|"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank
Joined: Feb. 2005
|Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 18 2007,07:55)|
|Given your rather obvious aversion to answering direct questions, Mr. Hunter|
Speaking of which . . . . shall I repeat my questions for you once again, Dr Hunter?
No problem. No need to thank me --- I'm happy to do it.
DI continually tells us that ID is not creationism.
In the DI's Wedge Document, it states:
"FIVE YEAR OBJECTIVES
* Major Christian denomination(s) defend(s) traditional doctrine of creation"
If ID is not creationism, then (1) what is this "traditional doctrine of creation" that DI wants Christian churches to defend, and (2) why does DI want churches to defend it?
Or is DI just lying to us (under oath) when it claims ID isn't creationism.
IDers complain a lot about evolution's "materialism". What, precisely, about “evolution” is any more “materialistic” than, say, weather forecasting or accident investigation or medicine? Please be as specific as possible.
I have never, in all my life, ever heard any weather forecaster mention “god” or "divine will” or any “supernatural” anything, at all. Ever. Does this mean, in your view, that weather forecasting is atheistic?
I have yet, in all my 46 years of living, to ever hear any accident investigator declare solemnly at the scene of an airplane crash, “We can’t explain how it happened, so an Unknown Intelligent Being must have dunnit.” I have never yet heard an accident investigator say that “this crash has no materialistic causes — it must have been the Will of Allah”. Does this mean, in your view, that accident investigation is atheistic?
How about medicine. When you get sick, do you ask your doctor to abandon his “materialistic biases” and to investigate possible “supernatural” or “non-materialistic” causes for your disease? Or do you ask your doctor to cure your naturalistic materialistic diseases by using naturalistic materialistic antibiotics to kill your naturalistic materialistic germs?
Since it seems to me as if weather forecasting, accident investigation, and medicine are every bit, in every sense,just as utterly completely totally absolutely one-thousand-percent “materialistic” as evolutionary biology is, why, specifically, is it just evolutionary biology that gets your panties all in a bunch? Why aren’t you and your fellow Wedge-ites out there fighting the good fight against godless materialistic naturalistic weather forecasting, or medicine, or accident investigation?
Or does that all come LATER, as part of, uh, “renewing our culture” … . . ?
Do you repudiate the extremist Reconstructionist views of the primary funder of the Center for (the Renewal of) Science and Culture, Howard Ahmanson? If so, why do you keep taking his money anyway?
For extra credit, you can tell us:
(1) what is it, specifically, that you think the designer did?
(2) what mechanisms do you think the designer used to do . . . well . . . whatever the heck you think it did?, and
(3) where can we see the designer using these mechanisms today to do . . . well . . . anything?
Thank you once again for not answering my simple questions, Dr Hunter.
Editor, Red and Black Publishers