Should God be replaced? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Greg or e who wrote (16196)	2/5/2004 5:22:43 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) of 28931

"you reject out of hand the possibility that Jesus Christ rose from the dead." I consider it no more likely than any other myth from ancient days. Why should we believe stories just because they were part of our cultural and family beliefs, while rejecting others? You reject the Greek family tree of Gods--Gods whom were fervently WORSHIPPED. Why? hol.gr "It's not surprising that the Diaz essay begins by ascribing the worst of motives to religious viewpoints while flattering himself as the noble seeker of truth that is completely objective" Your wild accusations do nothing for your case... "That would be a hoot if it were not so telling of the complete lack of intellectual honesty on the part of evolutionists" These gratuitous and patently ridiculous insults do not compliment you, nor do they lend credibility to whatever positions you may hold. "That used to be called spontaneous generation didn't it? Pasture disproved that hundreds of years ago. Why would one believe such a discredited theory; because "life evolved, so evolution is a fact"" How it is called has not changed. There was an Aristotelian concept of SG which considered that complex organisms could originate from matter. This was an idea halfway between superstition and science. It is a certainty that complex life developed from simple life, and this is well documented in the fossil and genetic record. It is nearly a certainty that simple life developed from matter and this is the current opinion. Certainly, the capability of life to generate either locally or through space debris is beyond doubt. The actual process that DID occur is still conjectural--but what an exciting century lies ahead! "That's why Modern science is not modern and why it is not science" You have said nothing to explain this silliness. Modern science is modern science whether it is good, bad, or indifferent. It cannot be otherwise.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next