Romans 14 11For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. In the end everyone ever born will know who their creator is.
__________________
For ever running, but losing the race. If it were not for grace.
Romans 14 11For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. In the end everyone ever born will know who their creator is.
Not really sure what you are saying to FH, and it seems as though you are dogging him a little, especially with a quote taken out of context.
here is Romans 14 verse 10:
You have no right to criticize your borther or look down on him. Remember, each of us will stand personally beforethe judgement of the Seat of God.
Romans 14, verse 13:
So don't criticize each other anymore.
And to show you the COntext of the entire chapter Romans 14 verse 1 is:
Give a warm welcome to any brother who wants to join you even though his faith is weakDon't criticize himbecause he has different ideas thanyou about what is wrong and right.
The particular chapter of Romans 14 is about inclusion and how to accept others in the christian way. That is the problem about citing one verse out of an entire chapter, you have to read the whole chapter to get the meaning.
Jones wrote that he wasn't saying the intelligent design concept shouldn't be studied and discussed, saying its advocates "have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors."
But, he wrote, "our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."
This is exactly what I said in our previous rather lengthy discussion regarding this matter. Teach it, but as it is not science, don't pretend it is and teach it in the science class room. There is plenty of room for it in a philosophy class.
as one who thinks that evolution has much more credibility than ID or creation, i think this was the right call.
Believing in evolution is as credible asbelievingthat if you get a paper bag, throw in some metal, a little glass, some leather,and shake if for a few thousand years you would expect to get a watch, but not just any watcha Rolex.... theodds you would get a watch are better than believing the theroy of evolution... Of course everyone isentitled to their own opinion. But mine is right. God said and I believe it!!! Bob <>< God made me in His own image, not the image of a monkey..
Farm Hunter, as far as I can see, the Judge's decision is the only correct decision.
Perhaps he went a bit over-board in his lenghty discourse on the TOE.
When you get right down to it, science is NEVER taught in the manner of adopting an un-proven, un-testable theory simply because our current scienctificunderstandings are incomplete.
I.D. teach's that life is to complex to be adaquitly<sp> explained by the TOE, so therefore life as we see it must have been designed.
I.D. fails on several levels. The first and foremostbeing that simply because one theory is scienctificly incomplete NEVER means that a completely new un-proven, un-testable, un-scienctifictheory must/should be adopted or taught.
What scientific study/observation/hypothisis do you base I.D. on?
The presumed (some would say proven) failings of the TOE to answer all the questions?
Studies in science are NEVERtaught or even approachedin that manner unless it has beenproven (or highly suspected)that the current theories/hypothisis have utterly failed.
Even if you concede every arguement made against the TOE, it doesn't scientificly translate into teachingI.D.
At worst it would mean a starting back over at square one. But in no way shape or form would it equal then teaching, an un-testable, un-proveable, theory.
As appalled as I am at the way Evolution has been taught in the past (TOE has been taught as to explain the origins of life), proving it's failings doesn't mean you teach a less-provable, less-testable theory.
What an utter failing of the TOE would mean is a re-start to understanding "Life AS we know it". Thats all. It wouldn't mean that the schools should suddenly jump to a different conclusion without any testing.
Anyone who has been here more than two days knows that I am a Christian. But I ask this.
Name even ONE test that we can conduct to prove or even likely to prove a Designer.
Belief in God is based on Faith, and until Godbrings other events about, that is the way it will be.
If God was scientificly provable, there would be no need for Faith.
On a positive note, atleast the TOE has been challanged and the pure evolutionist have been forced to back away from the way the TOE has been promoted in the pastas the "be-all, end-all" answer to life on Earth.
That, in it's self, would have seemed monumental in the very recent past.
Thanks
Mr-Pirk
__________________
A proud owner of a Flying Vee. Bestowed by the fine Gentleman VC1111 himself.
I don't think Bisquit eater was out of line at all. I feel like he gave a good word to an evolutionist. . . . In the end every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Regardless of where the word comes from it is so true. I would hate to be the man that rejected God when he realizes that Jesus is Lord after its too late.
This chapter in Romans is dealing with the differences between the Jews and the Gentiles in their ceremonial and dietary concience . .or the lack thereof. I agree that we should treat a brother with gentleness and tolerance. Everybody in my opinion are not our brothers . . .some are neighbors . .some are adversaries.
__________________ And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
PA - Intelligent Design - resolved
