Kristine
Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006
|
Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 02 2011,16:44) | Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 02 2011,04:38) | Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 01 2011,15:54) | Quote | Details? We don' need no steenkin details. It's not ID's job to match your pathetic demand for details. Your details stink anyways. |
Then why not just say that the "Almighty" did it in whatever the way it was done, even if that is consistent with evolution as described by science, and be done with it? After all, if they say that some method or other was impossible, they're directly implying that the "Almighty" couldn't have done it using that method, which contradicts what I thought was their base assumption. Or am I missing something here?
Henry |
Because that would mean that humans are just another animal, a filthy, stinkin' ape no less, with no Greater Purpose, and that would also mean that the Fall never happened, and therefore we didn't need to be Saved, and so The Scriptures might not be the Revealed Truth. Once you start down that slippery slope, it can only end in one place: the possibility that the atheists were right all along in that when we die, that's it, which can't possibly be the Truth because He is Risen. So all that other sciency stuff must be wrong. Simple as that. QED. End of story. Besides, everyone knows that Darwinism leads the innocent to Atheism and materialism, which is far, far worse than Islam, Naziism, and Communism combined, and so must be stopped at all costs. |
More importantly, it would mean that Teh Eevul Darwinists are right about something. There is also the not inconsiderable problem that those fellows in frocks in Rome take that line, and some of the constituency would be very unhappy about agreeing with Them.
Having invested so heavily in YECs as a core component of movement conservatism, why let a bit of intellectual honesty spoil the party? |
I remember having this conversation with AmeriChristian (who I miss talking to) at Red State Rabble (which I simply miss). AmeriChristian, a theistic evolutionist, was telling me that someone close to him who was a creationist let it slip that "if evolution is true" then "we have committed a big sin against them" [apes] and probably the majority of the natural world as well.
Yeah. His (or maybe her?) creationist relative was that honest.
-------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?
AtBC Poet Laureate
"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive
"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr
|