Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Biff the unclean · 08-11-2003, 04:18 PM

Anyway Rhea, picture logic as tortured as that of CD. Combine that with leaden prose. Add there being no way for you to talk back to the author and there you have "Mere Christianity."

Enjoy

Family Man · 08-11-2003, 06:15 PM

This thread has become hopelessly muddled, with at least three different topics, none of which belong to GRD or having anything to do with Mere Christianity. I've started new threads to continue the discussion at:

Psalm 22 and Messianic Prophecies

Biblical Fabrications

CD's God Hypothesis

CD, since you concede that evolution can explain a lot about morality, I didn't continue that thought. As for your claim that you can "poke holes" in evolutionary theory, LOL. I've seen a lot of people come here and make that claim; I've seen none that actually accomplishes it. Why you think I should be concerned with the claim of the theist with an axe to grind over the consensus of virtually the entire scientific community, I have no idea. But go on to E/C and poke those holes. I think you'll soon realize you're poking holes in your own bag, and that it doesn't hold water.

For the rest of you, I hope you'll use the new threads to continue the discussion.

lpetrich · 08-11-2003, 08:56 PM

Here, Charles Darwin, is a thread just for you; it is in the Evolution/Creation forum, where it is on-topic.

PopeInTheWoods · 08-12-2003, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charles Darwin
Of course, there are g-zillions of examples of miniscule complexity. Look at every snowflake! So since snowflakes spontaneously arise, therefore the DNA code can too? [Hint: the answer isn't yes].

If by "spontaneously" you mean, "over a billion years given certain starting conditions (available chemicals, energy sources, and catalysts) and through gradual but known intermediate steps (off the top of my head, including organic compounds, peptides, simple RNA) that just happen to be good at duplicating themselves," then actually the answer is yes. No one is suggesting that a tornado in a junkyard can assemble a 747, or even a Yugo.

But we're now way off-topic, and I suggest a good read through the Evo/Creo forum.

Andy

Rhea · 08-15-2003, 10:11 AM

Thanks for the responses on Mere Christianity, everyone. it helps to have an overview in deciding whether to spend time readinging it for the purpose of answering the christian comments.

CD, thanks for the demonstration of the kind of logic that makes Mere Christianity believable and even adored by some.

going off now to read the links...

Charles Darwin · 08-16-2003, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich
Charles Darwin:

Now what's this about "earthquakes, and the dead rising from the grave and walking during the resurrection around that clearly didn't happen." I'm not quite following. Why didn't these happen?

Read the Gospel of Matthew; some of this had allegedly happened during JC's crucifixion.

And what was this mysterious 3-hour sky darkness that nobody else in the world had seen? Thallus had allegedly recorded it, but Pliny and Philo and Josephus and other historians made no mention of it.

Well I'm sure you've seen the sky grow quite dark due to heavy clouds during the daytime. Sometimes it can be quite ominous, though in fact it is nothing very unusual. I understand you may doubt the veracity of this report; what I don't understand is the claim that is "clearly didn't happen." Likewise for the earthquake.

Generally, there are two problems here. One, as I'm stating above, is the hyper criticism of rather normal reports. Two, is the question-begging assumption that God could not have controlled the events. Reminds me of the argument that the virgin birth is "unscientific." Please, the virgin birth is predicated on the idea that God was behind it. If God can create the universe, surely he can arrange for a virgin to get pregnant.

Charles Darwin · 08-16-2003, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Family Man
I don't have time to post anything substansive at the moment. However, this thread has gone beyond a General Religious Discussion. In fact, CD and I have been having two unrelated discussions: one on the nature of the Bible, which belongs in BC&H, and the second on the nature of morality, which belongs in the morality forum. CD also seems to question evolution, but that is an intrinsic part of our morality disagreement. He can always start his own thread in E/C, where I'm sure the experts there can disabuse him of the notion that evolution is false. If any mod would like to split the threads into their appropriate forum. Otherwise, with CD's permission, I'd like to continue our discussion in the appropriate forums by starting new threads there. In that way, we can benefit by the contributions of experts that don't normally contribute in GRD.

Good points. However, a subtle but important point: I'm not claiming evolution is false -- just extremely unlikely.

Charles Darwin · 08-16-2003, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DMB
CD: I notice that you use echolocation as the example of something that couldn't have come about through Natural Selection.

Creationists always used to use the eye as such an example until that was shot down too many times. Why is echolocation a more difficult example than the eye?

One difference is that the bat's system took a long time to evolve. How long have we had sonar or radar?

Please post this stuff in E/C. They will love it there.

Well DMB, you put me in a difficult spot. On the one hand, you tell me this isn't the appropriate place for evolution talk, on the other hand you keep on talking about it.

Secular Pinoy · 08-16-2003, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charles Darwin
However, a subtle but important point: I'm not claiming evolution is false -- just extremely unlikely.

So sublte, it's actually a distinction with little difference. Care to post your reasons for saying that evolution is unlikely, whatever that means, in our Evolution/Creation Forum?

08-16-2003, 10:33 PM

CD: Glad to see you're back. I thought you had decamped for all time.

Quote:

Well DMB, you put me in a difficult spot. On the one hand, you tell me this isn't the appropriate place for evolution talk, on the other hand you keep on talking about it.

I, like others, have been inviting you to post your ideas about evolution in the E/C forum. I merely responded to a post of yours, but it would be much more appropriate for you to take your ideas about evolution there.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-11-2003, 04:18 PM	#71
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Anyway Rhea, picture logic as tortured as that of CD. Combine that with leaden prose. Add there being no way for you to talk back to the author and there you have "Mere Christianity." Enjoy

08-11-2003, 06:15 PM	#72
Family Man Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Superior, CO USA Posts: 1,553	This thread has become hopelessly muddled, with at least three different topics, none of which belong to GRD or having anything to do with Mere Christianity. I've started new threads to continue the discussion at: Psalm 22 and Messianic Prophecies Biblical Fabrications CD's God Hypothesis CD, since you concede that evolution can explain a lot about morality, I didn't continue that thought. As for your claim that you can "poke holes" in evolutionary theory, LOL. I've seen a lot of people come here and make that claim; I've seen none that actually accomplishes it. Why you think I should be concerned with the claim of the theist with an axe to grind over the consensus of virtually the entire scientific community, I have no idea. But go on to E/C and poke those holes. I think you'll soon realize you're poking holes in your own bag, and that it doesn't hold water. For the rest of you, I hope you'll use the new threads to continue the discussion.

08-11-2003, 08:56 PM	#73
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Here, Charles Darwin, is a thread just for you; it is in the Evolution/Creation forum, where it is on-topic.

08-15-2003, 10:11 AM	#75
Rhea Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Recluse Posts: 9,040	Thanks for the responses on Mere Christianity, everyone. it helps to have an overview in deciding whether to spend time readinging it for the purpose of answering the christian comments. CD, thanks for the demonstration of the kind of logic that makes Mere Christianity believable and even adored by some. going off now to read the links...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.