Evidence for God from Science

August wrote:

Yes, but Christian beleifs were behind the Spanish Inquisition.

How does that relate to either ID or evolution, which you brought up, since neither was around at that time?

We can also debate the meaning of Christian

It doesn't, if you remember you brought up the Nazi's and I replied

"Will arguing about ID over evolution prevent a new Nazi regime?"

It doesn't, if you remember you brought up the Nazi's and I replied

"Will arguing about ID over evolution prevent a new Nazi regime?"

You were the one that brought up relative morality, and I used the Nazis to demonstrate that your thinking was fallacious. And answered your question that the ToE played a role in Nazi thinking.

August wrote:

It doesn't, if you remember you brought up the Nazi's and I replied

"Will arguing about ID over evolution prevent a new Nazi regime?"

You were the one that brought up relative morality, and I used the Nazis to demonstrate that your thinking was fallacious. And answered your question that the ToE played a role in Nazi thinking.

Good =)

And to that I responded that Christianity resulted in the Inquisitions.

Meaning vilifying a position because some people misinterpret it and use it for evil doen not make it invalid.

Am I correct?

Meaning vilifying a position because some people misinterpret it and use it for evil doen not make it invalid.

Am I correct?

Let's assume that you are, by what standard do you judge something to be good or evil? Clearly it's a problem when it's left up to the person or persons themselves.

Torture and execution during the SI was done by secular authorities, not the Catholic church, btw. They were responsible for the announcement of what heresies were being committed, and offered an amnesty to those who held the Cathar beliefs. The whole inquisition killed less than 2000 people, all regrettable but self-corrected by the church, unlike the Nazi's.

August wrote:

Meaning vilifying a position because some people misinterpret it and use it for evil doen not make it invalid.

Am I correct?

Let's assume that you are, by what standard do you judge something to be good or evil? Clearly it's a problem when it's left up to the person or persons themselves.

Torture and execution during the SI was done by secular authorities, not the Catholic church, btw. They were responsible for the announcement of what heresies were being committed, and offered an amnesty to those who held the Cathar beliefs. The whole inquisition killed less than 2000 people, all regrettable but self-corrected by the church, unlike the Nazi's.

You are not indicating that all Nazi's were scientists?

All this was a response to me saying.

"Look into your own heart and perhaps you will see what is right and what is wrong?"

Again, you cannot think by teaching ID in schools that it would prevent a neo-Nazi regime?

I think that morality should be taught to our children in our homes, and taught to the masses by leaders. Introducing ID and any christian derivitaves in schools opens the way for other religions to become offended and want inclusion. It does in no way teach morality. And if it does why are we teaching morality in a class which is supposed to teach science?

You are not indicating that all Nazi's were scientists?

Not at all, but their policies were influenced by the belief that to make their race stronger, they had to remove the weaker parts.

All this was a response to me saying.

"Look into your own heart and perhaps you will see what is right and what is wrong?"

Yes. And while I agree with the premise, I don't think it's the whole premise. We are able to distinguish between good and bad because God created that ability in us.

Again, you cannot think by teaching ID in schools that it would prevent a neo-Nazi regime?

No, there are many factors.

I think that morality should be taught to our children in our homes, and taught to the masses by leaders.

Agreed.

Introducing ID and any christian derivitaves in schools opens the way for other religions to become offended and want inclusion.

Back to square one. ID has nothing to do with Christianity. That is the propaganda that evolutionists would have you believe though. Please show me where it relates to Christianity.

It does in no way teach morality.

Right, but it shows alternatives to the ToE

And if it does why are we teaching morality in a class which is supposed to teach science?

We should not.

If you read what I wrote earlier, you would have seen I said that alternative scientific options in the time preceding WWII, may have stopped Nazism. Or it may not have. It was one of many factors that those leaders used to justify their policies.

You still have not answered:
by what standard do you judge something to be good or evil? Clearly it's a problem when it's left up to the person or persons themselves.

August wrote:

Introducing ID and any christian derivitaves in schools opens the way for other religions to become offended and want inclusion.

Back to square one. ID has nothing to do with Christianity. That is the propaganda that evolutionists would have you believe though. Please show me where it relates to Christianity.

If you read what I wrote earlier, you would have seen I said that alternative scientific options in the time preceding WWII, may have stopped Nazism. Or it may not have. It was one of many factors that those leaders used to justify their policies.

My original post was in response to a poster who stated that the Bible is the source of truth and that in it can be seen the falacies of natural evolution.

You share a different view? The intelligent designer could be anyone?

If morality is not ingrained within the concept of ID then how would it prevented Nazi atrocities?

I will reiterrate, vilifying a position because some people misinterpret it and use it for evil doen not make it invalid. Be it Nazi's with "survival of the fittest" or the Inquisition.

Am I correct?

My original post was in response to a poster who stated that the Bible is the source of truth and that in it can be seen the falacies of natural evolution.

You share a different view? The intelligent designer could be anyone?

No, in my worldview the designer is the Christian God. That is not what ID theory states though. If it suits you, in your worldview, the ID'er can be a pink unicorn.

We have now reached the point where I have repeatedly answered your questions, yet you refuse to answer mine. You keep on asking the same questions I believe I have already answered.

I would like to continue the discussion, but if you you don't answer my questions, then I see no point.

August wrote:

My original post was in response to a poster who stated that the Bible is the source of truth and that in it can be seen the falacies of natural evolution.

You share a different view? The intelligent designer could be anyone?

No, in my worldview the designer is the Christian God. That is not what ID theory states though. If it suits you, in your worldview, the ID'er can be a pink unicorn.

We have now reached the point where I have repeatedly answered your questions, yet you refuse to answer mine. You keep on asking the same questions I believe I have already answered.

I would like to continue the discussion, but if you you don't answer my questions, then I see no point.

I'm sorry what questions have I not answered?
Should we start a new thread?

I'm sorry what questions have I not answered?

Quote:
it is true that love binds us all.

How do you know that?

Quote:
Just do your best to do the right thing


What is the "right thing", and how do you know what it is?

Quote:
We are only here but for a moment, and you will be judged by one who has the right to judge.


How do you know that?

by what standard do you judge something to be good or evil?

Those questions.....

BTW, thanks for a civil debate, it's kinda hard to have these discussions without them deteriorating into namecalling etc. I appreciate the tone of our discourse.

BTW, thanks for a civil debate, it's kinda hard to have these discussions without them deteriorating into namecalling etc. I appreciate the tone of our discourse.

I am glad we could have this discussion.

Quote:
it is true that love binds us all.

How do you know that?

I cannot explain how I know, it is what I beleive.

As for the other questions, I have started a new thread.
But I will start of by saying, people can agree on what is right and what is wrong but because the source, the execution, or the practice is different, they forget the message and intent of the moral code.