|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Dissecting the Evolutionist Approach to Explanation and Persuation | |||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
That is not a reasonable action to attribute to the traditional idea of the Almighty. Already rebutted. Given the idea of a deity whose actions may not make sense to us - the traditional idea of the Judeo-Christian God - there's no action we can propose that would not be reasonable for him to take. God is already defined as a being whose actions may appear as unreasonable to us. Therefore asserting that fake fossils would be "unreasonable" is meaningless. You have to do better than simply stating an action is not "reasonable". The traditional idea of God makes it certain that he's going to take actions that appear unreasonable to us.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I answered you adequately Jar and there is no other answer and your repeating your question is a perfect example of your usual tactics of harassment and bullying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
The complete ignorance about what creationists believe about what God would have created that is being shown on this thread at least must illustrate how evos don't pay the slightest attention to creos. Creationists are the ones that gave us the idea of God putting the fossils there, in the first place. They're the ones that came up with it; we're just repeating it. All you've proven is that you're the one who doesn't pay enough attention to the comments of other creationists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
God is already defined as a being whose actions may appear as unreasonable to us. If you want to define the traditional concept of God that way, then the God I don't believe in is different from the God you don't believe in, and I think a little religious tolerance is in order here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Robinrohan may not know the Biblical basis for what he is saying but he is correct and I've said the same thing in Message 209.
I propose this little exchange about what God might have done as an Exhibit for the problem that this thread is about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5223 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
robin,
If you want to define the traditional concept of God that way, then the God I don't believe in is different from the God you don't believe in, and I think a little religious tolerance is in order here. Same to you, you have no idea what my "real" god finds reasonable. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminModulous Administrator Posts: 897 Joined: |
The idea of the topic is to dissect the Evolutionist Approach to Explanation and Persuasion. Whilst it is to be expected that there would be some engagement of the Evolutionist Approach, the thread has stopped being about dissection but is rapidly going down the path of becoming another free for all all-purpose evolution debate. Perhaps we can look back on the last few pages and try and work out what happened, and where things went from metadebating to debating. Please check the relevancy of your posts to the OP before you hit Submit. This message has been edited by AdminModulous, Thu, 09-March-2006 07:07 PM New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I think that you fall into the same trap as creationists do. I suppose what I want to know is why. Why did I fall into a trap? That's a trick question. I deny falling into any trap.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
What creationists Frog? You mean those back before Darwin? No current creationist has such a belief that I have ever seen and this is a sad case of misrepresentation that obfuscates the argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
My Message 215 tags this particular side wrangle as a perfect case of evolutionist misbehavior in the conduct of debate with creationists, as their misrepresentation of the creationist view of God's work means no communication is possible.
It helps that a noncreationist is the one who got targeted by it, showing that this is a genuine problem and not a subjective creationist gripe. This message has been edited by Faith, 03-09-2006 02:14 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Right, we've identified "baby steps" as an inadvisable approach for evolutionists to use. So after Person A has repeated that four pizzas is enough for the sixth or seventh time without addressing anything Person B has said, what is the correct response for Person B? This is a misrepresentation because although I do repeat my point to what has appeared to be a gallery of intentionally deaf ears, I do also usually expand on my point, reason for my point, try to bring in aspects of the situation that further the point. I didn't do much of this on mark24's thread because I didn't want to debate anything at all in the first place, and shouldn't have taken the bait. But I did a lot of it on the old Sedimentation Great Debate thread and many others since then. Mostly I don't bother arguing science much at all because of the closed minds of the evos. Also, despite the constant assurances that my point has been understood and has become irritatingly repetitive, I remain unconvinced that it has been understood in many cases. I still don't think anybody has honestly thought through my endlessly reiterated points about the strata, and the evidence in this current side issue that evolutionists are willing to play fast and loose with what creationists believe about how fossils could have gotten there is an example of how evolutionists just don't care what creationists think. Oh and while I'm here, allow me to agree with RR that for the most part you have been fairminded on this thread, and my complaints have not been directed at you but at the whole evo mentality. This message has been edited by Faith, 03-09-2006 02:25 PM This message has been edited by Faith, 03-09-2006 02:33 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Maybe it will calm things down and get some focus back on the real topic theme.
My plan of the moment is to leave the topic closed for about 3 hours. Other admins may decide to reopen it sooner. Anyway, once the topic is reopened, how about fewer but better messages? Let's stop exchanging one or two liners. Adminnemooseus New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting, Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics, Official Invitations to Online Chat@EvC |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Well, perhaps I didn't understand your answer. Perhaps you can show me where it is answered?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LinearAq Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 598 From: Pocomoke City, MD Joined: |
Faith writes:
Why not? (probably off-topic anyway)
There is no way God would have just PUT fossils there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
1) Because Creation was finished in the sixth day.
2) It is out of keeping with the character of God in the Bible. And please don't ask me to prove his character as it is based on the entire Bible and would be a huge undertaking.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024