G******e
发帖数: 9567 | 1 If there be found among you ... that ... hath gone and served other gods,
and worshipped them ... Then shalt thou ... tone them with stones, till
they die.
If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the
wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee
secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not
known, thou, nor thy fathers ... thou shalt stone him with stones, that he
die.
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, ... 阅读全帖 |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 2 我建議你這種連神愛世人是否是愛所有人都不敢回答的
到一邊去。
不服氣的話你回答看看. |
|
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 4 Let's see how hard it is to get a straight answer from LZ for a very basic
science question on his favorite subject -- is the appearance of human based
on "evolution theory" by chance?
He flip-flapped his positions from N to Y and then to N --- I'm not sure
what is his position on this question right now. Maybe he can clarify ---
whether he think himself is a product of random-mutation. |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 5 你不貼這個的話我都要擔心你了。
有人看得懂麼？
based |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 6
that's a good excuse not to give straight Y & N answers....
again, do you believe you are a product of random events (mutations, etc)? Y or N. |
|
|
|
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 10 你問過這問題嗎？最近不忍看你不敢回答問題的可憐樣子，
可能漏看了很多你的貼，抱歉！ |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 11 Nothing... just curious why it took LZ so long to admit that based on the "
science" theories he believes, he is a random-mutant. IMHO he is a well-
educated and talented non-believer, a master-piece of God's creation.
Apparently he disagree and would rather choose randomness as a superficial
explanation than admitting God's creation. |
|
M******n
发帖数: 43051 | 12 是啊，于是你问这个问题的目的是什么？
我们承认我们是一系列随机事件造成的后果，这哪里肤浅了 |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 13
你問過這問題嗎？最近不忍看你不敢回答問題的可憐樣子，
可能漏看了很多你的貼，抱歉！ |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 14
这哪里肤浅了 -- let's be honest, assuming "random" (in the context of Darwin
's theory) whenever you can't explain the variations across species is a
pretty lame "scientific" explanation (or lack of). |
|
M******n
发帖数: 43051 | 15 随机过程本来就是科学的一种啊
科学又不只是决定论
Darwin |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 16
agree, with well-specified transtion probabilities, stochastic process is
useful to discribe random events. But the "randomness" conviniently used in
Darwin's theory (or more broadly, the origin of life, or creation of
universe) is not clearly specified. |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 17 好幾個人跟你解釋了，隨機不是原因，是觀察出來的。
隨機甚至和神決定也不衝突。
不過你沒讀過進化論，這些你都不知道的。
Darwin |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 18 問一個問題就可以知道 littletshirt 自己搞不清楚。
"請問有任何隨機的事件嗎？還是所有的事情都是上帝決定 to serve
a purpose?"
請回答有或沒有。 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 19
that's a convinient excuse....have you thought about the root causes/
mechanics that lead to the "random variation" in new phenotypes that are
subject to natrual selection. Don't stop at the "random" incoporation of
incorrect ATCG during DNA replication stage. |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 20
還是所有的事情都是上帝決定 to serve a purpose -- I have answered this many
times. |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 21 看得出你根本不知道"隨機" 是形容詞而不是名詞。
without |
|
|
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 24
that's what you thought.
sorry, I don't need (as if you could) 把整門學科講 since biology is my major
. and I only asked you very basic questions.
I feel the same about asking you questions.
But these are good excuse to run away from serious questions that I may borrow from you in the future.
Bottomline for LZ -- 絕不直接回答問題 |
|
S*********L
发帖数: 5785 | 25 你没有谈论加尔文的资格。你如果执迷不悟，继续无理取闹，随意。我拒绝理你就是了
，很简单。 |
|
h*o
发帖数: 1035 | 26 神爱所有的人：
太 5:45 这样，就可以作你们天父的儿子；因为他叫日头照好人，也照歹人；降雨给义
人，也给不义
的人。
神恨恶人的罪：
罗 6:23 因为罪的工价乃是死；惟有 神的恩赐，在我们的主基督耶稣里，乃是永生。
耶稣基督并不是为所有的人死了：
约 3:18 信他的人，不被定罪；不信的人，罪已经定了，因为他不信 神独生子的名。
借着基督得救的是神预定拣选的，不是所有的人：
罗 9:11 (双子还没有生下来，善恶还没有作出来，只因要显明 神拣选人的旨意，不
在乎人的行
为，乃在乎召人的主)。
帖前 5:9 因为 神不是预定我们受刑，乃是预定我们藉着我们主耶稣基督得救。 |
|
|
S*********L
发帖数: 5785 | 28 又来转移话题这一套，你就不能正视一下你自己的问题？实在理屈词穷保持沉默也行，
何必扯到一个八不相干的话题。 |
|
S*********L
发帖数: 5785 | 29 因为他对加尔文主义缺乏起码的了解，只有恶意攻击和歪曲的态度。你认为他有资格和
你讨论，你随便和他谈，我当然不会说三道四。但是他要和我说，我当然可以说他是否
有资格了。 |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 30 這就回答得很好啊，不知道所長怎麼不能就這麼簡單的回答？ |
|
|
|
|
o**1
发帖数: 6383 | 34 任何人都有资格谈论加尔文。
你觉得他不了解加尔文主义，你可以跟他讲清楚嘛，以理服人多好呢。
上来就剥夺了人的谈论资格，这个不好吧。这可真有点像宗教裁判所所长了。 |
|
|
|
s***u
发帖数: 1911 | 37 我信的是，信仰的基础是爱，如果一个信仰宣扬的不是爱，我就要反击这个邪恶信仰
我这么做，是替天行道 |
|
s***u
发帖数: 1911 | 38 如果你不是唯独圣经，而是搬出一些所谓信经和一些神学研究，那和我这样的非基督徒
半斤八两 |
|
h*o
发帖数: 1035 | 39 说的很对啊，
林前 13:13 如今常存的有信，有望，有爱，这三样，其中最大的是爱。
路 10:27 他回答说：“你要尽心、尽性、尽力、尽意爱主你的 神；又要爱邻舍如同
自己。”
那么什么是爱？
替天行道，你认为神需要你来替他做事才行么？ |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 40
這問得太好了
Michael, 你介意我也問你這問題嗎？ |
|
|
|
s***u
发帖数: 1911 | 43 love is like the moment you met your hub/wife. |
|
s***u
发帖数: 1911 | 44 替天行道 means I am beating the Calvinism for the God |
|
|
s***u
发帖数: 1911 | 46 oh, thank you
I will read it when I have time.
we have parents and spouse and kids. don't tell me I don't know what is
love
see you next time |
|
S*********L
发帖数: 5785 | 47 我已经和他说过不下一百次了，你以为我是没事无缘无故说他呀。他就是坚持我行我素。
我可以和你解释，你至少还能听的进去，对那些又不懂又不听劝的人，坚持无理取闹
的人，我当然可以认为他没有资格和我讨论，况且他是直接跟我贴的，如果是跟你的贴
，你愿意如何做，我不管。 |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 48 你說了很多次，可是人家不認為你說得對，不行嗎？
對不對又不是看說了多少次。
素。 |
|
t*******d
发帖数: 2570 | 49 Let's be honest, "random" in the context of Darwin's theory is not an
assumption. And "lame" is not a scientific criteria to determine whether a
scientific theory is true or not.
Science does not serve to produce theories that satisfy human's ego or
vanity.
Darwin |
|
t*******d
发帖数: 2570 | 50 On the contrary, "randomness" in the Darwin's theory is clearly specified.
It is not specified as a stochastic process. It is specified as mutations
that are not directional and towards generating the surviving species.
in |
|
