The Religion of Evolution

I better not bring up the topic of observed female homosexuality in monkeys challenging Darwin's theory then. No, don't go there.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Alright, if you wrote it yourself, YOU might want to fact check YOUR OWN WRITINGS, dj2becker. And if you actually wrote it yourself you're more pitifully ignorant than even I could imagine. BTW, probably 90% of the scientists who "believe" in evolution believe in God also; it's been explained to you numerous times that there is no contradiction between theism and evolution.

Then quite evidently the theistic evolutionists don't believe the Bible's account of creation.

how so..

Originally posted by dj2becker
There is no branch that looks at a larger portion of God's handiork than do astronomers. The Scripture says: "The Heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork". (Psalm 19:1); "For the invisible things of h ...[text shortened]... and of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

You are Miss de Point and I claim my free gift. In any case, the Psalmists were a tradition of allegorical folk poets, some of them very fine bits of poetry. They were writing allegorically not describing the physical truth of the world. You devalue their poetic value if you argue otherwise

Yup, fine, no problem, but few of the god fearing astromomers will believe that the sun moves through the sky as described in the bible. The y have separated allegory from dogma and moved on.

The will of course be astronomers who believe that the sun moves round the earth in the biblical fashion but I expect they don't get out much.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Then quite evidently the theistic evolutionists don't believe the Bible's account of creation.

No, they believe in the value of the allegory, they don't believe it as literal truth. If you pulled your head out of your arse you might begin to understand enough to start doing the same

Originally posted by dj2becker
Then quite evidently the theistic evolutionists don't believe the Bible's account of creation.

Most people in the world who believe in a God don't believe in the Bible's account of creation (most don't believe in most of the Bible at all).

Originally posted by KneverKnight
This thread is evolving into yet another disaster for Creationism.

as it well should!

i just think its a disaster...

Originally posted by dj2becker
There is no branch that looks at a larger portion of God's handiork than do astronomers. The Scripture says: "The Heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork". (Psalm 19:1); "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen" (Romans 1:10). Ninety percent of all astronomers today believe in G ...[text shortened]... nal rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

Robert Jastrow is an agnostic. See the 1995 quote of his I posted in the "Universe" thread.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Then quite evidently the theistic evolutionists don't believe the Bible's account of creation.

here the answer to Jastrow:

http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/360Evolution.html

this part especially : Evolution for Dumkopfs

Originally posted by no1marauder
Robert Jastrow is an agnostic. See the 1995 quote of his I posted in the "Universe" thread.

So you see no significance in an agnostic saying these words, "The scientist has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak, and as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

Originally posted by dj2becker
So you see no significance in an agnostic saying these words, [b] "The scientist has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak, and as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
[/b]

Jastrow cannot be agnostic and think that , that's the only significance of it, that his true colors are showing. if he can say that and the science is faith based ,,then he's either lying when he says he's agnotic or delusionary.

Originally posted by frogstomp
Jastrow cannot be agnostic and think that , that's the only significance of it, that his true colors are showing. if he can say that and the science is faith based ,,then he's either lying when he says he's agnotic or delusionary.

Would you like to point out anything in science in which you try to make conclusions about the past in which you do not base assumptions upon assumptions? In other words where faith does not play a role.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Would you like to point out anything in science in which you try to make conclusions about the past in which you do not base assumptions upon assumptions? In other words where faith does not play a role.

u·ni·for·mi·tar·i·an·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (yn-fôrm-târ--nzm)
n.
The theory that all geologic phenomena may be explained as the result of existing forces having operated uniformly from the origin of the earth to the present time.

Talk about faith...

Originally posted by dj2becker
Examining creation will bring us closer to the Creator. That is what the earliest founders of science believed, or as the founders of astronomy put it, we would merely be thinking God's thoughts after Him.

But something happened on the way to the twentieth century. In the middle of the nineteenth century when modern science began to develop, the enitr ...[text shortened]... when there are only two religions competing for the minds, hearts, and loyalties of Western man.

Plagiarized from D. James Kennedy, Why I Believe.