Should Intelligent Design Be Taught as an Alternative to Evolution?

[arniem]

(setfree;45116)
great post!! Hope he takes your advice!
He ??? I dont know why but for some reason I thought adren@aline was a she. Go figure. (Sorry adren@line ... I dont know)I actually admire someone like adren@aline , they come fully loaded with a lot of good and hard questions. They are so well prepared we fall flat sometimes trying to defend Christianity.The most frustrating part to try and explain is how the Holy Spirit comes to reside in the Christian . It is almost impossible to explain to those who do not have it.I spent 36 years outside of Christianity until one evening out of extreme frustration at never understanding the Bible I blurted out "God help me understand this stupid book".I guess he thought I was praying or something because he opened that bible all by himself every night for over 6 months for the parts he wanted me to read.22 years later he still does it. Try to explain that to a Christian !! I bet adren@aline would beleive it before many of us would.I am so naive that I beleive the Lord , The God of Israel , has sufficient strength to turn a thin onion skin page in a bible whenever he wants.I really do.Arnie M..

 

[Jerusalem Junkie]

I actually admire someone like adren@aline , they come fully loaded with a lot of good and hard questions. They are so well prepared we fall flat sometimes trying to defend Christianity.
Say what?

 

[RobinD69]

I will admit adren@line has given some good arguements and is an intellegent person, but so did the Pharasees. I would hope that someone of such great intellegence would be willing to look at other evidence besides the same old recycled arguements. I know this may be beating a dead horse, but even wikipedia agrees with me on Buddhism. Thats not saying much, but I believe we should leave Buddhism out and continue with the creation vs evolution thing. I would even be willing to concede to his perspective of Biddhism if we can just focus on the topic at hand.

 

[adren@line]

(RobinD69;45242)
I will admit adren@line has given some good arguements and is an intellegent person, but so did the Pharasees. I would hope that someone of such great intellegence would be willing to look at other evidence besides the same old recycled arguements. I know this may be beating a dead horse, but even wikipedia agrees with me on Buddhism. Thats not saying much, but I believe we should leave Buddhism out and continue with the creation vs evolution thing. I would even be willing to concede to his perspective of Biddhism if we can just focus on the topic at hand.
There is actually an article on Wikipedia about Buddhism and Christianity, did you read it?

 

[adren@line]

(Wakka;45036)
You couldn't be more wrong. There is a lot of science and proof that goes into ID, to convince people like you that there IS an alternative out there. Darwinism has it's holes, and while people are still figuring out ways to support their theory, creationism is there (complete and ready for you). What sounds more farfetched? Life and all of it's complexity coming from nothing (chances are absolutely close to zero if not zero, because life must have originated form somewhere). Or an intelligent creator who must have created life? I know I'm rewording it to make it kind of biased, but seriously do ask yourself that question, and weigh both sides of the argument equally.
ID needs more support than evolution.

 

[adren@line]

No , you have demonstrated a false view of Christianity, popular but false.

subjective opinion.

Sure knock yourself out.

re·li·gion Audio Help /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-lij-uhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation–noun1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.Christianity fits this definition.

I addressed them all as you presented them.

Let me rephrase:You addressed them with subjective opinions and not opinions based on objective truth and established fact.

You are mixing karma and reincarnation,

Karma relates directly to reincarnation. Ones karma affects how they will be re-born. That is why karma exists and that is its function.

both of which are just misunderstood adaptions of the Judeo Christian faith.

And the moon landing was fake.

You dont know its original usage because the Buddhists dont even know for certain.

sure they do, they just interpret it differently.

I have no problem sharing dates if you have no problem accepting them, but even with such a date, you do know that Judaism predates Hinduism.

Yeah and George Bush is an alien.

You really dont have a clue. In Christianity, yes there are many diverging doctrines, but all have the same core beliefs.

in a very generic way, yes they do.

The same cannot be said for Hinduism and Buddhism.

yep.

Actually the Gnostics have been adversaries of the Jews and the Christians since the beginning. If I remember correctly, Gnosticism is more like Hinduism than Cristianity, they cant make up their minds either. So no Gnostics arent Christians.

predictable.

False view of Christianity as popularized by the media.

in your opinion, ofcourse.

.Are you going to provide proof for your claims?

dont throw stones in a glass house.

Where in the Bible does it say the earth is flat or the sun revolves around the earth or that it endoses witches

Havent looked into it (yet), but I do know for a fact that Christians did believe i n all of that "stuff" a few hundred years ago, while many in the rest of the world did not.

Actually it is the opposite way around, the true believers are constantly proven right and the make believers fall by the wayside.

Muslims give similar arguments.

Not seking fair, but seking truth, and the Bible is proven true every day.

Only by those who believe in it. For the rest of us, the Bible should have no place in public education. Or any other religious book for that matter.

 

[Wakka]

(adren@line;45675)
ID needs more support than evolution.
Why? Chances go against evolution and big bang (you can't have evolution without the Big Bang). It's just that most people don't even count ID as an option because God isn't testable in a science lab.

 

[adren@line]

God isnt testable in a science lab, evidenced via philosophical arguments, or even able to be proved via mathematics.All of the systems of logic or math that have been laid out to evidence God preach in a pantheistic or monistic God, which is not the same as a monotheistic God, and is impersonal.As far as chance, these events occurred over billions of years, many things can happen in that time frame.

 

[RobinD69]

No , you have demonstrated a false view of Christianity, popular but false. subjective opinion.Fact not opinionQuote:Sure knock yourself out. re·li·gion Audio Help /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-lij-uhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation–noun1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.Christianity fits this definition.Worldly definition, I will give you that, but it does not define true Christianity, but you do realize that this definition fits evolutionistic practices just as much if not more than Christianity. Number 4 is questionable and they leave out the personal relationship part which is primary in Christianity.Quote:I addressed them all as you presented them. Let me rephrase:You addressed them with subjective opinions and not opinions based on objective truth and established fact.You really need to study a little more then maybe you will see what I have already told you.Quote:You are mixing karma and reincarnation, Karma relates directly to reincarnation. Ones karma affects how they will be re-born. That is why karma exists and that is its function.Still along the same lines as you reap what you sow and the Christians are born again when they trully become Christians. Quote:both of which are just misunderstood adaptions of the Judeo Christian faith. And the moon landing was fake.And you avoid a legitimate answer once again.Quote:You dont know its original usage because the Buddhists dont even know for certain. sure they do, they just interpret it differently.No they manipulate it to suit their means.Quote:I have no problem sharing dates if you have no problem accepting them, but even with such a date, you do know that Judaism predates Hinduism. Yeah and George Bush is an alien.No factual responce means you avoid another one.Quote:You really dont have a clue. In Christianity, yes there are many diverging doctrines, but all have the same core beliefs. in a very generic way, yes they do.Quote:The same cannot be said for Hinduism and Buddhism. yep.Quote:Actually the Gnostics have been adversaries of the Jews and the Christians since the beginning. If I remember correctly, Gnosticism is more like Hinduism than Cristianity, they cant make up their minds either. So no Gnostics arent Christians. predictable.Quote:False view of Christianity as popularized by the media. in your opinion, ofcourse.You really need to do some research and leave the popular opinions for the media and the politicians.Quote:.Are you going to provide proof for your claims? dont throw stones in a glass house.I have shared proof and you refuse to dig deeper than what you want to see.Quote:Where in the Bible does it say the earth is flat or the sun revolves around the earth or that it endoses witches Havent looked into it (yet), but I do know for a fact that Christians did believe i n all of that "stuff" a few hundred years ago, while many in the rest of the world did not.Some who claimed to be Christians and not as many as you would like to think. And by the way it wasnt the Christians but the Catholics who believed these things.Quote:Actually it is the opposite way around, the true believers are constantly proven right and the make believers fall by the wayside. Muslims give similar arguments.Yes they do, and they also believe a cheap copy of the Bible which resembles the Gnostics and Hinduism more than Christianity and Judaism. Quote:Not seking fair, but seking truth, and the Bible is proven true every day. Only by those who believe in it. For the rest of us, the Bible should have no place in public education. Or any other religious book for that matter.Do you actually do research or do you just believe what the anti Christians propugate?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[adren@line]

Fact not opinion
You cant seem to tell the difference
Still along the same lines as you reap what you sow and the Christians are born again when they trully become Christians.
Thats only according to the born-again flavor of Christianity, which you seem to think is the only true Christianity, which isnt a fact since it isnt verifiable by anyone who does not hold your bias.And no, Christian ideas relate to one life and one life only. Karma-reincarnation ideas span over many life-times, possibly thousands.
And you avoid a legitimate answer once again.
I can only reply to ridiculous theories with other ridiculous theories.
No they manipulate it to suit their means.
what means?
No factual responce means you avoid another one.
Again, its hard to take people who promote comical revisionist history seriously. Youve already had one Christian in this thread point out that Hinduism is older and yet still believe the reverse.
I have shared proof and you refuse to dig deeper than what you want to see
Im sure you also have your own unique definition of "proof".
Some who claimed to be Christians and not as many as you would like to think. And by the way it wasnt the Christians but the Catholics who believed these things.
Most of the early settlers all believed these things, and continued to well into the development of the country. Do the Puritans come to mind? Salem witch trials?And Catholics call themselves Christians, so I do as well.
Yes they do, and they also believe a cheap copy of the Bible which resembles the Gnostics and Hinduism more than Christianity and Judaism
lol.How is Islam more similar to Hinduism? I can assure you that Christianity is much closer to Hinduism than Islam is. For one, Islam is strictly monotheistic while many percieve Christianity to be polythesitic as Christians worship/believe in three Gods all at once (father, son, holy spirit). Hindus themselves have their own trinity.
Do you actually do research or do you just believe what the anti Christians propugate?
Ofcourse I research. I, as well as millions of others, want to retain separation of church and state and do not want the state to force-feed any religion down anyones throat in a classroom.

 

[RobinD69]

(adren@line;45704)
You cant seem to tell the differenceYour opinionThats only according to the born-again flavor of Christianity, which you seem to think is the only true Christianity, which isnt a fact since it isnt verifiable by anyone who does not hold your bias.It is a Biblical Fact. And if you deny the word of God then you deny God.And no, Christian ideas relate to one life and one life only. Karma-reincarnation ideas span over many life-times, possibly thousands.Actually Christianity believes in the unsaved life, the born again life, and the eternal perfected life.I can only reply to ridiculous theories with other ridiculous theories.Which means you have no legitimate reply.what means?Do you realize that the secular world would love to prove the Bible and true Christianity as false by any means neccesary.Again, its hard to take people who promote comical revisionist history seriously. Youve already had one Christian in this thread point out that Hinduism is older and yet still believe the reverse.I trace Christianity back to the beginning, the creation. It has be called by many names but it still predates all other faiths.Im sure you also have your own unique definition of "proof".Not really, its all in the Bible, and if you want to continue refering to buddhism, you just havent dug deep enough to even scratch the suface.Most of the early settlers all believed these things, and continued to well into the development of the country. Do the PuritansCultic Sect come to mind? Salem witch trials?Wow 21 people burned as witches over what.. a ten or twenty year period.And Catholics call themselves Christians, so I do as well.Catholics believe in their traditions and you havent been very clear as to what you believe.lol.How is Islam more similar to Hinduism?Hinduism as well as gnosticism both influenced Islam. I can assure you that Christianity is much closer to Hinduism than Islam is.Not even close. For one, Islam is strictly monotheistic while many percieve Christianity to be polythesitic as ChristiansMany perceive alot, but as you have shown, perceptions are not always accurate. worship/believe in three Gods all at once (father, son, holy spirit).One God who expresses Himself thru three primary personalities, Godhead, God in the Flesh/ Word of God, and God within Us. Hindus themselves have their own trinity.They have more than a trinity.Ofcourse I research. I, as well as millions of others, want to retain separation of church and state and do not want the state to force-feed any religion down anyones throat in a classroom.
Hey, read the constitution, its not seperation of church and state as is so popularly assumed.

 

[adren@line]

It is a Biblical Fact. And if you deny the word of God then you deny God.
Naa.One can embrace God and deny a book, because a book isnt God. God is.
Which means you have no legitimate reply.
You got it. No legitimate reply exists to an illegitimate proposition. If everyone adhered to their own brand of fringe-history and fringe-politics, we would have hundreds of different revisionist history books when dealing with Jesus, Mohhamed, the Buddha.For example, in your conspiracy-theory fringe revision, Judaism is older than Hinduism and the Hindus and Buddhists ripped-off the Jews and Christians. The earth is 6000 years old and Adam and Eve were created.In the Hindu conspiracy theory fringe revision, the Jews stole their monotheism from the early Hindus and Jesus traveled to India during his missing years and learned his pacifistic ways from Buddhist and Hindus. Mary was buried and Kashmir and the Arabs of Mohhameds time followed Hindu beliefs.According to Islam conspiracy theory fringe revisions, Adam and Eve were Muslims, Jesus was a prophet, Mohhhamed was the Kalki Avatar as prophesied in Hindu scripture, and the Quran is a perfect book.Ofcourse, to you, all but the first paragraph sound like complete and utter nonsense. To me, all three paragraphs are nonsense that are not agreed upon by the majority of scholars or in the secular world, who wish to examine the facts (when I state "fact", I am referring to the definition that normal people use, not you), and analyze all the information that is available and piece together the pie.
Do you realize that the secular world would love to prove the Bible and true Christianity as false by any means neccesary.
..and Islam. Some go as far as to attack Judaism, but then then someone will eventually get the ADL one them.
I trace Christianity back to the beginning, the creation. It has be called by many names but it still predates all other faiths.
Thats great. But its still an off-beat revisionist version of history.
Not really, its all in the Bible, and if you want to continue refering to buddhism, you just havent dug deep enough to even scratch the suface.
groundbreaking.
Wow 21 people burned as witches over what.. a ten or twenty year period.
Thats 21 too many.
Catholics believe in their traditions and you havent been very clear as to what you believe.
no need too. This is a Christian forum, not a heathen forum.
Hinduism as well as gnosticism both influenced Islam. I can assure you that Christianity is much closer to Hinduism than Islam is.Not even close. For one, Islam is strictly monotheistic while many percieve Christianity to be polythesitic as ChristiansMany perceive alot, but as you have shown, perceptions are not always accurate.worship/believe in three Gods all at once (father, son, holy spirit).One God who expresses Himself thru three primary personalities, Godhead, God in the Flesh/ Word of God, and God within Us. Hindus themselves have their own trinity.They have more than a trinity.
Please list one major similarity between Hinduism and Islam.
Hey, read the constitution, its not seperation of church and state as is so popularly assumed.
Sure it is. References to God are far and few-between, and the Bible, Jesus, etc are never mentioned.never.If we do not have seperation of church and state, then we will have religious tyranny at the hands of the Christians. The "rest of us" will be subject to Christian law and persecution, kind of like how the European systems as based on Christianity promoted the slaughter of anyone who didnt follow the Bible. George Bush, or whatever republican leader, will be the new Constantine.

 

[RobinD69]

You call much of what I share as revisionist history, yet you offer no foundation for this claim. Do you not realize that the majority of the history before Christ time is speculative at best. The only group that even came close to recording an accurate historical record were the Jews within the pages of our Old Testiment. The Hindus kept no historicle records and neither did the buddhist or the gnostics. The Egyptians of Christ time had stopped keeping records and the records they had were not definitive. Remnants of what are believed to be religious texts, hyrogliphs, cave paintings, slabs of clay and stone are only given estimated ages with a 10,000 year or more estimate of accuracy. Another words the Hindu texts could be 1500 BC or 3000BC or even with their alotment for error it could even be yesterday. Egyptian hyrogliphs which are given ages of 3000BC are dated with the same methods used to date Hebrew stone writings, they come up with similar results, but they give the Egytian findings credibility while not even acknowledging the Hebrew findings. This is secular discrimination. You find relics of any people group and they claim to have accurate dating, but they never want to give accurate dating for the Hebrew or Jewish or even Christian findings. Do you realize that the Shroud of Turin has been dated several times? Dates vary between 1500AD, 500AD, 100AD or BC, and even within the past 50 years. These same dating variations occur with all historical findings, but only Christian related(Hebrew and Jewish) are limited to secular bias. Call it a conspiracy theory if you like, you probably will, but I ask you to do legitimate research with an open mind. I ask the same of the war in Iraq. Go back to old newspapers of the time just before the war, say within 2years before the war, and you will find plenty of reports concerning WMDs, Saddam Al Quada connections, and more as promoted by the liberal media. Go back to the Clinton administration and you will find even more. Revisionist history you say. it happens right before your eyes and the media controls it. And stop picking on the Moon Landing, that was my birthday and I know it well.

 

[adren@line]

You call much of what I share as revisionist history, yet you offer no foundation for this claim. Do you not realize that the majority of the history before Christ time is speculative at best
lol. Contrary to your belief, the worlds history does not revolve around the birth and existence of Christ.There are many people who even doubt the existence of Jesus. Go ahead and google "jesus never existed" and see their arguments, most of which are cited to historical texts. In not stating I agree or disagree with their claims, but they are there and well-sourced.
The only group that even came close to recording an accurate historical record were the Jews within the pages of our Old Testiment.
naaThe Greeks did a better job of recording history than the Jews. Many of the Greek scholars also traveled to India and gave detailed accounts of life there. The various Muslim invaders also kept fairly detailed records of India.
The Hindus kept no historicle records and neither did the buddhist or the gnostics.
The Hindus and Buddhists kept a few, either way if they kept more than they were destroyed by one of the various invaders.The Gnostics were documented in European history by European/Christian scholars.
The Egyptians of Christ time had stopped keeping records and the records they had were not definitive. Remnants of what are believed to be religious texts, hyrogliphs, cave paintings, slabs of clay and stone are only given estimated ages with a 10,000 year or more estimate of accuracy. Another words the Hindu texts could be 1500 BC or 3000BC or even with their alotment for error it could even be yesterday
The way dating estimates are created is not simple. They are fairly complex. The fact that you do not agree with them doesn't mean they are wrong. It doesn't necessarily mean they are 100% right, but when it comes to academics with advanced degrees who devote their careers to this stuff, or un-informed Christians with an agenda, im going to trust the former. So do most rational people.Either way, im fairly certain you aren't in any position to discredit the dating methods that mainstream historians use.So when you pass off revisionist history as fact, it holds no merit.
Egyptian hyrogliphs which are given ages of 3000BC are dated with the same methods used to date Hebrew stone writings, they come up with similar results, but they give the Egytian findings credibility while not even acknowledging the Hebrew findings. This is secular discrimination. You find relics of any people group and they claim to have accurate dating, but they never want to give accurate dating for the Hebrew or Jewish or even Christian findings. Do you realize that the Shroud of Turin has been dated several times? Dates vary between 1500AD, 500AD, 100AD or BC, and even within the past 50 years. These same dating variations occur with all historical findings, but only Christian related(Hebrew and Jewish) are limited to secular bias.
Hindus say the same thing. One of the main geographical landmarks in the Hindu Vedas is the Saraswati river. The most plausible site for this river dried up in 2000BC. So at the earliest, according to Hindus, the Vedas date to 2000BC and considering the earliest Vedas mention the river as alive and flowing, it would be good measure to add a good 500 years to that (so 2500BC).The Gita describes astronomical data that could have only been observed around 3000BC. Yet the Vedas are dated by mainstream historians to 1500BC and the Gita some 500+ years after that. That is what the "secular world" has decided. They arent subject to considering Hindu bias, because religious bias has no place in determining dates of texts and historical events.
Call it a conspiracy theory if you like, you probably will, but I ask you to do legitimate research with an open mind. I ask the same of the war in Iraq. Go back to old newspapers of the time just before the war, say within 2years before the war, and you will find plenty of reports concerning WMDs, Saddam Al Quada connections, and more as promoted by the liberal media
lol.There are no WMDs in Iraq and Saddam Hussein had no connection to Al Queda. He was barely even a Muslim. The war is a massive failure on nearly all accounts and most of the Iraqis were living better lives before we invaded.And please stop with the "liberal media" tagline. Liberals accuse the media of being right-wing and the right-wingers accuse the media of being liberal.
Go back to the Clinton administration and you will find even more. Revisionist history you say. it happens right before your eyes and the media controls it. And stop picking on the Moon Landing, that was my birthday and I know it well.
Ok, how about AIDS was created by the US Government to kill Africans? That might fit nicely with your conspiracy theories.yes? no?

 

[Jerusalem Junkie]

Apparently no one knows any thing about ancient Egypt do they?

 

[Wakka]

(adren@line;45686)
God isnt testable in a science lab, evidenced via philosophical arguments, or even able to be proved via mathematics.All of the systems of logic or math that have been laid out to evidence God preach in a pantheistic or monistic God, which is not the same as a monotheistic God, and is impersonal.As far as chance, these events occurred over billions of years, many things can happen in that time frame.
1. Evolution cannot be proven in a test tube (Only adaptation (micro evolution) because scientists have seen it happen with their own eyes). Evolution is just a logical explanation of our existence for those who do not want to believe in a God. ID also cannot be tested in a lab.2. Evolution has serious holes and problems in it's theory. For example, where did matter come from to create the life forms? What was before the Big Bang? What created the 4th dimension? Who even knows that unicellular organisms evolved into multicellular organisms? No one has seen it happen. What about unicellular organisms that have irreversible characteristics, such as the flagellum? How could unicellular organisms with hundred of thousands of moving parts inside of itself just be created from atoms, etc? Evolution couldn't have put together atoms to make a cell. Neither could have lightning hitting mud, it's like a Boing 747 just appearing from mud. It's impossible.3. Mathematical evidence (calculations of chance) prove that evolution is practically impossible. Our own moon is in the exact right position, our earth is in the exact right tilt, our planet is in the exact right distance from the sun, our atmosphere has just the right amount of oxygen to support life. Chance goes against evolution. ID is another alternative. There is historical proof that Jesus was alive and that he did in fact do miracles. It's documented history. Jesus did die on the cross, and immediately after his death, the sun did go dark, and there were earthquakes felt across the earth. It is recorded, even by the Romans and Greek. Mathematical evidence does support God. Archaeological evidence does support Biblical claim. Finally, the Bible is historically accurate.4. You're completely ignoring the spiritual proof. This is where the total proof of God comes in. Unfortunately you can not test the spiritual realm in a science lab. It's something you experience yourself. You can talk directly to God, and you can do supernatural things through the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit can dwell in you, and you DO feel the Holy Spirit. The only problem is that God won't go up to you. You have to seek God. There is an old saying that goes, "You'll only get as much out of God as you want from him." If you want to know God, you need to come to Him in faith. Repent, and believe. It'll help if you dwell around Christians. Pretty soon you'll notice God changing you. It's incredible. The bible says that you'll become a new creature and that's 100% true. Then if you're baptized by the Holy Spirit (not water baptism), you'll dwell with God. It's great.That's the spiritual realm for you.

 

[adren@line]

1. Evolution cannot be proven in a test tube (Only adaptation (micro evolution) because scientists have seen it happen with their own eyes). Evolution is just a logical explanation of our existence for those who do not want to believe in a God. ID also cannot be tested in a lab.
Yep, but ID has no direct supporting evidence in the way that evolution does.If you get an informed person, possibly an expert/scientist, and make a list of all of the evidence for evolution in one column, and do the same for ID, you will see that the list of evidence for evolution is far greater than the list for ID.If one makes a separate list of serious holes and flaws, the list is greater for ID. Again, this is based on the idea that the people making the list are informed and educated in biology and physics. If they aren't, then the list means nothing.Based on this idea of probability, evolution seems more plausible as all it is, is adaptation applied to the macro scale.
2. Evolution has serious holes and problems in it's theory. For example, where did matter come from to create the life forms?
The possible answers are long and complicated. But they do exist in the scientific community. ID proponents choose to ignore that fact.
What was before the Big Bang?
Such questions are based on outdated ideas in regards to the big-bang. Again, anyone who follows science will see that such questions have been answered by various theories of physics.
What created the 4th dimension?
The 4th dimension is time. No one created it, as all it is is a measurement between two events.
Who even knows that unicellular organisms evolved into multicellular organisms? No one has seen it happen. What about unicellular organisms that have irreversible characteristics, such as the flagellum? How could unicellular organisms with hundred of thousands of moving parts inside of itself just be created from atoms, etc? Evolution couldn't have put together atoms to make a cell. Neither could have lightning hitting mud, it's like a Boing 747 just appearing from mud. It's impossible.
Not really.Lots of stuff is possible over billions of years. Think about how long that is. Anyhow, by the same ID/creationist logic, everything simply just "popped into existence" from nothing, which is even more absurd.
3. Mathematical evidence (calculations of chance) prove that evolution is practically impossible. Our own moon is in the exact right position, our earth is in the exact right tilt, our planet is in the exact right distance from the sun, our atmosphere has just the right amount of oxygen to support life. Chance goes against evolution.
Chance in the span of 16 billion years can give way to many phenomenon.
ID is another alternative. There is historical proof that Jesus was alive and that he did in fact do miracles. It's documented history. Jesus did die on the cross, and immediately after his death, the sun did go dark, and there were earthquakes felt across the earth. It is recorded, even by the Romans and Greek. Mathematical evidence does support God. Archaeological evidence does support Biblical claim. Finally, the Bible is historically accurate.
No one believes any of that except Christians. Plus even if ID were true, this God could be Allah, Zeus, or Ganesh.
4. You're completely ignoring the spiritual proof. This is where the total proof of God comes in. Unfortunately you can not test the spiritual realm in a science lab. It's something you experience yourself. You can talk directly to God, and you can do supernatural things through the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit can dwell in you, and you DO feel the Holy Spirit. The only problem is that God won't go up to you. You have to seek God. There is an old saying that goes, "You'll only get as much out of God as you want from him." If you want to know God, you need to come to Him in faith. Repent, and believe. It'll help if you dwell around Christians. Pretty soon you'll notice God changing you. It's incredible. The bible says that you'll become a new creature and that's 100% true. Then if you're baptized by the Holy Spirit (not water baptism), you'll dwell with God. It's great.
On that same token, Allah is real as well since Muslims experience Him.

 

[RobinD69]

(adren@line;45728)
lol. Contrary to your belief, the worlds history does not revolve around the birth and existence of Christ.Think what you like, but fact is the world wouldnt exist without Christ.There are many people who even doubt the existence of Jesus. Go ahead and google "jesus never existed" and see their arguments, most of which are cited to historical texts. In not stating I agree or disagree with their claims, but they are there and well-sourced.Yes I realize this, but as you say, this is revisionist history.naaThe Greeks did a better job of recording history than the Jews. Many of the Greek scholars also traveled to India and gave detailed accounts of life there. The various Muslim invaders also kept fairly detailed records of India.Can you plese share sources for these claims?The Hindus and Buddhists kept a few, either way if they kept more than they were destroyed by one of the various invaders.The Gnostics were documented in European history by European/Christian scholars.The way dating estimates are created is not simple. They are fairly complex. The fact that you do not agree with them doesn't mean they are wrong. It doesn't necessarily mean they are 100% right, but when it comes to academics with advanced degrees who devote their careers to this stuff, or un-informed Christians with an agenda, im going to trust the former. So do most rational people.Truthfully I have no agenda, and you would be surprised in what I know.Either way, im fairly certain you aren't in any position to discredit the dating methods that mainstream historians use.So when you pass off revisionist history as fact, it holds no merit.Once again, your opinion.Hindus say the same thing. One of the main geographical landmarks in the Hindu Vedas is the Saraswati river. The most plausible site for this river dried up in 2000BC. So at the earliest, according to Hindus, the Vedas date to 2000BC and considering the earliest Vedas mention the river as alive and flowing, it would be good measure to add a good 500 years to that (so 2500BC).The Gita describes astronomical data that could have only been observed around 3000BC. Yet the Vedas are dated by mainstream historians to 1500BC and the Gita some 500+ years after that. That is what the "secular world" has decided. They arent subject to considering Hindu bias, because religious bias has no place in determining dates of texts and historical events.So you believe all of this as proof for the Hindu writings, but will deny similar proof for the Bible. Yes you sound very unbiased in your views. Not.lol.There are no WMDs in Iraq and Saddam Hussein had no connection to Al Queda. He was barely even a Muslim. The war is a massive failure on nearly all accounts and most of the Iraqis were living better lives before we invaded.And please stop with the "liberal media" tagline. Liberals accuse the media of being right-wing and the right-wingers accuse the media of being liberal.Explain this if you will. Why did at least eight semi trucks cross into Syria from Iraq just days before the invasion? These semis fit the discriptions by Iraqis as being mobile research centers for nuclear weapons and biological weapons. On top of that Syria changed their minds at the last minute on letting the US attack from their borders. Sound suspicious to me. Explain the evidence of AlQuaeda training camps in Iraq as well as the $25,000 reward for the families of suicide bombers. Also the Iraq war has been won, but the war on terror is still being fought there and Afganistan. The Iraqi people have been liberated from Saddam, and contrary to popular belief they are in much better shape than they have been in 30 years. Under Saddam only 25% had electricity, now over 65% have electricity. Only 15% had running water, now over 50% have running water. Sounds like living better to me.Ok, how about AIDS was created by the US Government to kill Africans? That might fit nicely with your conspiracy theories.Only if I was Reverand Wright, LOL.yes? no?
Whether you believe so or not, I do enjoy these conversations.

 

[adren@line]

-You are right, stating that Christ did not exist is revisionist history. That is why I do not take it too seriously. It is no more plausible than Judaism being older than Hinduism or Buddhism coming from the OT.-So it helps both parties in a discussion if you keep revisionist history out of the discussion, since that can go anyway and in any direction.-As far as the Greeks, google searches yield some results:http://www.ancientcoins.biz/pages/owl/http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/greek-india.htmlWikipedia has some decent articles:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_the_Westhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religions_of_the_Indo-Greekshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ab%C5%AB_Rayh...Br%C5%ABn%C4%ABAshoka, a famous Indian Buddhist king, also sent many Buddhist monks and missionaries to ancient Greece, which in-turn influenced Greek philosophy (which in-turn influenced Christian and Islamic intellectuals such as Thomas Aquinas). Some ancient Greek conquerors of areas of northern India also converted to Buddhism. There is considerable Greek influence in some areas of northern India, especially in the ancient sculpture and art. Some Indians today even look very "Greek" as the Greek settlers inter-married with the Indians some 2000+ years ago.-The claims of Hindus in regards to their dating are not something I believe in since they are also revisionist history.As far as Iraq, there is still no legitimate evidence for Al-Queda. Im pretty sure even the white house has admitted that.

 

[sexymadison69]

^^ woah dude no-ones going to bother reading a massive chunk of text like that. paragraphs!One thing that people maybe don't realise about science, is that to be science, it has to be able to be disproved. If something cannot be disproved, then it is not science. Gravity can be disproved, if we discovered something that went against what we know about gravity, we'd have to change our understanding of it. Every science law and theory out there has tenets that can be proved wrong. Until they're found the law stays. This is how the laws get made new, it's a FUNDAMENTAL part of science, it can't be science without it.Creation Science and Intelligent Design do not have this. What piece of evidence is there that is able to disprove them? Is there anything that could possibly exist that would cause Creationists and IDrs to say "hold on, the way we've thought about it is all wrong, we're going to change our minds"? No there isn't, so it isn't a true science and should not be taught as a science. It's a philosophy.