Re: West Virginia creationism

On Wed, 15 May 2024 09:10:27 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Harran wrote:

On Tue, 14 May 2024 20:35:56 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
 

Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 10 May 2024 16:40:15 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>

Burkhard wrote:

>
[...]
>

In fact, your opening gambit is directly expressed in the Bible: Judges
10:16 or Ecclesiastes 3:19: "For what happens to the children of man and
what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other.
They all have the same breath"
>

I question that. But this is Old Testament which Christians turn to for
back ground,  but the Old Covenant contained in the Old Testament was
like a contract which was fulfilled by Jesus Christ and set aside. The
new Convent contained in the New Testament is the one Christians are under.

>
I'm still waiting for you to explain how you get from a God twiddling
with molecules and DNA to a God with whom we can have a personal
relationship; the type of God defined in both the Old and New
Testament; the same type of God defined by Stephen Meyer, one of the
most prominent proponents of ID, in his book 'Return of the God
Hypothesis'.
>

Not my call!

 
In other words, you can't. You appear to be in good company, none of
the leading proponents of ID seem able to explain it either.
 

There are no ID proponent on TO, that I see just me. Due in insults,
castigation and character assassination, ID proponents are quick to
leave TO. Except me,  so far I've been able to overlook it.

To be accurate, so far YOU have been able to practice baseless
insults, castigation, and character assassination.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge