Comment on Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools by Gene Fortner.
Bill,
The Bible makes statements. One can use science to determine how accurate those statements are.
A couple of examples are;
Acts 17:26 New English Translation (NET)
26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth
I believe science agrees with that.
Genesis 1:27New English Translation (NET Bible)
27 God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them,
male and female he created them.
Science agrees that we are all descended from one male and one female.
There are many other statements that have been found to be substantiated by science.
I can’t think of a statement that from the Bible that has been disproven.
Gene Fortner Also Commented
Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools
why should not an understanding of evolution shed light on the reading of Genesis as most non-fundamentalist Chrsitians today suggest?
Definition of Evolution
When we talk about “evolution,” we don’t mean, “any kind of change.” Nor do we mean minor variations that result from natural selection. We use the term “evolution” to mean;
“The doctrine that unguided natural forces caused chemicals to combine in such a way that life resulted; and that all living things have descended from that common ancestral form of life.”
This not supported by any empirical evidence, only by pure speculation.
BTW,
The universal scientific laws of Biogenesis and Heredity complete refute Neo-Darwinism.
End of Discussion
Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools
Paul,
“there is nothing but semantic difference between the DI definition that Gene has given us and theistic evolution. ”
What nonsense, your ignorance of Intelligent Design is astounding.
Introducing The College Student’s Back to School Guide to Intelligent Design
Casey Luskin September 25, 2009 3:07 PM | Permalink
There are a lot of false urban legends promoted in academia about intelligent design (ID). They often start with myths promoted by misinformed critiques in scientific journals, court rulings, or even talks by activists at scientific conferences. Unfortunately, it’s not uncommon for this misinformation to then be passed down to college students, who may know very little about ID and lack the resources to correct their professors’ misinformed and misplaced attacks on ID. Not anymore.
If you’re a college student, recently gone back to school and expecting to hear a lot of anti-ID views from your professors, we’re pleased to present this “Back to School Guide” for students as follows:
The College Student’s Back to School Guide to Intelligent Design
The guide contains suggestions for helpful pro-ID books, articles, and websites for students to read when investigating the issue. Additionally, it contains “Answers to Your Professor’s Most Common Misinformed Objections to Intelligent Design.” Nine answers are given to common but false arguments against ID like “Intelligent Design Proponents Don’t Conduct or Publish Scientific Research” or “Intelligent Design Is a Science Stopper” or “Intelligent Design Has Been Refuted by the Overwhelming Evidence for Neo-Darwinian Evolution.”
There are three easy tips to remember as a student with an anti-ID professor:
• Tip #1: Never opt out of learning evolution. In fact, learn about evolution every chance you get
• Tip #2: Think for yourself, think critically, and question assumptions.
• Tip #3: Proactively learn about credible scientific viewpoints that dissent from Darwinism on your own time, even if your classes censor those non-evolutionary viewpoints.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/09/introducing_the_college_studen025841.html
Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools
Paul
” All Jones decided was that ID is supernaturalism and shouldn’t be introduced now as part of science.”
Jones was wrong. he got duped by strawman arguments and his lack of education.
He prepared for the trial by watching “Inherit the Wind”.
LOL
Recent Comments by Gene Fortner
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
yes
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Bill “How inane would it be to claim an apple tree is not an apple tree unless and until it has apples on it?”
Bill,
Comparing babies and apple trees is a bit more inane than comparing apples and oranges.
BTW,
“The ONLY DEFINITION FOR SIN that we have in the Bible is that it is the transgression of the law… IT CONDEMNS EVERY SIN, AND REQUIRES EVERY VIRTUE.” E.G. White, ST, March 3, 1890 par. 3.
If it is a sin to possess a fallen nature then there must be a law against it. Has God given a law forbidding anyone from being conceived with a fallen human nature? If there ever was a law that was impossible to keep, this would be it, for how could one choose not to violate it before one existed?!
Summary of 60th General Conference Session (2015)
Thanks Sean
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Ethan,
IMHO,
No statement was necessary.
In fact I consider it thoughtless.
FB#6 should have absolutely no effect on their ability to support the world church and perform work faithfully and with integrity.
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
@Bill Sorensen:
Bill,
Sin is transgression of the law.
Where does it say being born is a sin?
