Quantum,
My font is bigger than yours!!
Anti-Evolutionists Wanted !!!!
by Francois 163 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
IslandWoman
Francois,
IW - Nice way of putting it. I just don't believe that any such artistic tinkering was necessary along the way. I mean if we're dealing with a god at all, we're dealing with a perfect one or none IMHO.
Why would it be out of the question for God to allow himself the pleasure of "artistic tinkering"?
We enjoy it. I believe God can be understood best through his creation. Similar to the artist, inventor or musician whose work reflects their interests and passions, so must God's work reflect his.
Why couldn't God have used both automated or pre-programmed systems along with artistic intervention? Certainly to expect the Creator to conform to our version of a perfect God is unrealistic, we ourselves would find pre-programmed work boring. We enjoy creativity, variety and personal accomplishment, certainly God would also. So why wouldn't he have enjoyed "tinkering"?
IW
-
gsx1138
The smugness of knowing the periodic table, studying some old bones, and believing you have all the facts will get you a Mocha and an article in the Scientific Journal. Not only do you join in the thread late Six your first post drips with smart ass so a lecture from you on smugness is like the pot calling the kettle black. I'm sure you have something valuable to add we just haven't seen it yet. Everyone here is to post their thoughts on evolution but you seem more intent on trying to prove some type of intellectual superiority.
Your post is interesting Quantum. However, quoting the Bible is irrelevent to me since I don't even remotely believe it is the word of God. Adapting to your environment does not make you better than what you were before it makes you alive. Your analogy is good and I see where you're coming from. Kind of a if scientists believe in mutations for betterment of a species then they've been reading too many X-men comics. However, most scientists will agree that it would take millions upon millions of years to get some kind of drastic change and I'm sure that there were more than enough failures to go along with the early successes. As I've stated, I think that life may be easier to spawn than we think. Of course my theory is unproven and I'll have to wait for fossil recovery from Mars or one of Jupiters moons
-
SixofNine
The smugness of knowing the periodic table, studying some old bones, and believing you have all the facts will get you a Mocha and an article in the Scientific Journal.
For example? Please post an example of someone who meets those descripters. It isn't any decent scientist that I'm aware of.
btw, smart ass is very different from smugness. *edited because I was confused as to who gsx was*
Edited by - SixofNine on 6 July 2002 20:38:9
-
nancee park
[email protected] MISSPOKE ABOUT SEVERAL THINGS regarding events, languages, and I believe the rest of you also labor under the same sort of misconceptions. Read this extra close:
ORDER OF ORIGINAL EVENTS AS GENESIS ACTUALLY STATES THEM:
#1 YOHM = DAY(in the sense of an eon or long time period)
Ge 1:1-5
THE HEAVENS (STAR-FILLED)
FORMLESS EARTH/DUST CLOUD WITH DEEP WATER/HYDROGEN
#2 YOHM/DAY/EON
Ge 1:6-8
AN EXPANSE: The earth/dust coalesces into the single entity called Earth while the hydrogen forms into water and there is a space in between the two called heaven as in a place rising high upwards from the Earth outwards toward the stars.
#3 YOHM =DAY/EON
Ge 1:11-13 GRASS, FRUIT TREES
#4 YOHM =DAY/EON
Ge 1: 14-19 LUMINARIES VISIBLE. They had already been created from nothingness but in this time period were "made" in the sense of made to appear visible, not created again. They were only now visible apparently because previously there were too many clouds perhaps of vapor and or dust.
#5 YOHM = DAY/EON
20 LIVING CREATURES, FLYING CREATURES not necessarily birds but possibly winged dinosaurs.
21-23 GREAT SEA MONSTERS. Whales is not necessarily the right translation for the Hebrew word; these may have been aquatic dinosaurs
24-25 DOMESTIC AND WILD ANIMALS. At this point were created mammals such as are now our pets and livestock.
#6 YOHM/DAY/EON
1: 26-31 HUMANS IN GENERAL
#7 YOHM/DAY/EON
Genesis 2 CROP CULTIVATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Verses 5-6 says there was no cultivated field with bushes or vegetation or "rain water," not necessarily in that it had never rained but possibly that the rain water had never been directed as via human irrigation for any sort for crop cultivation
GLOBAL FLOODING MISREPRESENTED:
The ocean tides have risen and fallen global many times so it's untrue that there has never been global flood. In fact it is rising fast even now due to ice melting in Antartica from global warming. The melting and freezing of ice before and after the Ice Ages have also affected the planet as a whole.
TOWER OF BABEL MISREPRESENTED:
Read close. The Bible itself does not say all or most languages came from one language but rather that in that in the earth/region where a tower had been built a number of languages came to be, i.e. in the Middle East there came to be as there are right now SEMITIC (Arabic, Hebrew), INDO-EUROPEAN (Hittitite, Kurdish), TURKISH languages, and formerly were also HAMITIC languages.
They came to be not in the sense of suddenly coming to exist but in the sense that people speaking the already developed languages came pouring into the Middle East, a land good for cultivation and civilization. This happened in "Peleg's day" or time of living, which itself clues you in that it was not within a matter of seconds, hours or a single 24 hour day.
-
gsx1138
Once again Six you post nothing but ego stroking bs. My scientific journal comment was born out of the same smart ass attitude that you've infected this thread with.
Yeah, I think my position, and in fact that of just about everyone on this thread, is intellectually superior to yours.
You sure sound like a fundy. The only thing you've contributed so far is insults to other posters and asking us to prove our position to you. It's nice you've decided to join the debate but actually post your own opinion on the matter instead of busying yourself with what others say. I'm not sure what part of my viewpoint on this subject falls in line with the WTS thinking but I'm sure you'll find someway to justify your ignorant assertion. Other than me thinking that there is a higher power I can't find any other correlations. I actually believe in evolution so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
Sure, change the last part of your post so I look like an asshole.
Who did you think I was?
Edited by - gsx1138 on 6 July 2002 20:52:28
-
SixofNine
I'm not sure what part of my viewpoint on this subject falls in line with the WTS thinking
Why, this part, of course: "The smugness of knowing the periodic table, studying some old bones, and believing you have all the facts will get you a Mocha and an article in the Scientific Journal. "
That attitude sounds hauntingly familier.
The only thing you've contributed so far is insults to other posters and asking us to prove our position to you.
Well, just you, and I took that back . Now how far can a conversation, especially one framed as a debate, go if I can't ask you to prove your position? Just to clue you in on my position, I think that is the beauty of non-specific-you-just-gotta-feel-it theology. You never, ever, ever, have to be wrong about this one thing. No one can question you. Nice work if you can get it.
It's nice you've decided to join the debate but actually post your own opinion on the matter instead of busying yourself with what others say.
Perhaps you missed it, but I have posted my opinion about the original topic. Now I am asking more questions which, while they might clue you into my POV somewhat, are also quite relevant to the direction the conversation has taken. Much like gravedancer, and, for that matter, just about every other human on this planet, I'd love for there to be a loving god. Heck, loving or not, if there is a god, I'd like to know about it, just so I'm not ignorant.
My desire changes nothing.
-
Francois
Well 6o9, you've really succeded in throwing a skunk into this adult conversation. I have no intention of dealing further with you unless you can prove to me you can behave like a civilized adult. That would include leaving off with your absurd fonts, and your ill-informed ranting. Any idiotic fundy can stand up and scream his spewings into the face of his audience. But I believe you'll find that The Master spoke his truth quietly.
And you aren't really convinced your point of view has any value, much less truth, or you wouldn't be so disturbed by opinions that tend to disprove your point of view. When a man knows his truth and is certain about it he can speak it quietly and not be offended by what his neighbor believes.
I suggest you attempt this approach, alien as it apparently is to you. Unless you do, I for one will totally ignore you - and I urge all others in this thread to ignore you as well. Will you support me in this - other threadsters?
IW - I've had a long day with this thread and now I'm going to get horizontal. But be assured I'll be back early in the morning to pick it up again and respond to your incisive observations. I will thank you for your post tonight, however.
Many thanks to all
Francois -
SixofNine
What the hell are you on about Francoise? odd fonts and ill informed ranting? I think I am not the only person in this thread confused about who said what.
I'll be the first to admit that you, while a talented writer, bug the shit out of me when you prattle on about your inside track to god. How does that make you different than A-Guest/shelby? I simply don't think that you have "gone deep" in this conversation. I don't think you have built any amazing deeply spiritual bridges between science and religion. I'm not overly impressed by a simple statement of fact: evolution does not preclude a god. I do think it is a wise fact to understand and a nice first step for people who can't concieve of god apart from the bible. I don't have to find the wise man on the mountain to get that concept.
Having said that, I am not the person who took this thread in a direction away from that simple concept.
-
gravedancer
I was the "font offender"...sorry but after Quantums long post, all in large font and all bold...I made a joke.
6o9 is a decent guy, Frank as are you. Let's not spoil the thread by attacking each other....this thread was one of the best in quite a while as long as we centered it to ideas.