Научници - антиеволуционисти

[Guest Alefshin]

Oce Gorane, zasto preskacete i precutkujete detalje iz biografija ovih kreacionista koje ste ovde izlistali?

D. Gish, ciju ste biografiju upravo postavili, je fundamentalni baptista, kako i stoji recimo u clanku na Wiki koji ste preneli ovde, sa izuzetkom tog pasusa, koji je na neki nacin nestao iz vase poruke.

>>> A Methodist from age ten, and later a fundamentalist Baptist, Gish has long held that the Biblical creation story is a historical fact.[4]

Lako je snaci se, to je recenica koja se zavrsava fusnotom 4 u clanku na engleskoj Vikipediji - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish

Нисам ни сумњао да ће Ивица то приметити.

Пази, то су текстови које сам одавно копирао на Видовдан, сад их само преносим овде што значи да шта сам урадио, урадио сам тада. Наиме, у том периоду је од стране кругова који су присталице теорије еволуције( теорија по којој смо настали од мајмуна) организована једна приземна кампања против антиеволуционизма тј. схватања да је Бог створио човека. У тој кампањи се нису бирала средства, па су ти који су учесници исте користили сва могућа средства не би ли попљували аргументе против ТЕ, па сам био врло опрезан јер сам знао да ће `ударити` на чињеницу да већину креациониста чине фундаментални протестанти( у САД). Са друге стране, ту је и линк Википедије па је свако могао комотно да оде на тај линк и да ишчита цео текст. Иначе, у шуми копираних текстова, ово се односи на једва пар њих, колико се сећам, али некоме је то много важније него све остало што пише у свим тим текстовима.

Ти исти научници су, сем тога што су протестанти( што је тамо владајућа хришћанска деноминација), сви листом доктори наука па би било ред да их чујемо шта имају да кажу. Еволуционисти, чије су перјанице а(нти)теисти, их максимално сатанизују, али дај да чујемо њихове аргументе ма колико то некоме не одговарало.

[Срећко Петровић]

Oce Gorane, zasto preskacete i precutkujete detalje iz biografija ovih kreacionista koje ste ovde izlistali?

D. Gish, ciju ste biografiju upravo postavili, je fundamentalni baptista, kako i stoji recimo u clanku na Wiki koji ste preneli ovde, sa izuzetkom tog pasusa, koji je na neki nacin nestao iz vase poruke.

>>> A Methodist from age ten, and later a fundamentalist Baptist, Gish has long held that the Biblical creation story is a historical fact.[4]

Lako je snaci se, to je recenica koja se zavrsava fusnotom 4 u clanku na engleskoj Vikipediji - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish

????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ?????????.

????, ?? ?? ???????? ???? ??? ?????? ??????? ?? ????????, ??? ?? ???? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??????, ?????? ??? ????. ?????, ? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ?????? ??????? ???? ?? ?????????? ??????? ?????????( ??????? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ?? ???????) ???????????? ????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????????????????? ??. ???????? ?? ?? ??? ??????? ??????. ? ??? ??????? ?? ???? ?????? ????????, ?? ?? ?? ???? ?? ???????? ???? ????????? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ????????? ????????? ?????? ??, ?? ??? ??? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?? `???????` ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???????????? ???? ????????????? ???????????( ? ???). ?? ????? ??????, ?? ?? ? ???? ?????????? ?? ?? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ? ?? ?????? ??? ?????. ?????, ? ???? ????????? ????????, ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ???, ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??????? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ? ???? ??? ??????????.

?? ???? ???????? ??, ??? ???? ??? ?? ???????????( ??? ?? ???? ????????? ?????????? ????????????), ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ????. ?????????????, ???? ?? ????????? ?(???)??????, ?? ?????????? ??????????, ??? ??? ?? ?????? ?????? ????????? ?? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ??????????.

Oce Gorane,

Moje ime je Srecko Petrovic a ne Ivica i ja sam se predstavio i imenom i prezimenom u nick-u, i u temi koja je za to predvidjena.

'Iz sume kopiranih tekstova' ja nadjoh da su ovi naucnici, koje ste izlistali na prvoj strani ove teme, heterodoksni, i da medju njima ima i opasnih sektasa.

Zanimljivo mi je to sto vi, kao pravoslavni svestenik, propagirate stavove adventistickih i drugih autora, i to na pravoslavnoj internet-prezentaciji. Moram da priznam da mi je sama ova kombinacija /adventisticki propovednici + pravoslavni svestenik + pravoslavni sajt/ samo po sebi cudna i zbunjujuca, otuda vas molim da razumete i moju reakciju.

Pored Duane Gush-a kog smo vec pomenuli, baptista je (ovo sto sledi su imena naucnika koje ste nabrojali na prvoj strani) i William Dembski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dembski), Phillip E. Johnson je 'elder' u Presbyterian Church (USA) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson), Michael Behe predaje na adventistickom koledzu St. Andrews (http://www.andrews.edu/sem/MT/MT/MT22/#Behe), Jonathan Wells je, ne znam da li cete da mi verujete, clan tzv. 'Munove crkve', kojeg je licno taj Mun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Myung_Moon) 'nadahnuo' da 'unisti darvinizam' (proverite ako mi ne verujete> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Wells_(intelligent_design_advocate)), Stephen C. Meyer se sluzio podvalama, tj. podmetao drugim naucnicima da misle ono sto ne misle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_C._Meyer, pogledajte pod 'Political controversy').

Odnosno Gush-a kojeg smo vec pominjali, ne znam da li znate kakve probleme po skolama i u drustvu u USA izaziva taj njegov radikalizam i fundamentalizam, i da li znate kakva je organizacija taj 'Institute for Creation Research'? Kopija te organizacije, naime, je tzv 'Centar za prirodnjacke /tj. 'kreacionisticke/ studije g. M. Petrovica kod nas. Evo nesto o njemu i toj organizaciji> http://ncseweb.org/creationism/general/ultra-fundamentalism-duane-gish:

In July of 1982, Dr. Gish debated Dr. Russell Doolittle on Public TV. In response to the above argument, Gish claimed that some blood proteins were more similar between bullfrogs and man than between chimpanzees and man. His source was a story told by Garniss Curtis (UC-Berkeley) at the July, 1971 Wenner-Gren conference in Austria. It seems there was a rumor of a study comparing blood proteins of humans and bullfrogs that gave the above result (perhaps from the Transylvanian Academy of Sciences?). Curtis predicted (correctly) that the result would not be published or repeated, because it was a dreadful tragedy — the frog was actually an enchanted prince!

Gish defends himself by saying he thought Curtis was serious! I, for one, believe Gish — he has made a career out of going around telling jokes and calling them science, and I find it easy to believe he can’t tell the difference. This is another example of why you should always require and check the original source for claims made by the Institute for Creation Research. The results are often very interesting! For that matter, check out my sources as well.

Uglavnom, nije mi jasno kakve veze sa nasom verom i Crkvom mogu da imaju ovakvi likovi, recimo onaj iz 'Munove crkve', ili ovi sto se sluze podvalama? Pravoslavni oduvek veruju da je svet stvoren, ali nije mi poznato da se nasa dogmatika igde i ikad bavila pitanjem starosti zemlje, ili genetikom i sl.

Mene, iskreno, zbunjuje to sto se vi zalazete za taj sektaski kreacionizam.

[karadjordje]

Добродошао Срећко и баш ми је мило да те видим 

Мислим да је добро ово што ради отац Горан јер довољно је да читамо о научним ставовима ових људи а не о њиховој вјери.

[Guest I.Stojkovic]

Ja se zovem Ivica, a posto sam misljenja da je veroispovest jedno, a sumiranje snaga za dokazivanjem da je teorija evolucije. eto....takva..., ne vidim problem da se saznaju argumenti i od drugih ljudi, ma kako okarakterisani bili. /

Hvala o.Alefsine, ovo je za mene, iako se zovem Ivica  :)u potpunosti novo i sasvim prijemcivo. do sada su mi jedina saznanj bila sa www.cps.org.rs

[Guest I.Stojkovic]

Dragi Srecko,

Kada ne bi ste znali ko su autori tekstova koji negiraju Darvinovu teoriju evolucije, da li bi prihvatili tvrdnje koje su naveden u tim tekstovima?

[Guest Alefshin]

Oce Gorane,

Moje ime je Srecko Petrovic a ne Ivica i ja sam se predstavio i imenom i prezimenom u nick-u, i u temi koja je za to predvidjena.

???? ?? ?? ?? ??, ? ??? ????? ?????????? ????????? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????????? ????????? ??? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ???????????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ??. ???, ??? ?????? ?? ???? ????, ???? ?? ????????? ???????? ?? ???? ????????? ??????.

'Iz sume kopiranih tekstova' ja nadjoh da su ovi naucnici, koje ste izlistali na prvoj strani ove teme, heterodoksni, i da medju njima ima i opasnih sektasa.

Zanimljivo mi je to sto vi, kao pravoslavni svestenik, propagirate stavove adventistickih i drugih autora, i to na pravoslavnoj internet-prezentaciji. Moram da priznam da mi je sama ova kombinacija /adventisticki propovednici + pravoslavni svestenik + pravoslavni sajt/ samo po sebi cudna i zbunjujuca, otuda vas molim da razumete i moju reakciju.

Pored Duane Gush-a kog smo vec pomenuli, baptista je (ovo sto sledi su imena naucnika koje ste nabrojali na prvoj strani) i William Dembski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dembski), Phillip E. Johnson je 'elder' u Presbyterian Church (USA) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson), Michael Behe predaje na adventistickom koledzu St. Andrews (http://www.andrews.edu/sem/MT/MT/MT22/#Behe), Jonathan Wells je, ne znam da li cete da mi verujete, clan tzv. 'Munove crkve', kojeg je licno taj Mun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Myung_Moon) 'nadahnuo' da 'unisti darvinizam' (proverite ako mi ne verujete> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Wells_(intelligent_design_advocate)), Stephen C. Meyer se sluzio podvalama, tj. podmetao drugim naucnicima da misle ono sto ne misle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_C._Meyer, pogledajte pod 'Political controversy').

Odnosno Gush-a kojeg smo vec pominjali, ne znam da li znate kakve probleme po skolama i u drustvu u USA izaziva taj njegov radikalizam i fundamentalizam, i da li znate kakva je organizacija taj 'Institute for Creation Research'? Kopija te organizacije, naime, je tzv 'Centar za prirodnjacke /tj. 'kreacionisticke/ studije g. M. Petrovica kod nas. Evo nesto o njemu i toj organizaciji> http://ncseweb.org/creationism/general/ultra-fundamentalism-duane-gish:

In July of 1982, Dr. Gish debated Dr. Russell Doolittle on Public TV. In response to the above argument, Gish claimed that some blood proteins were more similar between bullfrogs and man than between chimpanzees and man. His source was a story told by Garniss Curtis (UC-Berkeley) at the July, 1971 Wenner-Gren conference in Austria. It seems there was a rumor of a study comparing blood proteins of humans and bullfrogs that gave the above result (perhaps from the Transylvanian Academy of Sciences?). Curtis predicted (correctly) that the result would not be published or repeated, because it was a dreadful tragedy — the frog was actually an enchanted prince!

Gish defends himself by saying he thought Curtis was serious! I, for one, believe Gish — he has made a career out of going around telling jokes and calling them science, and I find it easy to believe he can’t tell the difference. This is another example of why you should always require and check the original source for claims made by the Institute for Creation Research. The results are often very interesting! For that matter, check out my sources as well.

Uglavnom, nije mi jasno kakve veze sa nasom verom i Crkvom mogu da imaju ovakvi likovi, recimo onaj iz 'Munove crkve', ili ovi sto se sluze podvalama? Pravoslavni oduvek veruju da je svet stvoren, ali nije mi poznato da se nasa dogmatika igde i ikad bavila pitanjem starosti zemlje, ili genetikom i sl.

Mene, iskreno, zbunjuje to sto se vi zalazete za taj sektaski kreacionizam.

????????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ???????? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ?????????. ??????, ?????, ???????? ??????? ????? ????? ?????????? ??? ?????????? ???? ???? ???????? ?????????????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ??????! ????????, ?? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ????? ? ????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???????. ????? ??????? ????, ???? ????? ???????, ?? ???? ????? ??????, ? ????? ?? ???? ???????????? ???, ?? ????? ? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ?????? ??????? ????????? ?????????. ? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ????????? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ???????? ?? ???? ?????. ???????? ?? ?? ?????????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ????????, ? ??????? ??? ????? 100 ???-??????? ??? ?? ????????????? ????????, ??? ?????? ?? ????? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ? ??? ????????????? ?????????? ???????????? ? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ????????. ?????? ? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ?????? ?? ? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ?????????? ?? ???????? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ?????. ?? ?? ????? ?? ???????? ?????? ?????? ???. ?????, ????????, ??????, ???? ???. ???? ??? ?? ???? ??????????? ??? ????????????? ???????? ???????? ?? ?????? ??????? ????? ? ????? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???????, ???? ??????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ?????????? ????? ??? ??????? ????.

????, ?? ??????? ???? ???????? ?? ??????????? ??????????? ?? ????? ?????????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ????????? ???? ???? ? ?? ??????? ??????? ? ???????????. ?????, ????????, ???? ?? ? ?????? ??? ???????? ????? ???????? ????? ?????? ? ????????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????, ? ????????, ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ?????????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ????? ??? ???????????? ??????? ??????? ??????.

? ?? ??? ?? ???????? ??????? ?????? ?? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ?? ??????? `?????? ????????` ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????.

[Срећко Петровић]

?????????? ?????? ? ??? ?? ?? ???? ?? ?? ?????  ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ?????? ? ??????? ????????? ???? ???? ? ?? ? ??????? ?????.

????? ?? ???????????? ?????.??, ?????? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ???????? "?????? ???????" ?? "????", ??? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ???? ??. ?? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ?????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ? ?. ?????: ?????? ??????? ??????? ?????????? ?? ?????? ? ????????? ????? ????.?????, ??? ?????? ? ??????? ??????? ????????? ?? ??????? ?????? ? ??????? ????????? ????? ? ??? ??????. ???? ?? ???????? ???????? (???? ????? ???????????? ? ??????), ?? ??? ??? ? ??????.

[Срећко Петровић]

Dragi Srecko,Kada ne bi ste znali ko su autori tekstova koji negiraju Darvinovu teoriju evolucije, da li bi prihvatili tvrdnje koje su naveden u tim tekstovima?

????? ?????,?????? ?? ?????? ????????, ??? ??? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????? ????? 5-6.000 ?????? (? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?????) ? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ?? 6 ???? ??????? ?? 24 ???? (??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????), ??????? ?? ?? ???.??? ??????????? ????????? ????? ??????? ??????? ?? ?? ?????? ?? ?????? ? ??????? ?????????, ???? ?? ??????????, ??. ?????????????????, ???? ?? ???????????, ??. "young earth" ???????. ???? ???? ?????? ???????.????, ?? ????? ?? ?????????? ????? ? ???????? ????? ?? ????????? 6 ???? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ???????????? ??????. ?? ?????????? ???, ???? ?? ??? ???????? ?? ?? ????????? ???????? ? ???? ???????? 4. ?????????, ? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ????? "?????".??????????? ??, ?? ??????? ?? ???????? (? ????? ??????), ??? ?? ????, ?????? ???????????, ?????????, ???????? ? ??. ?????????? ??????????, ? ????? ???? ?? ?? ????, ?? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ????????????, ????? ????????? ???? ????????? "????????" ???????? ????? ???.

[Срећко Петровић]

???? ?? ?? ?? ??,

??????? ?? ???????? ??? ??????, ??? ??? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ???? ????????? ?? "?????????? ???????"  

? ??? ????? ?????????? ????????? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????????? ????????? ??? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ???????????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ??. ???, ??? ?????? ?? ???? ????, ???? ?? ????????? ???????? ?? ???? ????????? ??????.

????? ?., ??? ?? ???? ???????, ?????? ???????? ? ?????, ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??????????, ???? ??????????? ?? ? ?? ???, ???? ?? ?? ??????? ??? ?? ???????. ???? ??????? ?? ???? ???????, ??????????.

????????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ???????? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ?????????.

??? ??? ??? ???????, ??? ??????? ?? ???????????? ?????? ?????????? ??. ????? ???? ?? ?????????? ????? ? ????? ??????? ????????? ???, ???????? ??? ?? ?? ??????? ???????? ?????? ?????, ????????? ?? ??? ???????? ?? ??? ?????????:

???????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???????? ?? ??? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ?? ?????????? D. Gish-?, ? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? (http://www.svetijakov.org/forum/index.php/topic,265.msg6553.html#msg6553).

?? ?????????? ??????????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ?? ????? ???????? ? ?? ?? ??????????, ?? ?? ?? ?????? ?????????, ? ????????, ??????? ????????? ??????? ??? ???????? ???? ????????????, ?? ?? "??? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ???" (http://www.svetijakov.org/forum/index.php/topic,265.msg6584.html#msg6584).

???? ??????? ?????? ?????? ?? ???? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ????????? ????????? ??? ????????, ?????????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ???????? ??? ? ??????????, ? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ? ??????? ??????? ?????? ?????, ?? ?????? (http://www.svetijakov.org/forum/index.php/topic,265.msg6626.html#msg6626).

??? ???????? ??? ???? ???????? ??????????, ?? ???? ??? ?? ?????. ???????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ??????????? ????????????? ? ??? ???????????? + ??????????? ????????? ?? ???????????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ???????? ?????? ????? ? ?????????.

?? ????????, ????? ???? ??? ??? ? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ? "????? ???" ??? ???????? ???? ????????????, ?????? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ???????? ???????????? ???? ????????? ???????? ?????? ? ?????????? ???? ?? ?????? ??????? ?? ?? ????????? ????? ?????, ? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ????? ????????. ??, ???? ?????.

??????, ?????, ???????? ??????? ????? ????? ?????????? ??? ?????????? ???? ???? ???????? ?????????????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ??????! ????????, ?? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ????? ? ????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???????.

? ????? ??? ???? ?? ????, ???. ????? ???? ???????? ??????? ?? ???????? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????????? - ????? ???? ??????, ??? ???????????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ??? ??, ??? ??????????? ?????????, ???-???, ?? ?? ???????? ????.

???????? ?? ?? ?????????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ????????, ? ??????? ??? ????? 100 ???-??????? ??? ?? ????????????? ????????, ??? ?????? ?? ????? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ? ??? ????????????? ?????????? ???????????? ? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ????????.

? ????. ?????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?????????? ? ??????? ????????? ????????-???????? ??? ?? ??????????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?????? ???????????? ????? (=??????????), ??? ?? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????, ?? ?? ?? ???? ??????????? ? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??????? ??????? (=??????????), ??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????, ??? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ?? ????, ??? ???? ?? ?? ?? ????? ??????????

?????? ? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ?????? ?? ? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ?????????? ?? ???????? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ?????. ?? ?? ????? ?? ???????? ?????? ?????? ???. ?????, ????????, ??????, ???? ???. ???? ??? ?? ???? ??????????? ??? ?????????????

??????? ?? ?? ????? - ??? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ????????? ? ????? ?????? ???????, ????????? ????????? ???????? ? ??????.

??? ?? ??? ?? ????? - ?? ?? ????? ?? ???????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???????? ???? ?? ??????????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????????

???????? ???????? ?? ?????? ??????? ????? ? ????? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???????, ???? ??????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ?????????? ????? ??? ??????? ????.

??????, ? ???? ???? ????????? ?????????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ??????? ?????, ?????????, ????????? ???????? ??????? ???. ????? ?? ?????? ????? ? ?????? ?????? ??????, ?????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ???????? ????????

????, ?? ??????? ???? ???????? ?? ??????????? ??????????? ?? ????? ?????????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ????????? ???? ???? ? ?? ??????? ??????? ? ???????????.

???? ?? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????? ??????? ?? ??????????? ?????, ??? ?? ?? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ???????? ???? ????, ? ??????? ?? ??????? ???????? ? ????????? ???? ????? ????????? ??, ? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????? ? ???????? ??????????? ????, ??? ?? ? ????? ???????????? ???? ?? ????????? ???????????? ???????.

? ?? ??? ?? ???????? ??????? ?????? ?? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ?? ??????? `?????? ????????` ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????.

??? ????? ??????? ????? ???????. ??????? ?????????? ???? ?? ?????? ??????????? ?? ???????.???, ????????? ?? ?????????? ? ??? ?? ??? ????. ?? ??????? ?? ?? '?????? ????????', ? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????????

[Guest Alefshin]

Питање је сувише уопштено, али ако се мисли на оне који тврде да је земља стара 5-6.000 година (а има их који тако тврде) и да је Бог свет створио за 6 дана трајања по 24 сата (има и оних који тако тврде), наравно да не бих.

Од горепоменутих научника dr David Berlinski, dr William Dembski, dr Michael Behe, dr Michael Denton, а мислим и dr Phillip E. Johnson уопште нису заступници теорије о младој земљи, они су једноставно крајње критични и скептични према ТЕ. Џонсон на почетку своје одличне књиге `Дарвин на суду` отворено каже читаоцу да не узима у обзир његова верска убеђења приликом читања књиге и заиста их нигде и не износи. Исто важи и за Бихија, Дентона и многе друге, њихове књиге су пуне интересантних информација и вреди их прочитати и проширити видике.

Као што знамо, са друге стране, еволуционисти су такође припадници различитих конфесија, а добар део њих су и агностици или атеисти-штавише, они најгласнији су антитеисти тј. отворени богоборци.

Православни су, за разлику од суботара (и неких других), бар до сада, питања астрономије, геологије, билогије и сл. препуштали научницима, и хвала Богу да је тако, па до сада нисмо чинили као римокатолици, нисмо прогонили нити спаљивали "безбожне" научнике попут њих.

Не знам о каквим црним прогонима се овде говори, ником нормалном то не пада на памет нити је то ико помињао-овде се ради о томе да се пропрате дела оних научника који су критични према теорији еволуције. Цркву чине слободни људи, па према томе ко жели слепо да прихвати теорију по којој смо настали од мајмуна, а ћелија се самоформирала слободно нека изволи то, нико му не брани-али нека дозволи нама који желимо о томе и да размишљамо да чујемо другу страну. Зато сам изнео имена оних научника чије научне радове препоручујем-да чујемо и другу страну, чему страх од тога( у ствари, ја знам одакле страх од тога-ТЕ је климава где год је `дотакнеш`)? Нико овде не позива на некритичко и слепо прихватање свега што поменути научници тврде( као што многи слепо прихватају ТЕ), већ да чујемо и аргументе против ТЕ јер тек када се исти сагледају види се колико је та теорија у ствари климава.

Владика далматински Фотије:

Ovi stavovi jasno pokazuju jedno, a to je iz koga duhovnog miljea i iz koje intelektualne branše dolazi gđa Biserko. Retorika koju ona koristi je dobro poznata retorika našoj Crkvi i pravoslavnim Srbima uopšte, pošto su od nosilaca te i takve ideologije stradali zajedno od Drugog svetskog rata do danas. Gđa Biserko i njoj slične «crne udovice», predstavljaju jedan od poslednjih bastiona toga staroga sistema, koji je svoju «demokratiju» u vreme komunističke diktature (demokratije proleterijata) potvrdio mnogobrojnim logorima, gulazima i Golim otocima. Poseban «podvig» im je bio progon Srpske Crkve u svim sferama Njenoga života, uključujući tu i crkvenu svetosavsku prosvetu, koju je valjalo zbrisati sa lica zemlje i na njeno mesto ustoličiti antihrišćanski komunizam i darvinizam.

http://www.kim.sr.gov.yu/cms/item/news/rs.html?view=story&id=6673&sectionId=8

[Guest Alefshin]

Henry Morris

Henry Madison Morris, Ph.D. (October 6, 1918 – February 25, 2006) was an American young earth creationist and Christian apologist, educated primarily in the field of hydraulic engineering. He was one of the founders of the Creation Research Society and the Institute of Creation Research, and is considered by many to be "the father of modern creation science."

Contents

* 1 Biography

* 2 Beliefs

o 2.1 Theory of Evolution

o 2.2 Philosophy of science

* 3 Controversy and criticism

* 4 Quotes

* 5 Bibliography

o 5.1 Morris' writings

o 5.2 Historical background and assessments

* 6 References

* 7 External links

Biography

Morris grew up in Texas in the 1920s and 1930s. He graduated from Rice University with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering in 1939. Shortly afterwards he became a Christian, personally holding to the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy.

He married Mary Louise on January 24, 1940, and they later had six children. After his graduation in 1939, and through 1942, he was a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission. He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946. In 1946 he wrote a short book entitled That You Might Believe (1946), in which he presumed to answer the challenges of evolution with respect to his beliefs in inerrancy and creationism.

From 1946 through 1951, he worked at the University of Minnesota, where he was awarded a master's degree in hydraulics (1948) and a Ph.D. in hydraulic engineering (1950).

In 1951 he became a professor of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, also serving as chair of the department, holding that position until 1956. He then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University, 1956–1957, after which he served as was professor of hydraulic engineering and in civil engineering at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, also serving as the department chair.

In 1961, Morris and John C. Whitcomb wrote The Genesis Flood, which advocated creationism and flood geology. The book was influenced by the early 20th century creationist George McCready Price, a Seventh-day Adventist schoolteacher and attempted to support many of his arguments with appeals to science. In 1963 Morris founded the Creation Research Society with nine others. In 1970, he founded the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). His son John D. Morris took over the presidency of ICR when his father retired.

While the greater bulk of his published writings address creation science and evolution themes, he had also written Many Infallible Proofs, and The Bible Has The Answer, which are both works of general Christian apologetics.

On February 1, 2006, Morris suffered a minor stroke and was hospitalized. Reports from ICR said that his mind was functioning very well, but he could not stand without getting dizzy. Morris was moved from the hospital to a rehabilitation facility near his son's home (and ICR) in Santee, California where he died.[1]

Beliefs

Theory of Evolution

Morris wrote:

* "The fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. It is their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a Creator. Evolutionism is thus intrinsically an atheistic religion." [2]

* "The of particles-to-people evolution does not meet the criteria of a scientific theory." [3]

* "(T)he theory of evolution was devised on top of the tower of Babel by the Babylonian king, Nimrod, and Satan." -- The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth (1972)

Philosophy of science

Morris made a distinction between "operational science" and "origins science". He believed that operational science cannot be used to prove or disprove God's creative act, but that evidence of past events must be viewed through an interpretive framework. For example, in his book Scientific Creationism Morris stated:

" ... it must also be emphasized that it is impossible to prove scientifically any particular concept of origins to be true. This is obvious from the fact that the essence of the scientific method is experimental observation and repeatability. A scientific investigator, be he ever so resourceful and brilliant, can neither observe nor repeat origins!

This means that, though it is important to have a philosophy of origins, it can only be achieved by faith, not by sight."

In this, Morris set himself against many philosophers of science such as Robert Pennock and Michael Ruse. These philosophers see no important distinction between past and present data, but claim to use falsifiability and testability as the demarcation criteria for science. Intelligent design proponent Stephen Meyer agrees with Morris.

Even though Morris claimed that science cannot completely answer the question of whether the Bible's creation story is literally and historically true, he had written several books about scientific evidence that he believed fits better into a creationist framework than the mainstream science framework. Many creationists (for example, Answers in Genesis) have followed Morris' lead.

The mainstream scientific community rejected both his philosophy of science and his evidence in favor of creationism as pseudoscience, and claimed that Morris' representation of evolution as a complete religious system is a straw man. Morris' position had also been the subject of debate among Evangelical scholars of the Old Testament and among Evangelicals working in various fields of science.

Morris also strongly defended the use of the King James Bible but he was not a member of the King-James-Only Movement [4]

Controversy and criticism

The work The Genesis Flood by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris has been criticized for taking quotes out of context and misquoting sources.[5] For example, in one instance, a source which read "the sea which vanished so many million years ago" was quoted as "the sea which vanished so many years ago."[5]

John G. Solum has criticized the work for being inaccurate.[6] Solum noted "Whitcomb and Morris are mistaken about the nature of the rocks associated with thrust faults. Their claim about fossils is based on a YEC misunderstanding of how rocks are dated relative to each other, and how the geologic column was constructed."[6] In fact Solum noted, "Morris' explanation of relative dating is not "somewhat oversimplified" it is entirely incorrect."[6]

Morris theorized in his book The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth (1972) that the craters of the moon were caused by a cosmic battle between the forces of Satan and the armies of the archangel Michael. From the biblical point of view, this is speculative.

When bringing up Morris' claims of racism in evolutionary thinking, it has been questioned if Morris himself showed racism for asserting that the descendants of Ham "were marked especially for secular service to mankind".[7]

In 1991, Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS) granted the Institute for Creation Research accreditation. This created controversy because the chairman of TRACS' board of directors was Henry Morris, the founder of ICR."[8] Four years later, TRACS' government recognition was put on probation for 18 months until it complied with staff and accreditation changes.

Massimo Pigliucci criticized Morris for heading the ICR, and for allowing it to leave out and ignore material from its self-published works that interferes with its "mission" and "beliefs".[9] Pigliucci also criticized Morris' intrepretation of thermodynamics.[10]

Quotes

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Henry M. Morris

* "The only way we can determine the true age of the earth is for God to tell us what it is. And since he has told us, very plainly, in the Holy Scriptures that it is several thousand years of age, and no more, that ought to settle all basic questions of terrestrial chronology." (Remarkable Birth, p. 94)

* "When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data."

Bibliography

Morris' writings

Morris wrote or edited some forty books, including:

* That You Might Believe, self published, 1946

* (with co-author John C. Whitcomb) The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications, Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing, Philadelphia, 1961. (ISBN 0-8010-6004-4)

* Applied Hydraulics in Engineering, Ronald Press, New York, 1963.

* Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science, Craig Press, Nutley, New Jersey, 1970. (ISBN 0-8010-5906-2)

* The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth, Dimension Books, Minneapolis, 1972. (ISBN 0-87123-485-8)

* Many Infallible Proofs, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, 1974. (ISBN 0-89051-005-9)

* (ed) Scientific Creationism, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, 1974. (ISBN 0-89051-003-2)

* The Genesis Record, A scientific and devotional commentary on the book of beginnings, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1976. (ISBN 0-8010-6004-4)

* and Martin E. Clark, The Bible Has The Answer, revised edition, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, 1976. (ISBN 0-89051-018-0)

* and Duane T. Gish (eds) The Battle for Creation, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, 1976.

* The Scientific Case for Creation, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, 1977. (ISBN 0-89051-037-7)

* The Troubled Waters of Evolution, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, 1982. (ISBN 0-89051-087-3)

* and Donald H. Rohrer (eds) Creation, the cutting edge, Creation Life Publishers, San Diego, 1982.

* History of Modern Creationism, Master Books, San Diego, 1984. (ISBN 0-89051-102-0)

* and Gary E. Parker, What is Creation Science?, revised edition, Master Books, El Cajon, 1987. (ISBN 0-89051-081-4)

* The Long War Against God: the history and impact of the creation/evolution conflict, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1989. (ISBN 0-89051-291-4)

* God and the Nations, Master Books, Green Forest, 2002. (ISBN 0-89051-389-9)

* The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, Master Books, Green Forest, 2002. (ISBN 0-89051-369-4)

Historical background and assessments

* Ken Campbell, "Some Problems with Creation Science," St. Mark's Review 137 (Autumn 1989) pp. 12-19.

* Livingstone, David N., Darwin's Forgotten Defenders: The Encounter Between Evangelical Theology and Evolutionary Thought, William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1987.

* Moore, James R., The Post-Darwinian Controversies: A Study of the Protestant Struggle to Come to Terms with Darwin in Great Britain and America 1870-1900, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979.

* Numbers, Ronald L., The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1993.

* Numbers, Ronald L., Darwinism Comes To America, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1998.

* Stempien, Richard., and Sarah Coleman, "Processes of Persuasion: The Case of Creation Science," Review of Religious Research 27 (2) (1985) pp. 169-177.

* Van de Fliert, J. R., "Fundamentalism and Fundamentals of Geology," International Reformed Review 32/33 (April 1968), pp. 5-27.

* Young, Davis A., "Some Practical Geological Problems in the Application of the Mature Creation Doctrine," Westminster Theological Journal 35 (1972-73) pp. 268-280.

* Young, Davis A., "Another Look at Mature Creationism," Westminster Theological Journal 37 (3) (1975) pp. 384-389.

* Youngblood, Ronald F. (ed) The Genesis Debate: Persistent Questions about Creation and the Flood, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1990.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Morris

[Срећко Петровић]

?????? ?? ?????? ????????, ??? ??? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????? ????? 5-6.000 ?????? (? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?????) ? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ?? 6 ???? ??????? ?? 24 ???? (??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????), ??????? ?? ?? ???.

?? ????????????? ???????? dr David Berlinski, dr William Dembski, dr Michael Behe, dr Michael Denton, ? ?????? ? dr Phillip E. Johnson ?????? ???? ?????????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????, ??? ?? ??????????? ?????? ???????? ? ????????? ????? ??. ?????? ?? ??????? ????? ??????? ????? `?????? ?? ????` ???????? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ????? ? ????? ?????? ?????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ????? ? ?????? ?? ????? ? ?? ??????. ???? ???? ? ?? ??????, ??????? ? ????? ?????, ?????? ????? ?? ???? ????????????? ??????????? ? ????? ?? ????????? ? ????????? ??????.

??? ??? ?????, ?? ????? ??????, ????????????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ?????????? ?????????, ? ????? ??? ??? ?? ? ????????? ??? ???????-???????, ??? ??????????? ?? ?????????? ??. ???????? ?????????.

Ja sam odgovorio, oce Gorane, na vasu poruku (i takodje sam vam postavio nekoliko konkretnih pitanja), a ova poruka koju citirate je odgovor na pitanje koje mi je postavio korisnik I. Stojkovic, ovde:

http://www.svetijakov.org/forum/index.php/topic,265.msg6660.html#msg6660

Njegovo pitanje je, kako sam ga ja razumeo, bilo suvise uopsteno, nije se odnosilo na naucnike koje popularisete na ovoj temi, vec je glasilo, da podsetim, ovako:

Dragi Srecko,

Kada ne bi ste znali ko su autori tekstova koji negiraju Darvinovu teoriju evolucije, da li bi prihvatili tvrdnje koje su naveden u tim tekstovima?

Evo pogledacu koji od ovih naucnika koje pominjete zastupa tu teoriju o 'mladoj zemlji', pa cu javiti ovde.

Zastupate li vi teoriju o 'mladoj zemlji', oce Gorane?

Elem, za ovog poslednjeg kojeg nam upravo predstavljate valjda je izvesno da zastupa tu teoriju: "H. M. Morris was an American young earth creationist" - kako pise u clanku koji ste nam preneli ovde.

Nego, kakav komentar imate na ovaj pasus iz tog clanka koji ste zalepili na ovoj temi (podvucicu zanimljive delove da bi vam bilo preglednije):

Controversy and criticism

The work The Genesis Flood by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris has been criticized for taking quotes out of context and misquoting sources.[5] For example, in one instance, a source which read "the sea which vanished so many million years ago" was quoted as "the sea which vanished so many years ago."[5]

John G. Solum has criticized the work for being inaccurate.[6] Solum noted "Whitcomb and Morris are mistaken about the nature of the rocks associated with thrust faults. Their claim about fossils is based on a YEC misunderstanding of how rocks are dated relative to each other, and how the geologic column was constructed."[6] In fact Solum noted, "Morris' explanation of relative dating is not "somewhat oversimplified" it is entirely incorrect."[6]

Morris theorized in his book The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth (1972) that the craters of the moon were caused by a cosmic battle between the forces of Satan and the armies of the archangel Michael. From the biblical point of view, this is speculative.

When bringing up Morris' claims of racism in evolutionary thinking, it has been questioned if Morris himself showed racism for asserting that the descendants of Ham "were marked especially for secular service to mankind".[7]

In 1991, Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS) granted the Institute for Creation Research accreditation. This created controversy because the chairman of TRACS' board of directors was Henry Morris, the founder of ICR."[8] Four years later, TRACS' government recognition was put on probation for 18 months until it complied with staff and accreditation changes.

Massimo Pigliucci criticized Morris for heading the ICR, and for allowing it to leave out and ignore material from its self-published works that interferes with its "mission" and "beliefs".[9] Pigliucci also criticized Morris' intrepretation of thermodynamics.[10]

Predlazem da konsultujete vrlo interesantne citate o 'naucnosti', tacnije pseudo-naucnosti i metodama doticnog, na adresi koja je lako dostupna svima:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Henry_M._Morris

Obratite paznju na sledece citate iz dela H. M. Morris-a:

"The only way we can determine the true age of the earth is for God to tell us what it is. And since he has told us, very plainly, in the Holy Scriptures that it is several thousand years of age, and no more, that ought to settle all basic questions of terrestrial chronology." (The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth, Bethany House Pub 1972, p. 94)

Koja je ovo nauka u pitanju, ako mozete da nam pojasnite?

"When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data."

Sta reci? Bavi li se Sveto Pismo izlaganjem naucnih cinjenica, ili necim drugim? Koja je ovde nauka u pitanju, o. Gorane?

[Guest Alefshin]

Zastupate li vi teoriju o 'mladoj zemlji', oce Gorane?

Заступам антиеволуционизам-дакле, за разлику од тебе који слепо прихваташ ТЕ као неспорну и научну и теорију која се слаже са хришћанством. О много ствари уосталом о којима ти пишеш одавно је писано( на видовдану) па немам намере због тебе специјално да се понављам, тако да и не очекуј то. ТЕ се не слаже са хришћанством јер негира библијског Адама( а тиме посредно и Новог Адама, а то је Христос) који је по старозаветном извештају живео 930 год. Ова климава теорија говори о некаквих око 300.000 година постојања homo sapiensa док библијски извештај егзактно( овај роди онога са толико година, онај роди онога са толико година итд.) говори о највише неколико хиљада десетина година. Затим, претходница ТЕ, абиогенеза, је мистерија( наравно, ми верујући знамо да ће то вечито и остати) за еволуционисте, пошто је сумануто веровати да је праћелија настала слепим случајем( управо то тврди абиогенеза, сама реч каже `настанак живог из неживог`)-то може да верује само неко ко не зна како функционише ћелија као и то да је запањујуће комплексна. Наравно, нема потребе да кажем да без доказане абиогенезе цела теорија пада у воду. Уопштено, та теорија је настала у периоду владавине позитивистичких и натуралистичких тенденција, у времену дакле крајње неопрезног, скоро безусловног поверења у науку која `може да реши све` па и настанак живота. Дакле, она је натуралистичка и материјалистичка( у искључивом смислу) по самој својој суштини и поставља се питање како може као таква  да буде у складу са хришћанством.

[Срећко Петровић]

Zastupate li vi teoriju o 'mladoj zemlji', oce Gorane?

???????? ?????????????????-?????, ?? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ????????? ?? ??? ???????? ? ?????? ? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????????????. ? ????? ?????? ???????? ? ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ??????( ?? ?????????) ?? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ?????????? ?? ?? ????????, ???? ?? ? ?? ?????? ??. ?? ?? ?? ????? ?? ???????????? ??? ?????? ?????????? ?????( ? ???? ???????? ? ????? ?????, ? ?? ?? ???????) ???? ?? ?? ????????????? ????????? ????? 930 ???. ??? ??????? ??????? ?????? ? ???????? ??? 300.000 ?????? ????????? homo sapiensa ??? ????????? ???????? ????????( ???? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ??????, ???? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???.) ?????? ? ??????? ???????? ?????? ???????? ??????. ?????, ??????????? ??, ??????????, ?? ?????????( ???????, ?? ???????? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ? ??????) ?? ?????????????, ????? ?? ???????? ???????? ?? ?? ????????? ??????? ?????? ????????( ?????? ?? ????? ??????????, ???? ??? ???? `???????? ????? ?? ???????`)-?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????????? ?????? ??? ? ?? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????????. ???????, ???? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???????? ?????????? ???? ??????? ???? ? ????. ????????, ?? ??????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ????????? ??????????????? ? ??????????????? ??????????, ? ??????? ????? ?????? ??????????, ????? ??????????? ???????? ? ????? ???? `???? ?? ???? ???` ?? ? ???????? ??????. ?????, ??? ?? ?????????????? ? ????????????????( ? ?????????? ??????) ?? ????? ?????? ??????? ? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ?????  ?? ???? ? ?????? ?? ????????????.

??? ??????,

?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???????? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ??????????. ??? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? "?????" ????????? ??? ????? ???, ??????? ?? ???????.

??????? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ????????? ? ???????? ????? ???????. ? ??? ? ????, ???? ?? ??? ???? ????????? ?????? ??????? ??? ???? ?? ????? ??????.

?? ????????????, ???? ???? ??????? ? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ????, ???????? ???? ?? ??????? ??. ?????, ?? ?? ? ????.

?? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???????? ???? ???????????? ? ??? ??????? ??????? ??????, ?????????? ?????, ?? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?? ??????????, ????????? ???? ? ???????? ?? ad hominem. ???? ????, ????? ?? ?? ?????? ???????? ??????? ??????, ????? ?? ??? ????? ???????, ? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ?????????? ?? ???? ???????

??? ????? ??????? - ? ??????? - ? ??? ??????????? ???? ??????? - ? ??????????? ?? - ?????????? ?? ??????? ??? ???????, ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ????? ????? ? ??? ??????????

??? ?? ??????? ???? ?????? ????, ???? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???????????????, ? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??????? - ??? ??? ????? ??????? ??????????? ????????? (???. ????. ?. ????????, ??? ??? ??? ??. ?. ?????) ?????? ???????? ???????? ?? ?????????? ?????????? - ??? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ???????? ????? ????????. ? ??????????,

?????? ?.

[Guest Светлана]

И овако и онако не може се научно доказати, све су теорије, па сад како ко верује у односу на сваку теорију. Зато мени није јасно зашто се позивати на Епископе који верују у једну или другу теорију. Је л се то сад полако кристалише проблем око тога шта је Православно веровање, па да се и на Сабору одлучује у шта Црква верује?