|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Are your actions relevant to environmental degradation/global warming? |
| Yes |
|
51% |
[ 17 ] |
| No |
|
48% |
[ 16 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 33 |
|
| Author |
Message |
pangaea
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:22 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
pangaea wrote:
Being all merciful, he could have not condemned his own creation to suffer, but did anyway. |
nautilus wrote:
God is also Just. There is punishment for wrongdoing. It would make no sense to allow evil to go unpunished.
Mercy is freely given to the repentant. |
But you also said:
| Quote: |
| God knew what would happen, so supplied the animals with what they would need to survive after the fall. |
So god knew the fall would happen, yet did nothing to avert it, as I've said before. So he created people and animals just so they could suffer.
Which brings me to the point - What is so evil about eating an apple? I think that is more of a time-out offense rather than a suffer-needlessly-for-thousands-of-years kind of offense.
| Quote: |
pangea wrote:
So, basically, you are saying god knew from the beginning that there would be suffering on earth, had the power to avert it, and didn't.
nautilus wrote:
Well now..humans were given free will, to do as they wished.
Despite being forewarned, they made the choice to be disobedient. That was not what God had wanted to happen, however. |
But you said god knew they would be disobedient before it happened. So what was the point of a warning or a punishment? It just seems sadistic to me.
As for free will - why does anyone's free will to rape, torture, abuse, and kill outweigh anyone else's free choice not to be raped, tortured, abused, or killed? That doesn't sound like love, justice, or wisdom to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
An originally created big-cat-type has spawned todays descendants such as e.g. the Lion, tiger, Leopard. Interbreed them all for a while and you'll begin to approach what the originally created cat might have looked like. An awesome creature with a superior genetic range and set of abilities.
Similar case for the Polar, Grizzly and Black Bears. Over time, they've selected for certain segments of that hereditary DNA in order to be specialised to their own ecological niches. |
Wow, what a steaming pile of conjecture. If you're going to so blatantly rip off Sarfati, you'd better cite him.
Domesticated animals have been interbred for hundreds of years now. Where's my genetically perfect, 100 year old superdog?
You go on about people who don't study microbiology not being authorities on evolution, then hand us this completely unsubstantiated bullpucky as evidence for creationism. Sorry for the language, you've overloaded my hypocrisy filters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pangaea wrote: |
I agree with Globutron on the link. No need to repeat anything.
nautilus wrote:
| Quote: |
| If not, then what exactly would you regard as evidence of intelligent design? |
As my criteria for evidence of intelligent design is a lack of the things I would consider evidence for non-intelligent design, I will just list them here.
Evidence of non-intelligent design:
Excruciatingly painful and traumatic childbirth
gestational diabetes
preeclampsia
placenta detachment
genetic birth defects
juvenile diabetes
childhood cancers
wisdom teeth
allergies
viruses
tornadoes
hurricanes
earthquakes
tsunamis
I could keep going, but I think you get the picture. |
Pain, toil, and death serve crucial functions. Some atheists have even understood this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pangaea
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Koveras wrote:
| Quote: |
| Pain, toil, and death serve crucial functions. Some atheists have even understood this. |
What functions would those be? Pain is important for self-preservation, but that is not evidence for a creator.
Even if pain, toil, and death serve crucial functions, what is the function of genetic birth defects? A female reproductive system that sometimes malfunctions and kills mother and baby? Type 1 diabetes? Childhood leukemia? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tomato
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You may as well give up, Pangaea.
Probably every religion has a snap answer to that question.
According to Judeo-Christianity, it all started with the Fall of Man.
According to Hinduism, we are all paying our karmic debts.
According to cult members, it will all be over once everybody joins their cult. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tomato wrote: |
At one point I wondered: if everything is crumbling, as the Creationists claim with their interpretation of the Second Law, then why isn't all life devolving? |
It is though. Your own scientists will tell you that living things are racking up genetic flaws.
| Quote: |
| Why aren't mammals changing to reptiles, reptiles into amphibians, and amphibians into fish? |
Because they were never those things to begin with..
You're saying that everything evolved until the fossil record began then they all decided to devolve?
| Quote: |
| If the Garden of Eden was supposed to be such a blissful paradise, then it would make sense for the Creator to construct a bear and a cat for maximum fitness in the Garden of Eden, and never mind how that bear and that cat would fare anywhere else in the world. |
There was some level of change following the fall as animals changed their behaviour to adapt to the new reality. Within that vast original genetic range they selected for the things they now needed. Perhaps a Lions teeth became a bit sharper via natural selection in order to kill stuff. In other words they already had genetic instructions for large canines in their DNA, they just began to express that.
| Quote: |
| Incidentally, you seem to make a distinction between an Intelligent Designer and a God. What's the difference? |
ID does not identify a creator, it just studies the science of living things, drawing differnt conclusions to what evolutionists would. Once you realise the natural world shows evidence of design, then it is quite a different step to identifying a designer. Which would require philosphical arguments and so forth. That would be for a different class. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackjack wrote: |
| Quote: |
Taurine is non-existent in natural non-animal sources. It is present in minute amounts in milk and eggs. Little Tyke could have gotten her taurine requirement from milk, if she drank 500 gallons per day, or from eggs, if she ate more than 4000 per day. How *did* Little Tyke get taurine?
Perhaps even more important, why did Little Tyke disown her species' instincts? Little Tyke is a curiosity to the public, aberation to zoologists, anomaly to scientists, and an inspiration to idealists." |
Doesn't this more suggested that this was an isolated case? |
Sure, but how many more lions would be vegetarian if introduced into it as domesticated cubs?
The fact that given the right circumstances, Lions can be vegetarian and entirely peace-loving, affectionate animals shows that its only a change of circumstances that is the factor here.
Wild lions have no option but to be cultured into a certain lifestyle. They have no time to spend hours grazing every day in the hot sun when they can get the same energy value from a 5-minute hunt.
Besides, evolutionists build their entire theory on "isolated cases" and then extrapolating them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pangaea wrote: |
Being all merciful |
I may be wrong, but I don't think the description "All merciful" is found in the bible. Aren't you thinking of Islam?
| Quote: |
| So god knew the fall would happen, yet did nothing to avert it, as I've said before. |
God had already granted free will to humans. Thus to stop it, he would have had to take away free will and program humans as unthinking robots without any choice over their actions.
| Quote: |
| So he created people and animals just so they could suffer. |
I think you're struggling with the concept of free will here. The world suffers due to the wrong choice of humans.
| Quote: |
| But you said god knew they would be disobedient before it happened. So what was the point of a warning or a punishment? |
Knowing someone will do something is not the same as being responsible for their action.
| Quote: |
| As for free will - why does anyone's free will to rape, torture, abuse, and kill outweigh anyone else's free choice not to be raped, tortured, abused, or killed? |
We're living in the chaotic consequences of an original anti-God rebellion.
If you create a perfect 747 aircraft but then someone pulls out one of the rivets, a chain of events is set in motion whereby that jumbo is flawed and on an eventual path to destruction. It may take decades for the consequences of that missing rivet to come to fruition- stress fractures forming over time, whatever..but ultimately that plane will break apart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
Wow, what a steaming pile of conjecture. If you're going to so blatantly rip off Sarfati, you'd better cite him. |
How is it conjecture when its obvious that Lions, tigers and leopards shared an ancestor. That is proven by the fact they can interbreed. Its only geographical isolation that prevents them from re-merging back into their ancestral form.
This is happening with bears already. The ice is melting, polar bears are being forced to forage in habitats used by grizzlies..and they have already started to interbreed again.
| Quote: |
| Domesticated animals have been interbred for hundreds of years now. Where's my genetically perfect, 100 year old superdog? |
I don't really get your point here. All domesticated breeds of dog are descended from wolves. They're all the same species, just that humans have artificially selected fro certain parts of their available dna range.
if you took all your chihuahuas and rottweilers etc and interbreed them you'd eventually arrive at..a wolf. All the variety shown by people pet dogs is already present within the dna of wolves. They don't express it because it is not to their advantage to do so: they're already perfectly suited to the wild environments they live in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Globutron
Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Location: England/Anyang
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can we stay away from the actual religious part of this? I've never read the bible and I never will, it's a selfish fact that creationism is limited to Christianity alone. All you need to do is make a few Google searches and find that all of Christianity is based off much older religions from Egypt and more, just with altered names. Zeitgeist does this in a very wrong way, but you can do you own research based off it and find they're not direct lies.
But that's all I have to say about it. Justifying Christianity is very American, and we're not talking about America, we're talking about the earth. Which oddly includes other continents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pangaea
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Globutron wrote:
| Quote: |
| Can we stay away from the actual religious part of this? |
I didn't intend for it to go that route but it happened when the subject of vegetarian lions and the fall came up. Anyway, I don't intend to pursue the conversation further as it will only continue to descend into religious platitudes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Gipkik
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pangaea wrote: |
I didn't intend for it to go that route but it happened when the subject of vegetarian lions and the fall came up. Anyway, I don't intend to pursue the conversation further as it will only continue to descend into religious platitudes. |
I see that this thread is evolving. Who would've thought! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tomato
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
| Besides, evolutionists build their entire theory on "isolated cases" and then extrapolating them. |
That's news to me.
What isolated cases are you talking about|? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Globutron
Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Location: England/Anyang
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tomato wrote: |
| nautilus wrote: |
| Besides, evolutionists build their entire theory on "isolated cases" and then extrapolating them. |
That's news to me.
What isolated cases are you talking about|? |
I'm talking about the way they reconstruct whole skulls and creatures based on a single bone fragment and then go on to imagine whole family trees from their imaginary artwork.
Talking of artistic reconstructions, I see that 21 evolutionists constructed 21 completely different reconstructions of a skull. How can we be sure which one is true?
http://www.darwinism-watch.com/index.php?git=makale&makale_id=1160 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
