14 Mar 06
Originally posted by RagnorakNone because the other two would see the glory of god in his actions and leave their earthly father to follow their heavenly one.
For gods sake people, this is simple arithmetic.
I'll try again...
If Abraham has 4 sons, and sacrifices two of them because a talking burning bush told him to, how many sons would Abraham have left?
D
14 Mar 06
Originally posted by NordlysBut are they functioning members of the human race, deserving of all the rights accordingly expeected by such a designate? Or is their earthly slumber in some way a detraction of their status?
Well yes, but they are already persons with souls and all while they are still in the earth.
14 Mar 06
Originally posted by StarrmanFrom the website:
Oh dear me, what is happening to the world?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4793198.stm
Students should be taught how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence (for example Darwin's theory of evolution).
This is actually untrue. Creationists do not interpret evidence differently from scientists. They manipulate the evidence to fit thier beliefs. Strangely enough I dont think they even believe thier own hypothesis, but rather wish to shed doubt on anything contradicting the Bible.
Oh dear me, what is happening to the world?
Nothing much is new, as usual almost all decision makers do not understand the subjects that they are making decisions about. This is simply because the skills required to get into a position of decision making (Usually political skills) are very different from the skills required for making good decisions.
14 Mar 06
Originally posted by RagnorakSince Jesus is part of the Godhead, according to Trinitarians, then he's just giving apples to himself.
"If Jesus had 2 apples, and god gave him 3 apples, how many apples would Jesus have?"
He starts with 2 apples:
Gives one to himself: +1-1
Gives a second one to himself: +1-1
Gives a third one to himself: +1-1
= 2 apples.
QED
15 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadOne man's interpretation is another man's manipulation. Your choice of words pretty much begs the question.
From the website:
[b]Students should be taught how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence (for example Darwin's theory of evolution).
This is actually untrue. Creationists do not interpret evidence differently from scientists. They manipulate the evidence to fit thier beliefs. Strangely enough I d ...[text shortened]... sually political skills) are very different from the skills required for making good decisions.[/b]
I really don't understand how this insistence on keeping science and religion separate came about. If you go back a couple of centuries, theology was regarded as a form of science. It only seems to be atheists who want the two fields kept utterly separate.
15 Mar 06
Originally posted by twhiteheadAd hominem and a shameless, lame strawman.
From the website:
[b]Students should be taught how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence (for example Darwin's theory of evolution).
This is actually untrue. Creationists do not interpret evidence differently from scientists. They manipulate the evidence to fit thier beliefs. Strangely enough I d ...[text shortened]... sually political skills) are very different from the skills required for making good decisions.[/b]