Study Disproves The Bible

[rogue06]

Evolutionists come to Bible's defense:

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/fo...-bible-around/

David Klinghoffer is an Intelligent Design advocate at the Discovery Institute

[seer]

David Klinghoffer is an Intelligent Design advocate at the Discovery Institute

So what? All those articles about the bible being wrong were wrong themselves.

“Study disproves the Bible’s suggestion that the ancient Canaanites were wiped out” (The Telegraph)
“Bible says Canaanites were wiped out by Israelites but scientists just found their descendants living in Lebanon” (The Independent)
“Bronze Age DNA disproves the Bible’s claim that the Canaanites were wiped out: Study says their genes live on in modern-day Lebanese people” (Daily Mail)
“Scientists Find Evidence That Ancient Canaanites Survive Today: Was The Bible Wrong?” (Tech Times)
“New DNA study casts doubt on Bible claim” (Mother Nature Network)
“The Bible was WRONG: Civilisation God ordered to be KILLED still live and kicking” (Express)
“Genetic evidence suggests the Canaanites weren’t destroyed after all” (Ars Technica)
“Canaanites Weren’t Annihilated by Ancient Israelites After All” (Newser)
“Study disproves the Bible’s claim that the ancient Canaanites were wiped out” (Click Lancashire)
“Canaanites survived Biblical ‘slaughter’, ancient DNA shows”(ABC Online)
“DNA vs the Bible: Israelites did not wipe out the Canaanites” (Cosmos)
“The Bible got it wrong: Ancient Canaanites survived and their DNA lives in modern-day Lebanese” (Pulse Headlines)

[rogue06]

So what? All those articles about the bible being wrong were wrong themselves.

Just pointing out that he isn't an evolutionist.

[Adrift]

Just pointing out that he isn't an evolutionist.

Don't Intelligent Design types consider themselves evolutionists to some degree? It was my understanding that some did, but that they simply believed that evolution was guided rather than strictly natural.

[rogue06]

Don't Intelligent Design types consider themselves evolutionists to some degree? It was my understanding that some did, but that they simply believed that evolution was guided rather than strictly natural.

Most, although not all, are opposed to evolution. Klinghoffer belongs to that group.

[psstein]

Don't Intelligent Design types consider themselves evolutionists to some degree? It was my understanding that some did, but that they simply believed that evolution was guided rather than strictly natural.

It varies. Some accept macroevolution for the most part, but believe that an "intelligent designer" had to intervene at specific places, such as the creation of the bacterial flagellum.

Others are OECs, YECs, or a wide variety of things.

[Adrift]

Huh. I wonder how (or why) Intelligent Design would be compatible with YEC.

[Doug Shaver]

Don't Intelligent Design types consider themselves evolutionists to some degree?

From an ID FAQ:

Source: Center for Science and Culture

However, the dominant theory of evolution today is neo-Darwinism, which contends that evolution is driven by natural selection acting on random mutations, an unpredictable and purposeless process that "has no discernable direction or goal, including survival of a species." (NABT Statement on Teaching Evolution). It is this specific claim made by neo-Darwinism that intelligent design theory directly challenges. (http://www.intelligentdesign.org/faq.php)

© Copyright Original Source

[psstein]

Huh. I wonder how (or why) Intelligent Design would be compatible with YEC.

I don't see how it is either. ID seems to be a big tent party for anti-evolutionists.

Ronald Numbers' The Creationists is a really great source here, as is Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design by Forrest and Gross.

[rogue06]

Huh. I wonder how (or why) Intelligent Design would be compatible with YEC.

With some of those who reject evolution that is all that really matters. It's like Christian YECs joining hands with radical Islamic extremists who oppose evolution. You wouldn't think it would happen but it has.

[Roy]

Evolutionists come to Bible's defense:

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/fo...-bible-around/

What evolutionists? Do you think the staff of 'evolutionnews.org' are evolutionists?

[Roy]

Huh. I wonder how (or why) Intelligent Design would be compatible with YEC.

"Creation means that the various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent creator with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc."

"Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, wings, etc."

Creationism and ID are not just compatible, they're the same thing. Just ask the cdesign proponentsists.

[Adrift]

From an ID FAQ:

Source: Center for Science and Culture

However, the dominant theory of evolution today is neo-Darwinism, which contends that evolution is driven by natural selection acting on random mutations, an unpredictable and purposeless process that "has no discernable direction or goal, including survival of a species." (NABT Statement on Teaching Evolution). It is this specific claim made by neo-Darwinism that intelligent design theory directly challenges. (http://www.intelligentdesign.org/faq.php)

© Copyright Original Source

I thought that Intelligent Design types distinguished between natural/Darwinian evolution and a sort of guided evolution. Is that not a correct understanding of their view?

With some of those who reject evolution that is all that really matters. It's like Christian YECs joining hands with radical Islamic extremists who oppose evolution. You wouldn't think it would happen but it has.

So, to be clear, are you saying that they're just in cahoots with one another or that there really are YEC Intelligent Design types?

"Creation means that the various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent creator with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc."

"Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, wings, etc."

Creationism and ID are not just compatible, they're the same thing. Just ask the cdesign proponentsists.

Hmm. For some reason I assumed that almost all IDers were old earth creationists. By the way, the word "creationist" for "young earth creationist" always throws me. All Christians, and most theists are creationists in some regard. We all believe that the natural world was created at some point, we simply differ on when that creative action ceased.

[Darth Executor]

Hmm. For some reason I assumed that almost all IDers were old earth creationists. By the way, the word "creationist" for "young earth creationist" always throws me. All Christians, and most theists are creationists in some regard. We all believe that the natural world was created at some point, we simply differ on when that creative action ceased.

Does the word "man" from "postman" also throw you off? Should they just be called posts?

[Adrift]

Does the word "man" from "postman" also throw you off? Should they just be called posts?

Are you contractually obligated to be an ass in every single thread you post in?