Re: "The Language of God": Dr. Francis Collins Makes Case For

On Jan 5, 11:49 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 5, 8:09 pm, John Stockwell <john.19071...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 5, 6:19 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 5, 4:31 pm, John Stockwell <john.19071...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

SNIP....







- Show quoted text -

Since you are a Darwinist your support ofCollinsis a yawner----
entirely expected.

Basic facts:

The Bible advocates Divine guidance operating in reality causing
biological production (= Theism).

Darwinism advocates the exact opposite: unguided material causation
operating in reality causing biological production (= Atheism).

The Bible supports Creationism (= Divine causation operating in
nature), not Darwinism (= absence of Divine *causation* to explain
nature).

In regards to God: "evolution" since Darwin means Theos is absent and
not involved with nature. This is why all evolutionists reject and
dispute the claims of ID (= Mind involved with nature).

Again, these are basic facts.

To say the Bible supports Darwinism is self-evidently false, the work
of a double agent. (Even Darwin himself placed God in a deistic
position----not INvolved with nature; 1859:490). The proposition by
Collinsinsults intelligence and dares anyone to call him a liar. Of
course he could be confused.

The concept of double agent explains the work ofCollinsin view of
the basic facts. The same (= basic facts) excludes the possibility of
genuine confusion, in my opinion.

Collinsis a wicked person.

I don't think thatCollinsis a wicked person. You are assuming that
he
is lying when he says that he believes in God and sees God everywhere,
even in the laws of physics, and the laws of biology (i.e. Darwinian
evolution).
That doesn't mean thatCollinsis wicked, it means that his notion of
God is
bigger than yours.

-John- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As usual, you have misunderstood.

Collinsis wicked for attempting to say that the Bible and evolution
are compatible. (I am assumingCollinsto have attempted this based on
what others have indicated.) It is an objective fact that the Bible
and Evolutionism propose antithetic agencies to explain reality.

As to your point:Collinshas no source for his views on God----they
are subjective....equal with the KKK. AndCollinshas no source for
his views on God in relation to evolutionary theory. ToE says Creator-
Designer is absent from biological production----that is why
transmutation is necessary.

This is what happens when one attempts to reconcile the
irreconcilable: lies are told.

The Bible is only irreconcilable with science if one expects more from
the Bible than is warranted. Indeed, it is not the Bible that you hold
over science
and common sense, but your particular literalist interpretation of the
Bible.
There is nothing about science in the Bible, just as there is nothing
about any
of the other forms of knowledge we have or technologies we use.

Attempting to associate Collins with the KKK is an example of the sort
of disengenuousness that you bring to this discussion. Collins is
about as far
from being dishonest as a person can get.

Ray

-John

The approval of an (alleged) Christian (Francis Collins) by an Atheist
(like you) is invulnerable evidence proving that the Christian is not
a real Christian and that he is misrepresenting the Bible egregiously.



blah blah blah everybody's an atheist but Ray blah blah blah nobody's
a Real Christian(tm)(c) but Ray blah blah blah Ray Speaks For God blah
blah blah


(yawn)


Same ole ***.


================================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"


Editor, Red and Black Publishers
http://www.RedandBlackPublishers.com


.