Would you allow evolutionists to teach Sunday School?

[UTEOTW]

For that matter, why don't you stay on topic of where this thread is now and give us your logical and factual explanation for the fossils, genetic, atavisms, and vestiges (genetic, physical and developmental) in the whales.

 

[BobRyan]

If you can show that Berlinski is a Young Earth Creationist - do so.

I know that he is anti-Darwin.

What part of his statement did you object to?

(Or is that coming back too close to the actual details of the quote for your approach?)

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

why don't you stay on topic of where this thread is now and give us your logical and factual explanation for the fossils

Actually the "topic" is why one would or would not allow a compromised view of origins such as the Bible mixed with atheist doctrines on origins (known today as the junk-science Evolutionism) -- to be taught or held by a Bible teacher.

(Maybe you forgot?)

Fossils are created by catestrophic events (local or global) that result in rapid burial after death in a hypersalinized environment in the ground or underwater. But sidetracking onto that bit of misdirection (as you requested above) is not staying on topic.

The point remains - that the quotes of well known scientists - shows the blunders gaffs and flaws of the junk-science we know today as evolutionism.

If it is discredited EVEN in the science realm as junk-science how much more as junk-religion and junk-exegesis!!??

Indeed. As you yourself pointed out - the only reason given for the atrocious bending and twisting of scripture that your group does - is direct appeals to the junk-science we know today as evolutionism. (which has never been an accepted basis for exegesis).

In Christ,

Bob

 

[UTEOTW]

Bob most of your "blunders gaffs and flaws" involve the observation that evolution proceeds by a cladogenetic process rather than the orthogenetic process that Darwin and those that immediately followed him presumed. For instance all you have been able to show on all your horsy quoting is that the original orthogenetic series had to be modified or discarded, your choice, and you can show no such problems with the more complete, cladogenetic process.

 

[Bro. James]

New Question: Is Sin a vestigal appendage or a punctuated equilibrium? We sure seem to have an abundance of sin in the world.

To the original question: we would not allow an evolutionist to be a church member to start with--so obviously such could not teach Lord's Day School.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

[UTEOTW]

If Berlinski is "anti-Darwin," then what third way does he hold to if you are not claiming him as YE?

 

[UTEOTW]

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001423.html

Here you will see him listed as ID. THis is usually associated with YE. If you don't belive me, you might want to read the Discovery Institute's so called "Wedge" document. No, it is no longer on their site, they were smart enough to remove it. They were just dumb enough to let it become public in the first place. In it they talk about how they plan to use ID as a backdoor into teaching full YE in public schools eventually.

 

[UTEOTW]

One more thing to notice. Berlinski's PhD is in math. Just what does that have to do with biology? He is not even qualified to be a source.

Of course you keep quoting a journalist, too, so maybe you are not concerned with credentials, either.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by UTEOTW:
If Berlinski is "anti-Darwin," then what third way does he hold to if you are not claiming him as YE?

You are the one that claims he is YEC - I simply claim that he is a well respected author, trained in math and a professor at a liberal university that points out the blunders and flaws in Darwinian "stories".

From that - I have no clue that he is YEC or OE - but you claim to know - so provide "the details" that back up your statement - or admit that you are simply making things up.

Either way - I am happy.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by UTEOTW:
One more thing to notice. Berlinski's PhD is in math. Just what does that have to do with biology? He is not even qualified to be a source.

Of course you keep quoting a journalist, too, so maybe you are not concerned with credentials, either.

You seem to be in the dark about his work in statistics and Darwinian improbability.

Is there no end?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by UTEOTW:
[QB] http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001423.html

Here you will see him listed as ID. THis is usually associated with YE. If you don't belive me, you might want to read the Discovery Institute's so called "Wedge" document. No, it is no longer on their site, they were smart enough to remove it. They were just dumb enough to let it become public in the first place.

ID - "intelligent Design"..

UTEOTW has just made a "confession" -- he is not a believer in Christ the Creator.

Not only does he NOT accept Christ as the TRUE Creator of Genesis 1 and John 1-- HE rejects "Intelligent Design" - not even allowing for Christ to be In ANY WAY the intelligent designer of creation - because if he did he would be YEC!!

The smoking gun!!

Can anyone DOUBT why such a person is not a good idea as a Bible teacher??

Come on - how EASY can this be??

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Time for this thread to be closed.
It's gone its 21 pages worth.
DHK