"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a perpetual covenant. It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed."
--Exodus 31:15-17
2007-06-21 01:16:16 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
No. It is a sign that some people have common sense.
There is no creation research. Creationists have no real theory, so there is nothing to test. Because it is defined so poorly, there is no evidence that could support it or refute it.
2007-06-21 01:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by nondescript 7 · 8⤊ 0⤋
Space exploration. The space project created many technologies now used everyday by common people the worl over. It is argued that the Economic Dominance of the USin the 1970's - 1980's was in large part due to reserach that came directly out of the space program. If we put significant funds into this including the 100 year spaceship concept then it would surprise almost anyone how beneficial the technical developments could be. By the way new theory shows that a Warp Drive might actual be possible with energy requirements within our current abilities to produce!!! Imagine if we were able to start actively mining the asteroid belt. Total wealth of or the world would be dramatically increased. The first nation taht is capable of doing this will become the next dominant economic power on Earth. If a second third and fourth nation are not able to quickly follow suit, then that first nation would rapid dominate the globe in many more ways than mere economics. This is the way that human history has worked since the begginning of time. Here are some small examples to consider. Greek Civilization - Powerful navy expanded thorughout the mediiteranean and elements of greek culture spread at that time still dominate the western world. British Empire - Powerful navy - became the economic leader of theworld at the time. English today is the most widely spoken language in the world. Several nations which due to multiple native tongues use english as their formal national language due in large part to this fact. (Phillipines and India for example) There are many other examples. China and the Middle kingdom - perio of growth and prosperity Large trading fleets etc. Alexander the Great and the development of the phalanx. Roman empire and the first professional military of the period. Naitons with technical leadership frame the world and the human experience. Naitons that fail to lead become footnotes in history.
2016-05-21 09:18:09 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not sure about 'impending damnation' especially since Christianity is a growing religion in the USA.
Regarding the refusal to fund creation research: It’s a circular argument that Atheists use. Creation is unscientific therefore there should be no funding put towards it (because we don't want it to be scientific).
Atheists want creation to be kept out of scientific studies so that peer review literature and research can't be done so that they don't have to take creation seriously because it lacks 'scientific evidence' (so they claim).
2007-06-21 01:25:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gee, it must be because I'm stupid, but I can't think of what this "research" would be--perhaps some kind of bureaucratic bible study? Or extended prayer breakfasts? Or watching anti-Semite Gibson's "Passion" exploitation flick on Air Force One, when the nitwit in the Oval Office is flying to Crawford with Karl Rowe on one side of him and Ted the Ex-Gay Fundy on the other? Research?
2007-06-21 03:21:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its probably a good thing. There would probably be complaints about the government becoming too involved in religion if they did fund it. Does the government fund evolution research? If they don't, then there is probably no reason for them to fund creation research.
2007-06-21 01:27:54 · answer #5 · answered by comer59 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creation, of Create/Make, is "Old", of Old/New.
So is Creator of Creator/Maker Old of Old/New.
God didn't say let us create man.
God did say: let us MAKE man.
What's old and faulty is "ready to vanish": Hebrews 8;
And what's old & faulty "shall vanish": 1Corinthians 13.
Pst: the 'dead sea' is rapidly vanishing now. Hell-o!
So is the Horeb-bull Mtn that I told to go jump into it.
The day of the LORD is darkness, and not light: Amos 5.
That God is light(only), and no darkness at all: 1John1:5.
So then, obviously God isn't LORD in a Noah's Ark story;
Not unless you @ss u me 2 = 7 & law(death) = grace(life).
2007-06-21 01:32:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gonna go with "no" on that one.
See, it's that kind of reasoning that led the late Jerry Falwell to say that 9/11 was caused by the gays and the ACLU, and Pat Robertson to say that Katrina was justice.
2007-06-21 01:19:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
No, it's a sign that even the government recognizes that it's all nonsense.
2007-06-21 01:18:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
Why waste the tax payers money that won't have any results.
2007-06-21 02:27:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What does your question have to do with the verse you quoted? I don't see the connection.
2007-06-21 01:20:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋