I am a biblical creationist like Buz

"I believe there is nothing stopping evolution, therefore - though I am creationist - I am "for" evolution, you could even call me an evolutionist I suppose." - mike the wizI have received emails pertaining to the misunderstood statement "I am for evolution", and that you can "call me an evolutionist". I was confused and angry when I made the topic, "mike is evolving".Since my moment of struggle pertaining to biblical scriptures dealing with penalty for sin - I am now announcing that my period of struggle is over and I am not an evolutionist. I may have been evo during a momentary lapse of reason and/or confusion, but I most certainly am on Buz's team. And God is angry because of the way you attacked Buz in his recent thread! Sorry if this might dissapoint you if you are evo - but I have to be honest, I favour the biblical degenerative picture of truth.I said I was "for evolution" as in, unlike many creationists, I am not afraid if it holds some possible truths, and am aware it is science. And therefore evolution is one possible way that God could have created IMHO. Yet now I am convinced by the degenerative truths I have been shown biblically. And I certainly have returned to my former position. I am still open minded but certainly am not on the evo side like I was for two minutes in my confusion.So, I'm not ignorant - I've seen the picture and I still am for God, as evolution supports mindless Godless chance deludants and random silliness. Therefore I cut myself off from this Godless theory which atheist's love as it supports their negative, which is unacceptable as you then convince yourselves you are sinless and don't answer to God. I urge you to all stop this confusion.

"I guess some people never change. Or, they quickly change, and then quickly change back."-Homer Simpson

I'm afraid you still are if you believe this. Science deals in facts and theories, which is as close as we mere mortals can get to "Truth".

Turns out I DONT have to change. I know what Buz means to try to discuss 3td laws "as ID creationist" but with the last e-mail from Georgi and a long enough span of time for me to think on my own about his ideas I rest assured that it is non-linear and non-equilbrium ('synergetic' prejudice only) SCIENCE and not the little communication of creation science that holds the whole thing up. You can take this last either way but change is not one of them. I am confident NOW that overvoltages pinpoint the empirical nexus @polarized discussion(s) but should we be able to avoid that as Percy seems to want from Buz, that, EvC would BE beyond potential in my Hu... opinion. I was uncertain if thermal currents were possiblly at odds with Gladyshev's construction. I KNOW THEY ARE NOT now. Of course I do not know if I am correct a posteriori.

But if I know the ToE, and prefer the truth of the bible - how is that ignorant? Hhhmmm. I don't need science to know about Christ, and he's truth. Evolution isn't just science - it's an atheistic chance theology. True die hard evos are favouring evolution rather than accepting the creation account.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 12-15-2004 11:30 AM

Mike,Sorry to hear that all the patience that people like Schraf and Ned (among others) have shown toward you has been repaid with another of your charming I-need-attention maneuvers. I'm also sorry to hear God is angry, especially at this time of year.

quote:

---

I'm not ignorant -

---

I don't think you're ignorant, Mike.

quote:

---

I've seen the picture and I still am for God, as evolution supports mindless Godless chance deludants and random silliness.

---

I retract my last statement.regards,
Esteban Hambre

In order for your opinions not to be as flotsam in the wind, in order for you not to believe as whoever last caught your ear, your beliefs must be well grounded in both sincere faith and critical knowledge.--Percy

God is angry for our treatment of Buz. That is, without a doubt, the most inane, close minded, and ignorant statement I have heard in a while.Buz got exactly the treatment that his arrogance and obtuseness deserved. If your magical man in the sky were real and were upset over that, one would have to wonder about his priorities.

quote:

---

...this Godless theory which atheist's love...

​

...evolution supports mindless Godless chance deludants and random silliness...

---

Mike, you've been here for long enough to know that this is a rather large pile of horse-shit. Either that or all those debates about the randomness of evolution and how Christians can still accept it passed you by.I actually had some hope that you, as a seemingly reasonable and sane individual, would understand even if you did not agree. How terrible to have one's faith in another person destroyed... Yet you insist on spouting this particular PRATT as if you're not even aware that it's been debated to death. Agree to disagree, if you want - but take your mindless rant to some other board.I personally agree that this is just an idiotic attempt to attract attention.The Rockhound

That's not being ignorant, but in my opinion it's being irrational. You were being ignorant in your reference to what evolution is and stands for. For example, here your are being ignorant again:

quote:

---

But if I know the ToE, and prefer the truth of the bible - how is that ignorant?

---

I think what I and others are trying to say is that if you actually knew the TOE you would not feel like you have to choose between science and the Bible. Evolution is the story of creation as told by the Creation. If God did create the universe, then the earth is as much a testament to his creative power as the Bible is. The Creation is God's direct word about how he created. The Bible is God's inspiration filtered through Bronze Age man and his scientific inadequacies. By clinging to a creationist stance you are denying God's own Word, the Word he left in his creation. Instead, you cling to a belief that tells God how he created instead of letting God tell you how He created.

Firstly, this isn't to attract attention. Secondly, Percy - It's not that I change my mind every time I hear something. As I always believed in Christ. It's your misconception of me really. If you would dig a little deeper, you'd realise that if it doesn't worry me if evolution happened, then how important can creationism/evolutionism be to me personally? Answer; It's always been a secondry issue to me, as I've spent most times here in the F&B section discussing theology.Rockhound; How rude, I expected more from you, When I was an evo for a minute, I discovered that the position certainly favours an atheist, as it's awkward - and how much I can trust the bible comes into play. Well, I trust it fully, this waver in my position was a reflection on me, not the bible. If anything, the bible gives full glory to God Loudmouth, whereas atheists certainly don't give God the glory for the ToE. You either believe in God - or Attenborough and the BBC, who claim to walk with dinos but were never actually there when it happened - unlike God.As for Ned and Shraff - I still apreciate their "time" on me - but I'd expect they didn't expect to convert me - as I didn't expect to convert them.S much as people might be dissapointed in me, obviously one must trust in his maker concerning this issue - and have a full biblical position, rather than get wishy washy and weak like I previously did.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 12-15-2004 02:44 PM

Mike, you said you'd ignore me from now on. Your silly attempts to attack Buzsaw in his recent thread were just pathetic, and not even relevant to the topic. I'm beginning to think you've pokemon evolved into sleepingdragon, a fleeting ass-hat in the evc quadrant of cyberspace.

What with how a literal interpretation of the Bible is so obviously the only way one can believe in God.So Mike, did anything specific set off this deconversion? Because from the way it sounds, it seems like the more evidence you heard and understood, the more, bit by bit, you creeped towards having to acknowledge that evolution was factually correct. Then, for no particular reason, you suddenly decided that it wasn't.This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 12-15-2004 02:57 PM

No, I said I was done with that one train of foolishness. I will still call you on your bullshit in other places.If you can actually read that exchange and not see Buz for the ducking, weaving, prevaricating, and avoiding son of a gun he is, I find it no wonder that you have decided to leave behind the solid ground of science and reason for a mythic mindset.