THE EVOLUTIONISTS' GUIDE TO PROPER CHRISTIAN BEHAVIOUR

quote:

---

Originally posted by Admin:
Nominations for a staunch Creationist moderator are now open. Fred Williams has already informed me that he doesn't have the available time right now.

---

Man! I was sooooo ready to vote for Fred. I mean, he does have experience....------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com[This message has been edited by John, 12-09-2002][This message has been edited by John, 12-09-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chara:
It is an encouragement to know that others are willing to place their confidence in me as a moderator, but to be honest I don't believe that I have what it takes.

---

You do.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Whose interpretation of the Bible? I'm certainly aligned with some very large Christian denominations in not making a literal interpretation of the Bible, such as the Methodists and the Catholics, and they're theistic religions.

---

Just an observation, but none of the denominations take the Bible literally. There are always some passages that get white-washed, usually the parts about slavery and polygamy/taking concubines. Also, even among the most fundamental barring a tiny minority, the OT flat-earth is conveniently overlooked.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Exactly my point: ambiguous. Open to interpretation and debate.

---

So where do you draw the line?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

When something seems to hinder practicality, logic, and wisdom. That's usually the point where I'll investigate and research.

---

But the question was, perhaps this wasn't clear, where is the line between direct and indirect observation? Your answer doesn't seem to address this, except very vaguely. As a rule of thumb, I understand your response. I've 'known' that something was wrong with an statement or idea for days or weeks before realizing what that something is. However, what I am getting at is this: Creationists often discount evolution as not being directly observable yet accept science which is equally not-directly observable as far as I can tell. I want to know where that line is drawn.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

It is my opinion that the "line" drawn between direct and indirect observation is a moveable one.

---

So that makes it a meaningless distinction does it not?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com