|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 11:47:09 AM
|
|
|
SoldierInGodsArmy
Posts: 19
Joined: 5/8/2008
Status: offline
|
I'm a Christian and I accept Evolution.
99.98% Biologists accept Evolution and 70% of those people believe in God according polls.
Stop going to these Creationists websites and finding all this nonsense disproving Evolution because most if it is doodoo. You all who choose to be willfully ignorant are throwing gasoline on the fire of atheism. You make us look like idiots to those who don't believe in a god, so quit plugging your ears and going to creationistevolutionconspiracy.com and look at the facts.
Here is a basic intro to Evolution by a CHRISTIAN biologist *gasp*.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpNeGuuuvTY
< Message edited by SoldierInGodsArmy -- 5/24/2008 1:21:44 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 8:49:38 PM
|
|
|
evry1needsgod
Posts: 500
Status: offline
|
I'm reluctant to reply to your post. You seem very bitter and angry against your fellow Christians, assuming you truly are a Christian, and not an Atheist pretending to be a Christian to make Christians look bad (I've seen this first hand and have since become very skeptical). I suggest you read God's Word, if you truly are a Christian, and base your decisions off of something that is PERFECT, unlike science, which is constantly proving itself wrong. One day an issue is accepted as FACT, and the next it is proven wrong, then brushed under the rug so no one notices. If you are really a Christian, stop relying on your finite human mind to explain everything. God has the answers, not you. He was there in the beginning, not you, so I suggest reading His Word and let it say what it says. Don't put words in it's mouth. And I also suggest you find a more reliable poll, because the one you used its just wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 9:33:48 PM
|
|
|
DreadPirateRandy
Posts: 8754
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SoldierInGodsArmy
Evolution...
quote:
is doodoo.
Hope that clears things up.
_____________________________
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, are of imagination all compact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 9:41:54 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3267
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
You all who choose to be willfully ignorant are throwing gasoline on the fire of atheism. The fire of atheism needs no gasoline, SIGA! Perhaps your Christianity has not matured enough to understand human depravity resulting from the Fall. May I suggest Romans 5:12-21 for your consideration.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 10:19:21 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
If you are really a Christian, stop relying on your finite human mind to explain everything. God has the answers, not you. He was there in the beginning, not you, so I suggest reading His Word and let it say what it says. Don't put words in it's mouth. And I also suggest you find a more reliable poll, because the one you used its just wrong.
I do read the scriptures. I accept the truth of scripture. I let scripture say what it says. And I am a Christian who accepts evolution----as do most Christians.
If you have a problem with evolution because of the scriptures, I suggest it is because you need some help understanding the scriptures.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 10:23:45 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
You all who choose to be willfully ignorant are throwing gasoline on the fire of atheism. The fire of atheism needs no gasoline, SIGA! Perhaps your Christianity has not matured enough to understand human depravity resulting from the Fall. May I suggest Romans 5:12-21 for your consideration.
Evolution is not atheism. Depravity has nothing to do with evolution or science generally. Human alienation from God, so well described in scripture, is not contradicted in any way by evolution.
It is possible to be a Christian, even a good Calvinist Christian, and accept evolution. I know personally many of the teachers in our Reformed theological school who train the teaching elders and ministers of Word and Sacrament. They do not find it necessary to be negative about evolution in order to teach solid Reformed theology, including sola scriptura.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 10:46:17 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3267
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
If you have a problem with evolution because of the scriptures, I suggest it is because you need some help understanding the scriptures. Then, by all means gluadys, enlighten us with just one Scripture passage that even remotely suggests universal common descent over hundreds of millions of years. I certainly would not want to be part of a *gasp* conspiracy to silence truth!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/24/2008 11:38:14 PM
|
|
|
evry1needsgod
Posts: 500
Status: offline
|
quote:
Then, by all means gluadys, enlighten us with just one Scripture passage that even remotely suggests universal common descent over hundreds of millions of years. I certainly would not want to be part of a *gasp* conspiracy to silence truth!
You know Dr., as much as you or I ask this question (and I know you've asked it countless times), they fail to present any decent, subjective scripture worthy of consideration to support their opinion. After finding themselves trapped in this corner, they resort to interpreting verse contrary to their context. They use "Creationists" verses (Genesis 1-3 is a start) and say "Well, that might not necessarily mean EXACTLY that" and so on. They make God's own words out to be the most relative, touchy-feely, says what I want it to say, CONFUSING book over written. The last time I checked, God was not the author of confusion, right? If God said He made man from the dust of the ground, and women by man's rib, then He did. No questions asked. If Evolution were true, no female existed thousands, even millions, of years before Adam was created...so how on earth did his kind survive? Did he resort to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah to reproduce, if it were possible? Heaven forbid....
quote:
And I am a Christian who accepts evolution----as do most Christians.
I don't know what Christians you talk to, but perhaps you should broaden your horizons?
quote:
Evolution is not atheism.
By definition, no. By social consequences and usage, yes. First of all (and this doesn't prove anything...it just "adds to the fire") almost every Atheist is an evolutionist. And the majority of evolutionists are Atheist, if you divide them into religious groups (Yes, I have included Atheism as a religious group). Second, if you ask an Atheist why he doesn't believe in a God, he will say there is no evidence to persuade him otherwise. This argument implies he indeed has evidence against a God. If he does not, the argument he used against the belief in a God can be used against him in his belief against a God. He would therefore be ignorant fool. When you ask this individual where his evidence comes from, 999/1000 times, he will point to evolution. Evolution now becomes his "religion", or at least the foundation of his "religious" beliefs. So no, evolution is not Atheism per se, but has become a religious ideology, of which Atheists cling to. If I were a Christian with this arcanum, confidential, mystical revelation (actually, very simple logic), I'd be VERY skeptical before I am naively brainwashed and persuaded by the dumbfounding (no pun intended) cognition of "99.98%" of the world's biologists (bologna!).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 12:27:26 AM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
You know Dr., as much as you or I ask this question (and I know you've asked it countless times), they fail to present any decent, subjective scripture worthy of consideration to support their opinion. After finding themselves trapped in this corner, they resort to interpreting verse contrary to their context. They use "Creationists" verses (Genesis 1-3 is a start) and say "Well, that might not necessarily mean EXACTLY that" and so on. They make God's own words out to be the most relative, touchy-feely, says what I want it to say, CONFUSING book over written. The last time I checked, God was not the author of confusion, right? If God said He made man from the dust of the ground, and women by man's rib, then He did. No questions asked. If Evolution were true, no female existed thousands, even millions, of years before Adam was created...so how on earth did his kind survive? Did he resort to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah to reproduce, if it were possible? Heaven forbid....
quote:
Catholic theologian Ludwig Ott in his authoritative Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, under the section "The Divine Work of Creation," (pages 92-122) covers the "biblical hexahemeron" (the "six days" of creation), the creation of man, Adam/Eve, original sin, the Fall, and the statements of the early Fathers, Saints, Church Councils, and Popes relevant to the matter. Ott makes the following comments on the "science" of Genesis and the Fathers:
"...as the hagiographers in profane things make use of a popular, that is, a non-scientific form of exposition suitable to the mental perception of their times, a more liberal interpretation, is possible here. The Church gives no positive decisions in regard to purely scientific questions, but limits itself to rejecting errors which endanger faith. Further, in these scientific matters there is no virtue in a consensus of the Fathers since they are not here acting as witnesses of the Faith, but merely as private scientists... Since the findings of reason and the supernatural knowledge of Faith go back to the same source, namely to God, there can never be a real contradiction between the certain discoveries of the profane sciences and the Word of God properly understood." (Ott, page 92)
quote:
In Beyond the Firmament: Understanding Science and the Theology of Creation, evangelical author Gordon J. Glover argues for an ancient near-eastern cosmology interpretation of Genesis, which he labels the theology of creation:
"Christians need to understand the first chapter of Genesis for what it is: an 'accurate' rendering of the physical universe by ancient standards that God used as the vehicle to deliver timeless theological truth to His people. We shouldn’t try to make Genesis into something that it’s not by dragging it through 3,500 years of scientific progress. When reading Genesis, Christians today need to transport themselves back to Mt. Sinai and leave our modern minds in the 21st century. If you only remember one thing from this chapter make it this: Genesis is not giving us creation science. It is giving us something much more profound and practical than that. Genesis is giving us a Biblical Theology of Creation."[2]
And please... a round of applause for this following quote!
quote:
Rabbi Simeon Bar Yohai in the 2nd century wrote:
"If a man looks upon the Torah as merely a book presenting narratives and everyday matters, alas for him! Such a torah, one treating with everyday concerns, and indeed a more excellent one, we too, even we, could compile. More than that, in the possession of the rulers of the world there are books of even greater merit, and these we could emulate if we wished to compile some such torah. But the Torah, in all of its words, holds supernal truths and sublime secrets.
Thus the tales related in the Torah are simply her outer garments, and woe to the man who regards that outer garb as the Torah itself, for such a man will be deprived of portion in the next world. Thus David said:" Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law" (Psalms 119:18), that is to say, the things that are underneath. See now. The most visible part of a man are the clothes that he has on, and they who lack understanding, when they look at the man, are apt not to see more in him than these clothes. In reality, however, it is the body of the man that constitutes the pride of his clothes, and his soul constitutes the pride of his body.
Woe to the sinners who look upon the Torah as simply tales pertaining to things of the world, seeing thus only the outer garment. But the righteous whose gaze penetrates to the very Torah, happy are they. Just as wine must be in a jar to keep, so the Torah must also be contained in an outer garment. That garment is made up of the tales and stories; but we, we are bound to penetrate beyond."
quote:
By definition, no. By social consequences and usage, yes. First of all (and this doesn't prove anything...it just "adds to the fire") almost every Atheist is an evolutionist. And the majority of evolutionists are Atheist, if you divide them into religious groups (Yes, I have included Atheism as a religious group). Second, if you ask an Atheist why he doesn't believe in a God, he will say there is no evidence to persuade him otherwise. This argument implies he indeed has evidence against a God. If he does not, the argument he used against the belief in a God can be used against him in his belief against a God. He would therefore be ignorant fool. When you ask this individual where his evidence comes from, 999/1000 times, he will point to evolution. Evolution now becomes his "religion", or at least the foundation of his "religious" beliefs. So no, evolution is not Atheism per se, but has become a religious ideology, of which Atheists cling to. If I were a Christian with this arcanum, confidential, mystical revelation (actually, very simple logic), I'd be VERY skeptical before I am naively brainwashed and persuaded by the dumbfounding (no pun intended) cognition of "99.98%" of the world's biologists (bologna!).
I think you are over generalizing here. I know quite a lot of atheists, many of whom haven't the slightest interest in biology or evolution. They see theological platitudes of the mainstream religions as unnecessary and inadequate, but don't have any particular interest in or knowledge of science. They reject religion on its own merits (or lack thereof), not because of scientific theories.
< Message edited by drj11 -- 5/25/2008 1:13:43 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 1:16:21 AM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
quote:
Evolution is not atheism.
almost every Atheist is an evolutionist.
Almost every atheist accepts atomic theory, too.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:41:18 AM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
unlike science, which is constantly proving itself wrong. One day an issue is accepted as FACT, and the next it is proven wrong, then brushed under the rug so no one notices.
Completely 100% true and this is considered a good thing.
Except it is more accurate <and "more accurate" is the point> to say.
One day an issue is accepted as accurate, and the next it is proven not accurate enough.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 8:57:36 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3267
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
And please... a round of applause for this following quote!
quote:
Rabbi (and Son of God) Jesus the Messiah stated in the 1st century:
"But at the beginning of creation, God made them male and female".
So, which Rabbi will you believe, drj? The one with the feel-good message influenced by Greek philosophy? OR, the one who claimed to be eternal Truth? I know which One lives in my heart!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 9:04:13 AM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 1191
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL:gluadysquote:
Evolution is not atheism.
However, it IS atheist dogma.
quote:
Depravity has nothing to do with evolution or science generally.
Evolution has nothing to do with science.
quote:
Human alienation from God, so well described in scripture, is not contradicted in any way by evolution.
Then please explain how Genesis 2:22 is not contradicted in any way by evolution.
Jesus said in Mark 10:6 that God created man “at the beginning of creation”. Evolution has man as a latecomer. That is a clear contradiction.
Evolution may not be atheism, but it IS a lie straight out of the pits of hell intended to undermine the foundation of Christianity.
“ If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” – Psalms 113:3
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 2:19:08 PM
|
|
|
DreadPirateRandy
Posts: 8754
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
They reject religion on its own merits (or lack thereof), not because of scientific theories.
One could say they use natural selection as reasoning to back up their nonbelief and promotion of atheism.
I've heard more atheist say, "I do not believe in God because this-and-that proves He doesn't exist." - opposed to, "I do not believe in God because... I don't like religion."
While the latter example demonstrates their common dislike for religion, it still doesn't provide a reason, it's a "just because" argument.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gluadys
And I am a Christian who accepts evolution----as do most Christians.
I'm so glad you speak for the majority. 
By this theory, most Christian basically deny the opening statement of that proclaimed in Genesis 1:27 - "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
By this theory, most Christians deny the process of creation and accept natural mutation and development from complicated organisms. Whereas the Bible clearly states, "God created" - which "create" appears in the Bible 42 times - not, "God watched over various mya as cells processed into lifeforms by chance that eventually, one complicated cell would get it "right" and humanity would come soon to follow."
So as it turns, most of these "Christians" don't even believe in creation, but rather, natural selection. Therefore denying that "God created".
_____________________________
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, are of imagination all compact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 3:07:09 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrapeApe
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
They reject religion on its own merits (or lack thereof), not because of scientific theories.
One could say they use natural selection as reasoning to back up their nonbelief and promotion of atheism.
I've heard more atheist say, "I do not believe in God because this-and-that proves He doesn't exist." - opposed to, "I do not believe in God because... I don't like religion."
While the latter example demonstrates their common dislike for religion, it still doesn't provide a reason, it's a "just because" argument.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gluadys
And I am a Christian who accepts evolution----as do most Christians.
I'm so glad you speak for the majority.
By this theory, most Christian basically deny the opening statement of that proclaimed in Genesis 1:27 - "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
No, they just approach interpretation of the scriptures with a much greater level of sophistication, depth, and reason... at least compared to a literalist. Inability to reconcile scripture with reality is a failing of the fundamentalist, not a fault of those who have been able to do so.
< Message edited by drj11 -- 5/25/2008 3:13:48 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 3:31:07 PM
|
|
|
PrincessButtercup
Posts: 8883
Joined: 4/21/2007
From: not my home...
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
No, they just approach interpretation of the scriptures with a much greater level of sophistication, depth, and reason... at least compared to a literalist. Inability to reconcile scripture with reality is a failing of the fundamentalist, not a fault of those who have been able to do so.
So those of us who accept the clear Word of God over the theories of man are less sophisticated, shallow, and unreasonable compared to you? I don't appreciate that.
I mean think about it. GOD gave a very detailed account of creation. Why should flawed mankind discard or twist His report, the report of the only Being who was there to see it all? Seems pretty pointless to me.
_____________________________
I need you more than anyone, darlin'
You know that I have from the start
So build me up, Buttercup, don't break my heart...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 3:35:52 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mandicoot
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
No, they just approach interpretation of the scriptures with a much greater level of sophistication, depth, and reason... at least compared to a literalist. Inability to reconcile scripture with reality is a failing of the fundamentalist, not a fault of those who have been able to do so.
So those of us who accept the clear Word of God over the theories of man are less sophisticated, shallow, and unreasonable compared to you? I don't appreciate that.
I mean think about it. GOD gave a very detailed account of creation. Why should flawed mankind discard or twist His report, the report of the only Being who was there to see it all? Seems pretty pointless to me.
In the meantime, He left all sorts of clues lying around that suggest the His report was less than historically accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:03:19 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mandicoot
So you're saying that God makes a report, and then "leaves clues" to say that "oh, maybe My report wasn't quite right."
He's GOD for goodness' sake. He is incapable of leaving an innacurate report.
You are saying God is incapable of something??!?
literal biblical assumptions
1. earth+universe is < 10,000 years old
2. the stars were visible on day 7
modern day facts
1. light travels 670 million miles per hour
2. light from the nearest star other than our sun takes 4.2 years to arrive
possibly true conclusions
1. the laws of physics changed and speed of light was faster in the past
2. many more stars are visible today than thousands of years ago
(only accounts for stars less than 10,000 light years distant)
3. God created photons "in-transit" positioned between us and the stars such that the universe appears old
(deceitful deity hypothesis, that accounts for stars more than 10,000 light years distant)
< Message edited by swan42 -- 5/25/2008 4:15:45 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:07:20 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mandicoot
So you're saying that God makes a report, and then "leaves clues" to say that "oh, maybe My report wasn't quite right."
He's GOD for goodness' sake. He is incapable of leaving an innacurate report.
Well then, you should realize that his creation is also part of 'his report'.
Take note of this quote I used in one of my posts above: "Since the findings of reason and the supernatural knowledge of Faith go back to the same source, namely to God, there can never be a real contradiction between the certain discoveries of the profane sciences and the Word of God properly understood." (Ott, page 92) "
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:17:32 PM
|
|
|
PrincessButtercup
Posts: 8883
Joined: 4/21/2007
From: not my home...
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: swan42
You are saying God is incapable of something??!?
Our God is perfect, incapable of lying.
quote:
2. many more stars are visible today than thousands of years ago
(only accounts for stars less than 10,000 light years distant)
3. God created photons "in-transit" positioned between us and the stars such that the universe appears old
(deceitful deity hypothesis, that accounts for stars more than 10,000 light years distant)
In reading the account of creation, take a minute to notice something. When He created the plants, He created them "with seed in them". He made not saplings, but grown, mature plants. He created them with the appearance of age. It's not deception at all, because if He hadn't made full grown plants, Adam and Eve and the rest of creation wouldn't have had anything to eat. If He created vegetation with the appearance of age, what would stop Him from creating everything else with the appearance of age? Is it so far fetched to think that He made the stars already visible as if the earth had been here longer?
_____________________________
I need you more than anyone, darlin'
You know that I have from the start
So build me up, Buttercup, don't break my heart...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:21:23 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrapeApe
quote:
ORIGINAL: gluadys
And I am a Christian who accepts evolution----as do most Christians.
I'm so glad you speak for the majority.
By this theory, most Christian basically deny the opening statement of that proclaimed in Genesis 1:27 - "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
Not true. Evolution is not a denial of the doctrine of creation. The only thing it conflicts with is a specific mechanism of creation which is not named in scripture and is therefore not required as part of belief in creation. As a Christian I do most certainly affirm that God created humanity, male and female, in God's image.
I do not consider the fact that we evolved to be in contradiction to this faith.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:22:21 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
2. many more stars are visible today than thousands of years ago
(only accounts for stars less than 10,000 light years distant)
3. God created photons "in-transit" positioned between us and the stars such that the universe appears old
(deceitful deity hypothesis, that accounts for stars more than 10,000 light years distant)
In reading the account of creation, take a minute to notice something. When He created the plants, He created them "with seed in them". He made not saplings, but grown, mature plants. He created them with the appearance of age. It's not deception at all, because if He hadn't made full grown plants, Adam and Eve and the rest of creation wouldn't have had anything to eat. If He created vegetation with the appearance of age, what would stop Him from creating everything else with the appearance of age? Is it so far fetched to think that He made the stars already visible as if the earth had been here longer?
Ok. That's a fair and acceptable theological resolution that simultaneously allows the appearance of a 14 billion year old universe and the appearance of the validity of the Theory of Evolution without being heretical in the process.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:32:21 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
Then please explain how Genesis 2:22 is not contradicted in any way by evolution.
I certainly don't see how a beautiful literary image is in any way contradicted by evolution.
You wouldn't be so foolish as to think the writer was composing a scientific report would you?
quote:
Jesus said in Mark 10:6 that God created man “at the beginning of creation”. Evolution has man as a latecomer. That is a clear contradiction.
Of course, on the level of strict literalism, Jesus was contradicting both creation accounts: in the account in Genesis 1, humanity was created at the end of creation, not the beginning. And in the account in Genesis 2, the male and female were not created together at the beginning, but the male first and the female last.
So, we can conclude that Jesus knew better than to interpret the creation accounts as if they were a scientific record.
He is talking, after all, about marriage and divorce, and he grounds the sanctity of marriage in the creation of male and female. He is not making a point about the chronological order of creation, but treating it all as a single event. Much as Gen. 2:4 refers to "the day" (singular) in which the heavens and earth were created.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: CONSPIRACY!!! - 5/25/2008 4:35:40 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mandicoot
So you're saying that God makes a report, and then "leaves clues" to say that "oh, maybe My report wasn't quite right."
He's GOD for goodness' sake. He is incapable of leaving an innacurate report.
That is why we do not believe that the report of his creation is inaccurate. The stars, the sun, the rocks, the mountains, and the records of our genetic history, all given to us by the Word of God, do not lie to us.
If you think you are finding contradictions to them in the scriptures, I suggest you need to re-examine your assumptions about the scriptures.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
