Friday, November 18, 2011

Never ending insanity

My responses are in bold type.

Yep, it's more tard from gordo the almighty bloviator:

"..the Biblical record is not a matter of easily dismissed fiction, and that evolutionary materialism is self-referentially incoherent AND amoral. Thus it is not only necessarily false but a gateway to evil and a menace to our civilisation."

gordo is a creationist:

9 –> going on, Hb 11 speaks of how by faith — trust in God based on his Word [warranted by a chain anchored on the resurrection as described and linked many times . . . ] — “we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command.” That is, the God of the Bible is the Creator.

11 –> But that is not the most relevant issue, which is in Heb 11:6: “without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him [note the direct implication that here is but ONE true God, the Creator of the Universe] must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.”

When asked where in the bible the double slit experiment is mentioned, he says:

On this latest topic he has been directly told — many times — by several people, that the Bible is not a Physics textbook [which is of course where the Double Slit experiment on interference of light waves -- and sometimes of electrons -- is commonly discussed], though it does set the context in which we can be confident that the Creator God of order created a world in which nature is orderly and intelligible. (And, this comes from careful exegesis . . . )

That Biblically anchored view is a basis for doing Science: thinking God’s creative thoughts after him.

And a hypocrite:

TH: You are skating on very thin ice. I counsel you to be very careful in judging Another’s servant. We are reasonably called to look at arguments and at the ways of life (bearing in mind not only the issue of growth across time, but also the planks in our own eyes) but we are in no wise in a position to dismiss another person eternally. Which is why a certain often encountered profanity is so blasphemous, BTW. In your case it is very clear from the above and previous threads that you have made some serious conceptual and biblical errors, and need to correct them, seeking forgiveness for sins: do not let foolish wounded pride get between you and the truth and the right. For all of us, there is need to grow in penitent faith that turns from wrong to right and from discovered error tot he truth, instead of resisting correction. G’day. D (the D stands for Dictionary)

And a screwball:

Of course, what is artfully being dodged here is that he creeds are precisely the result of generations of serous biblical scholarship and reflect precisely – and demonstrably — the teachings of the Bible.

He describes himself as a "creedally orthodox Christian" on that site and as an "evangelical Christian" on his sites. He has a huge problem with mormonism and other versions of christianity, and he pushes the "end of days" crap.

More creationist admissions:

In short, the Bible is not a physics textbook so is not to be expected to discuss operational science topics like the double slit experiment.

However as a book that addresses the origins of the cosmos and the ground of our existence in our Creator God and loving Lord and Saviour, it does have some very telling things to say about the ultimate origin and nature of the cosmos, which grounds true science and in interesting ways points to the designer of the cosmos.

In so doing, it warns us against so-called “science,” which is in reality speculative and deceptive philosophy that as we have seen has from time to time been imposed on science and scientific issues on and off for the past 2300+ years. In particular, in Rom 1 and related texts, it warns against those who would exclude God from the province of knowledge, cautioning us that — never mind professions of brilliance — they suffer an endarkened understanding and loss of control over their moral compass, i.e the same basic point that Plato also observed on Alcibiades and co from a different perspective

This precisely fits what evolutionary materialism is, and on this, with reference to the pretense that evolutionary materialistic origins science allows us to accurately reconstruct the remote, unobservable past of origins [and imposes Lewontinian a priori materialism to block effective rebuttal in the institutions dominated by the ideological materialists] the Bible in Job 38 is very plain:

Job 38: 2 “Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?

3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand . . .

So, especially since evolutionary materialism — as shown above in reply to Mr Sherman [who like the other open or evident advocates of this ideology has been unable to reply cogently] — is inherently self referentially incoherent on the credibility of the materialistic brain to ground reasoned thought, we should not be intimidated by the materialists, never mind how they shake out their Lab coats at us.



He also promotes this page of his (and a lot of other ones):