--An infinite number of celestial orbs appear damaged, ‘aborted’, useless, pointless, strung out without any apparent purpose, etc.
--Star systems appear to be dying — ‘red dwarfs’, etc.
--An infinitude of planets appear unfavorable to sustain life.
B) Celestial luminaries observed for (diurnal) time-clocks and beneficial cyclic seasonal effects, with other potential appearing uses.
--Peculiar harmonies, symmetries, and proportions are observed in numerous stellar systems. ‘Dish’-like orbital symmetry seen in our lunar rotation and solar system, and most galaxies.
--Stars have a relatively long-appearing life cycle.
--Trans-earth habitation appears remotely promising, at least pending extensive supernatural and/or scientific intervention.
V. ZOOLOGY EXPANSION.
A) Swarms of creatures/life-forms endure ‘violence’ in lands, air, and seas.
--Many incur ‘hard’ sicknesses, often protracted deaths, starvation.
--‘Survival of the fittest’ is seen in vicarious splendor.
--Deleterious DNA mutations increasingly abound.
--‘Hypervariability’ and DNA-‘Mutation spots’ often --> drug ‘resistant’ bacteria .
B) Innumerable life-forms/creatures observed taxonomically ‘multiplied’ to replenish and overcome violent unfavorable conditions.
--Offspring replenish habitats. ‘Graceful’ appearing cadences, dances, noises observable
--Innumerable peculiar appearing and complex ‘niches’ after their kinds are observed.
--‘Sophisticated’ DNA-repair mechanisms correct many DNA mutations.
--Science technology --> superior drugs, technology, etc.
VI. HIGHER LIFE FORMS/MAN
A) Atrocious violence observed in higher life-forms and/or man: E.g.,
--dogs fight cats, snakes ‘charm’ victims, numerous predators instigate ‘terror’.
--Sickness, crying, travailing and groaning amidst all diverse life-forms and man.
--Pedophiliacs, murderers, terrorists
--Wars: Nation against nation, etc.
--Sickness and aging goes on without ceasing. Metastasis and cancer abounds.
--Crying and groaning in all upper life forms.
--Divorce, adultery, fornication, immorality, pornography --> ‘nuclear family’ decay.
--Unrestrained ‘free wills’ appear everywhere to conflict with each other.
B.) Songs of ‘deliverance’ heard among humans. Innumerable and diverse ‘renewals’ observed within creatures:
--Friendship and ‘praise’ postures are apparent. Fights often cease.
--A travailing woman is observed to ‘cheerfully’ endure her travailing.
--Acts of ‘kindness’ abound and justice is observed to various extents. Abundant ‘love’, ‘forgiveness’, ‘peace’, and ‘patience’ also witnessed.
--Nations have not yet annihilated >1% global inhabitants. ‘Peace’ reigns at times.
--‘Healing’, ‘courage’, ‘Christian-like’ behavior continue. Technological knowledge has increased.
--Songs are composed and sung. Art, writing, and hosts of other ‘joyous’ observations.
--Many ‘courtship’ and ‘marriage’ events continue -- even atheists are observed to ‘marry’ with relatively low divorce rates (i.e., compared to evangelicals).
--Free will seen subservient to forces of ‘love’ (e.g., ‘heroism’, ‘cooperation’, ‘church-meetings’, etc., etc.).
TEST RESULTS: Comparisons of (A) ‘SIN-CURSED’ observations and (B) ‘REDEMPTION’ observations: (A) Innumerable marks of destruction, ‘mutation’, ‘slow death’, and decay seem ubiquitous in the cosmos: ‘Eroding’ systems, ‘cursed’ life-forms, entropic events, and deleterious mutations, indeed, seem ubiquitous to all levels of the cosmos. ‘Mutation spots’ and ‘hypervariability’ in drug resistant bacteria seem to imply ‘dexterous cursedness’ in the design model. ‘Free-will’ itself and the numerous randomization events taking place seem sin-cursed.Indeed, such ‘vexation’, ‘pointlessness’, and ‘uselessness’, etc. seems to fail the All Benign Designer test. Many preliminary observations, thus appear cursed, from a perspective of an intelligent designer.
(B) Yet, the creation/cosmos is observed to be renewed and/or quickened: i.e., with light, ‘seasons’, rains, marriages, etc., as noted in the data in numerous redemptive events occurring on all cosmic levels. The creation/cosmos, creatures/life-forms, and man are ‘saved’ to various extents by innumerable ‘redemptive’ events, including physical and even metaphysical events (i.e., ‘marriage’ events). For each and every sin-cursed observation, another observation may be linked that appears to varying extents, ‘redemptive’.
CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION:
The personality behind such an intelligent design (ID) here would commiserate with all ‘sin-cursed’ observations and ‘redemptive’ ones. Such a personality is explicitly apparent in the Christ-Creator model, a Christ who himself became completely ‘sin-cursed’ but ‘risen from the dead’, redeeming the creation thereby. The natural marks of such redeeming events appear everywhere as expected under the ‘evangelical’-creationist hypothesis.
quote:
Originally posted by John:
Yes, and a book 'presents'
as a book-- the Bible included. That's it. The end. But this doesn't have anything to do with it being a correct account of anything at all. The Hitchhiker's Guide may as well be your source. It'd make things a lot more fun.

--Are not books are analogous to telescopes: they enable you to focus upon specific events, physical and/or metaphysical. Science, seems no different, albeit science seems perhaps more concerned with abstracting physical events, to most people. Science may be just another book, in my opinion. It may be the bible of books, in your opinion. Science, however, does not seem to cover human ethics very well. The Bible addresses this metaphysical event, apriori.
[This message has been edited by Philip, 06-04-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by John, posted 06-03-2002 4:57 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by John, posted 06-09-2002 12:50 PM Philip has replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 59 of 81 (10977)
06-04-2002 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by nator
06-04-2002 6:46 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Shraf:
quote:
Originally posted by Philip:
I believe the Bible is inerrant, if only due to the death, burial, and resurrection of the Christ for a sin-cursed creation.
But why does this have any special meaning as far as inerrancy, compared to any other Bible story?
I mean, you can't use a story in the Bible to prove that the whole Bible is inerrant.

--The problem (I perceive) with the Bible, is that every page requires this Christ phenomenon for it to be inerrant and credible, even in Genesis 1 and 2. Remove the interdependent Christ model and the scriptures become mere ethical fables, no more trustworthy then the Haitian Voodoo fables (aka. blatant Devil worship).
-- Show me a page in the Bible that makes sense without the Christ motif. You yourself might say: Proverbs, Job, the historical books, etc. But, I respond, these OT books are all supersaturated with ‘cursed’ and ‘redemptive’ data (natural and supernatural) and direct portraits/figures of the Christ to be sans the Christ model.
--This will sound crazy to you, Shraf, but the Gospel ‘story’ is more scientific than the scriptures. We both may agree that the scriptures do not employ a scientific method. The Bible merely telescopes the science of Christ’s vicarious sufferings and resurrection in all things.
quote:
Originally posted by Shraf:
(Philip) For this gospel is extremely conspicuous (as devised by God Himself) throughout those scriptures alone.
So says you. That's a nice theology, but it is based upon faith alone.
--That’s a conclusive faith based on hypothesis, methods, testing, observed data, results, and conclusions, using the scientific method.
(please, see my discussion with John, in this thread)
quote:
Originally posted by Shraf:
(Philip) Science also bears witness to such a gospel via the appearances of ID (think Honda-Civic)
I'm thinking Honda Civic, but what does that have to do with ID?
When you can show me a Honda that reproduces itself by mating with another Honda, we might have something to talk about.

--ID is apparent (to varying degrees) in all things, even to you Shraf. You might cleverly explain it away 99%, but it nonetheless suggests itself to your ‘scientific’ conscience (I believe) from time to time under a different guise perhaps.
--Thanks for your feedback,
--Philip
[This message has been edited by Philip, 06-04-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by nator, posted 06-04-2002 6:46 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by nator, posted 06-05-2002 7:06 AM Philip has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 60 of 81 (10996)
06-05-2002 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Philip
06-01-2002 10:08 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Philip:
[b]
quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:
Well, that was Brad-like. I think you just responded to what I hope was a reasoned argument with a sermon. Do you have any responses to anything I said?
--Percy

--Respectfully, who here has not been Brad-like in our self-deceiving generalizing ?proofs? based on science falsely so-called? Myself, Quetzel, Dr. Taz, Moose, Joe, TC, TB, JP? When it comes to boldly formulating the necessary mutations in the ToE, we?re ALL suddenly BRAD-LIKE, no?[/QUOTE]
Um, I have not been Brad-like.
Not even once.
You, on the other hand, are avoiding answering plain-language questions and points by becoming , er, Brad-like.
[QUOTE]--Respectfully, Percy, what other things did you really want to address?
--Wasn?t I merely invoking ?natural? non-NT proofs, with conclusions based on natural observations ? on the existence and the nature of ID (where did we mis-communicate)? I thought I provided you a short string of natural observations/potential proofs on the (ID) nature of ?restorative? events. This is not true sermon material (see below).
--Sermon material is ?I?m a miracle, you?re a miracle?, ?I?m a sinner, you?re a sinner?, ?we all justly deserve to be damned?, ?Christ came to totally forgive the idiotical sinners?, etc.
--Just because I stated much observable phenomenon appears ?restorative?/?redemptive? in nature.
--Albeit, my responses may indeed be ?sermon-like?/sermonoid. Huxley spoke against sin as an evo-atheist. It seems impossible to come up with an ID that isn?t Gospel-like I?m afraid. With any other ID model, ?as it stands, they have NOTHING. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. ZIP.?
[/B]
Blah blah blah blah blah.
------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."
-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Philip, posted 06-01-2002 10:08 PM Philip has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 61 of 81 (10997)
06-05-2002 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Philip
06-03-2002 12:01 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Philip:
I think I agree with you here.
(Note: I'd like to see non-evangelicals give some scientific workup(s) of their ID(s) and the nature(s) thereof)

You aren't likely to find "scientific" workups of these things from non-literalists because they don't confuse religion/spirituality with science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Philip, posted 06-03-2002 12:01 AM Philip has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024