The 6 point test.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
That's because ID is not science.

Why? It seems more logical to me than the theory of evolution, which
needs an intelligently designed program for adaptation to even appear
to be valid.

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you need me to define those words to make sense out of my
statement, you are in a bad way.

You continually redefine words and use bizarre grammar and logic so it is important that the rest of us fully understand your mad ramblings.

Then we can try and straighten you out.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Why? It seems more logical to me than the theory of evolution, which
needs an intelligently designed program for adaptation to even appear
to be valid.

For most of us, some god throwing twinkle dust about and then:

*-'~_ Abracadabra _ ~'-* A cat is created
*-'~_ Hocus-pocus _ ~'-* A zebra is created
*-'~_ Shellar _ ~'-* A tiger is created
.
.
.

does not represent science.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Why?

Because it doesn't follow scientific principles.

It seems more logical to me than the theory of evolution, which
needs an intelligently designed program for adaptation to even appear
to be valid.
Whether or not something seems logical to you does not decide whether or not it is science. In fact, you would probably find most science illogical. (Remember that you dispute many of the major findings of most major branches of science.)

Originally posted by RJHinds
Why? It seems more logical to me than the theory of evolution, which
needs an intelligently designed program for adaptation to even appear
to be valid.

Exactly where is the 'logic' in creationism? I thought it was faith based. You can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by FMF
I wasn't asking you to speak for Dasa. I was asking you to speak for yourself and to explain your beliefs on the matter, especially in light of what you said to him in your response to his OP.

My response is that trying to atone for a "sin" is pointless. How can someone atone for harming another? Put another way, if you murder someone how many years of good deeds will atone for that said crime? Under your own power you cannot make up for such a transgression.

Then again, who cares if it is a "sin"? The question is only pertinent if one has to answer to a higher authority at some point. Some people even look upon murder as virtuous, kinda like murdering a "brutal" dictator.

Of course there are other "lesser" sins catagorized in our minds. What of them? Then again, this is only from our perspective. If it is only from our perspective, again, who cares? It only matters if we have to answer to a higher authority. It then only matters what the verdict is from that authority.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You continually redefine words and use bizarre grammar and logic so it is important that the rest of us fully understand your mad ramblings.

Then we can try and straighten you out.

I don't need straighting out. I am already straight as a arrow that hits the
bulleye on the target.

Originally posted by Agerg
For most of us, some god throwing twinkle dust about and then:

*-'~_ Abracadabra _ ~'-* A cat is created
*-'~_ Hocus-pocus _ ~'-* A zebra is created
*-'~_ Shellar _ ~'-* A tiger is created
.
.
.

does not represent science.

There was no twinkle dust. God created with the sound waves from
His voice as He said, "Let there be .......".

P.S. This is science beyond your small minds ability to understand.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Because it doesn't follow scientific principles.

[b]It seems more logical to me than the theory of evolution, which
needs an intelligently designed program for adaptation to even appear
to be valid.
Whether or not something seems logical to you does not decide whether or not it is science. In fact, you would probably find most science illogical. (Remember that you dispute many of the major findings of most major branches of science.)[/b]

It sure does follow scientific principles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=YO7gV41PNcA

P.S. The last video in the series of 7 given below concludes that
the scientific method proves intelligent design.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Cj3PWUF7zAw

Originally posted by RJHinds
There was no twinkle dust. God created with the sound waves from
His voice as He said, "Let there be .......".

P.S. This is science beyond your small minds ability to understand.

RJHinds, you don't have the credibility to be talking about any small minds other than your own.

Originally posted by RJHinds
There was no twinkle dust. God created with the sound waves from
His voice as He said, "Let there be .......".

P.S. This is science beyond your small minds ability to understand.

".... with sound waves ...." trying to add a bit of science?
Laughable!

Why would god speak with no one about to hear?

And why now, with people about to listen, he is silent?

Originally posted by whodey
My response is that trying to atone for a "sin" is pointless. How can someone atone for harming another? Put another way, if you murder someone how many years of good deeds will atone for that said crime? Under your own power you cannot make up for such a transgression.

Then again, who cares if it is a "sin"? The question is only pertinent if one has t ...[text shortened]... er to a higher authority. It then only matters what the verdict is from that authority.

You've written three paragraphs about something else altogether, which is your prerogative of course. However, if you'd like to address the question I asked, then here it is again:

If there's nothing sinful or immoral about the way Dasa leads his life, and - indeed - he lives it in a virtuous way, with compassion and mercy and kindness, are you saying - as a Christian, and within the terms of reference of your own chosen religion, that God, as you see Him, will send Dasa to hell regardless?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
".... with sound waves ...." trying to add a bit of science?
Laughable!

Why would god speak with no one about to hear?

And why now, with people about to listen, he is silent?

These questions of yours just show how ignorant you are, nothing else.

Originally posted by Agerg
RJHinds, you don't have the credibility to be talking about any small minds other than your own.

Lack of credibility does not prove I am wrong.

Originally posted by RJHinds
These questions of yours just show how ignorant you are, nothing else.

My questions show that I dont know the answers -

apparently neither do you.

You continually spout nonsense but when challenged or asked to justify your statements conspicuously change the subject, go off at a tangent or resort to personal attacks.

And you calling anyone ignorant is really quite comical.