Imgood.me?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

One did, and it wasn't pretty.

Jason, stop repeating the Moonie literature from the Disco Institute by rote and think about what you are saying. Jason says:

"If there is any place in the biological world where we should see evolution occuring (sic) it is in the microbial world since they have the three things needed for evolutionary development: large population sizes, short reproduction cycles, and fast mutation rates (time is virtually irrelevant). So what do we find when we examine microbes?: that RM+NS cannot generate biological novelties."

Jason then goes on to assure us that a famous evolutionary biologist (Richard Lenski of Michigan State) has proven that evolution doesn't occur. It's this sort of mindlessness that makes us all look silly.

Did you pray Prof. Lenski through after his experiments failed so miserably, Jason?

You should check out Dulle's blog. He has a lot to say about evolution and design.

What's up with you being so concerned about always looking "silly"? Atheists think Deists look silly, does that make us wrong for believing in God?

[DAII]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

You should check out Dulle's blog. He has a lot to say about evolution and design.

I think Dulle is on the verge of trying to hybridize Apostolic theology with more mainstream theology ... but just not there yet.

I interested in some of his soteriological views ... as they are very Segravian in perspective ...

Most definitely doesn't see the rest of the Body as necessarily lost ... imo.

Would love him or Garner to debate/"discuss with" the likes of Bernard on Holiness standards.

Heck, I'd do it.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by DAII

I think Dulle is on the verge of trying to hybridize Apostolic theology with more mainstream theology ... but just not there yet.

I interested in some of his soteriological views ... as they are very Segravian in perspective ...

Most definitely doesn't see the rest of the Body as necessarily lost ... imo.

Would love him or Garner to debate/"discuss with" the likes of Bernard on Holiness standards.

Heck, I'd do it.

I'd like to hear a debate between Oneness scholars of opposing views on Holiness standards as well.

Doesn't Garner have a Phd?

[DAII]

Doctor Garner does. I know DKB is still working on his with the University of South Africa.

I know JG taught at UGST for awhile.

I think such a formal debate is warranted under the Apostolic Identity banner.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I'd like to hear a debate between Oneness scholars of opposing views on Holiness standards as well.

Doesn't Garner have a Phd?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by DAII

I think Dulle is on the verge of trying to hybridize Apostolic theology with more mainstream theology ... but just not there yet.

I interested in some of his soteriological views ... as they are very Segravian in perspective ...

Most definitely doesn't see the rest of the Body as necessarily lost ... imo.

Would love him or Garner to debate/"discuss with" the likes of Bernard on Holiness standards.

Heck, I'd do it.

He has some great thoughts on a number of subjects. I was just struck by how he took a "short cut" and copied the pathetic quote mining trick.

Does he really think Lenski believes he has "disproven" Natural Selection? What's Lenski say on the matter?

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Lenski_affair

Very lame.

And, it does make all Oneness people look ridiculous when bubbleheads do the cut-and-paste without first grappling with the issue. DO NOT cut-and-paste or even buy into the so-called "Creationist" literature without first studying the issue. Ann Coulter did this in her book "Godless" and discredited herself badly.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by pelathais

He has some great thoughts on a number of subjects. I was just struck by how he took a "short cut" and copied the pathetic quote mining trick.

Does he really think Lenski believes he has "disproven" Natural Selection? What's Lenski say on the matter?

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Lenski_affair

Very lame.

And, it does make all Oneness people look ridiculous when bubbleheads do the cut-and-paste without first grappling with the issue. DO NOT cut-and-paste or even buy into the so-called "Creationist" literature without first studying the issue. Ann Coulter did this in her book "Godless" and discredited herself badly.

Pel, have you chimed in over there?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Pel, have you chimed in over there?

On the "rationalwiki.com"? No.

While I do share an interest in being "rational" - I don't quite see how that should interfere with one's faith either.

Besides, I post here and just one other place. I don't have time to keep up with a series of running gun battles all over the interwebs.

If my post count here goes down Renda quits signing the checks.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by pelathais

On the "rationalwiki.com"? No.

While I do share an interest in being "rational" - I don't quite see how that should interfere with one's faith either.

Besides, I post here and just one other place. I don't have time to keep up with a series of running gun battles all over the interwebs.

If my post count here goes down Renda quits signing the checks.

Ha. So that's a "no?"

You'd have some valuable contributions I believe.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

You should check out Dulle's blog. He has a lot to say about evolution and design.

What's up with you being so concerned about always looking "silly"? Atheists think Deists look silly, does that make us wrong for believing in God?

If we are going to engage in the arena of ideas ... I think the use hard data, sound interpretation and logic play a role in various discussions.... and any lack thereof, makes one look "silly".

Just a random silly thought.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by DAII

If we are going to engage in the arena of ideas ... I think the use hard data, sound interpretation and logic play a role in various discussions.... and any lack thereof, makes one look "silly".

Just a random silly thought.

Sounds reasonable to me. But some evolutionists are unreasonable.