On Apr 28, 8:54=A0pm, Chris Bell wrote:
> s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > On Apr 27, 1:48 pm, Chris Bell =A0wrote:
> >>>On Apr 27, 11:05 am, swa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=A0wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > God =A0Questions and Answers
> >http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3008/
>
> > Is There a God?
> >http://everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
>
> >>A website for you Gladys (and other ID believers)
> >>http://www.newscientist.com/evolutionmyths
>
> > Chris, The website you have given tells those who read it that
> > 'evolution is the truth' and that that truth is not taught properly.
> > But it does not tell that the 'Theory of Evolution' =A0gives no
> > indication how the whole process started and WHO started it. It's all
> > a naturalistic process.
>
> Are you suggesting that the creation of the world was not naturalistic?
> Please explain.
>
Naturalistic, in the sense that I have used the word, means that
living organisms were created out of inorganic - not living - and
somehow of themselves acquired life, as I have written below. .
>
> > Sometime in the vast ages of the past something that was not living
> > suddenly of itself became living as a unicellular organism that had to
> > have irreducible complexity to be able to live and divide into other
> > organisms.
>
> I have asked you several times to define living for me. So far, you have
> refused to answer. Unless you can do so, your comments above are
> meaningless.
>
I'm sure you know what living means as I do also. You are living when
you read this posting; the computer montor on which it is posted is
not living.
> > At least two of those organisms in the same place and very much at the
> > same time had to,. of themselves, develop male and female ***uality,
> > and to 'know' how to express that ***uality in reproduction.
>
> ***ual reproduction came quite late on in evolution (and its progress is
> well do***ented). You should check your facts before you post nonsense.
>
I am not posting nonsense. It is a greater nonsense that in every
instance of ***ual reproduction what I have posted above actually
happened.
> > Evolution is the 'so-so myth'.
> > It makes more sense that the omnipotent God Almighty created in a
> > perfect state, but gave humans the ability to chose
> > right and wrong. It is from the first choice of wrong that wrongs are
> > still in the world today.
>
> Was it wrong to choose to eat meat? In the Garden of Eden there was no
> death, and hence no meat eating. Are you a vegetarian? Do you know who
> killed the first animals according to Genesis?
>
Check Genesis 2 and Genesis 9
> > The Christian faith is that as Jesus Christ overcame the wrong of
> > death on the cross and was raised from death, that, as He promised, He
> > will be with us to help us overcome wrongs as we meet them in our
> > cir***stances, and will, at the end of this life, experience Eternal
> > Life =A0with God Almighty.
>
> What does it mean to "experience eternal life" as you have put it?
>
Eternal life is everlasting, for the Christian, with the Triune God of
the Biblical scriptures in a perfect state of being.
>
> > These are my thoughts as I have not read them elsewhere.
> > Charles Darwin, (1809 - 1882) either did not know the work of
> > scientists who were Christians who were responsible for the
> > improvements that have come or he ignored that fact.
> > He dropped out of medical studies (I don't blame him for that, I would
> > have too in the cir***stances of medical practice in those days - even
> > today).
> > He passed in theology, =A0but evidently didn't like the idea of being
> > the village parson.
> > He appeared to be a failure, to himself and to his family.
> > He had an interest in nature.
> > On his voyage in the Beagle, in the Galapogas Islands he saw the
> > possiblility of solving the evolutionary problem that had first been
> > set by the Greek philosopher, Anaxamander, and of which his
> > grandfather Erasmus Darwin (1731 - 1802) wrote in his text, Zoonamia.
>
> He remained a faithful christian to the end of his life.
>
There are doubts about that. But Theistic evolutionists would like to
think that was so.
> > But what Charles Darwin actually did was to extrapolate from change
> > within a species to change from one species to another species, and
> > suggested that the fossil record would provide the evidence.
>
> > And close to 150 years later the topic is still being debated and
> > despite intense indoctrination (ie no other evidence to the contrary
> > is presented).
> > in the schools and universities, there are those who are stating from
> > the scientific evidence they have that
> > 'Evolution (ie macro-changes from one species to another species 'up
> > the tree of life' =A0didn't happen in the past and is not happening in
> > the present' .
>
> They are a very small minority.
>
=46rom 1962 Evolution has been taught in all High schools in NSW and
from sometime later in all Primary and Pre-schools. So naturally most
people will believe that evolution happened. I presume that has been
much the same elsewhere.
> The secularists have their religion =3D evolution.
>
> Not true. Evolution is science, religion is not. If some have turned it
> into a religion, that is their problem, not mine.
>
Theistic evolutionists say that God created by evolution. But why
would He work that way when He can create by the power of His word.
> > The (Biblical) Christians have their religion =3D God created, humans
s=
inned, God
> > is guiding to a better future those who put their trust in Him.
> > That is not to say that secularists (atheists) are not involved in
> > that process of improvements, but they do have a tendancy to claim all
> > the credits. <snip - but still true>.
>
> Many christians believe in the theory of evolution. Check church belief
> surveys.
>
Yes, as above. The majority of people cannot do the experiments
themselves and accept as they have been taught when that teaching is
given in a plausible manner.
Gladys Swager
>
|
