Evolution? How?

How very surprising--you know even less about sectarian christianity than you do science . . . that was a surprise . . .

By the way, understanding a theory of evolution requires thoughtful understanding, not faith . . .

I didn't say you were wrong, per se . . . this is another stirling example of your abyssmal lack of reading comprehension skills.

You refer to Protestants as though they were a sectarian monolith. To which Protestants were you referring: Albigensians, Waldensians, Walloons, Hussites, Calvinists, Baptists, Congregationalists, Independents, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Dutch Reform, German Reform, Mennonites, Moravians, Silesians? Of course, that takes no notice of the many subsects of each of these. To say that all Protestants believe anything in common is only slightly less naive than a contention that life arose from starlight "falling" on the earth for aeons.

The statement "I was using 'faith' as rhetorical" is too silly for further comment . . .

Setanta wrote: You have started a thread entitled "Evolution? How?" which begs a scientific question, yet you have placed it in Spirituality & Religion. The theory of evolution does not entail religious questions. I have a very great problem indeed with what you purport to be your knowledge of science, especially in view of your most recent crackpot statements--i suspect the same applies to Rosborne. Once again, when you put a thread like this in the Religion forum, you're asking for trouble, and deserve the responses you get. If you just wanted to chat with other religious fanatics about why science is unreliable and why the theory of evolution is "untrue," you ought to have gone to a religious web site where the choir preach to one another on a daily basis.

You and Rosborne's problem is not my knowledge of science but that you have to jump over into a religious post... not with the intention of teaching science but of bashing a few Christians.

RexRed wrote:

You and Rosborne's problem is not my knowledge of science but that you have to jump over into a religious post... not with the intention of teaching science but of bashing a few Christians.

Get a grip Rex, we don't care what you believe. We only care that you are coherent with the discussion, and you're not.

Are you saying that matter cannot occupy the same place?

You apparently do not know the definition of superlative.

In saying that that which is unique cannot at the same time be common, i am referring the ordinary definitions of the words.

You display an increasing ignorance of what one might refer to as your native language. It's not simply you are terribly confused and ill-informed about religion and science--you can't even properly use the language in which this debate has been further.

Here is a glaring example:

Quote:

Are you saying that matter cannot occupy the same place?

No, i'm saying that the words unique and common are mutually exclusive terms: something is either unique, or it is common--it cannot be both. As for matter occupying the same place, the same place as what? You grow more incoherent as this progresses.

You comments about Luther and Protestants on the previous page displays a profound ignorance of what Luther was all about, and both the causes and the results of his defiance of authority. By now, of course, that doesn't surprise me.

Why bother, you spun a fantasy about Luther which shows that you don't know what simony is, nor how quickly the Reformation fragmented christianity. You especially display an ignorance of what lead to the fragmentation.

Your performance here shows that you fail to read and comprehend. So why both giving you a lesson on Luther, the reformation, the counter-reformation, Charles V, Calvin and Zwingli, the Anabaptists, Henry VIII, Bloody Mary, the Edict of Nantes, the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, the Thirty Years War . . . you'd only spin more linguistic and intellectual fantasies as you struggle, and fail, to use the language properly.

How about you go spend twenty years reading history and comparative religion . . . but above all else, learn to use the English language properly. Then a conversation with you on the subject might not be a waste of my time.