To the darwinists

[CSLewis]

The council reaffirmed the inspiration of the canon - and one should not do away with part of the bible in order to justify his beliefs - isn't that your point in this argument?

I don't know Hebrew so I am definately out of my league but several scholars use genesis 1 as an example of parallelism in Hebrew literature - I am going to actually have to study this in more depth than copy and pasting an article from some sight I googled -

I agree that it is more than just a polemic against near east religion (paganism) and that it contains factual historical narrative and you are right this is a story of redemption but how does evolution have any affect on our need for redemption? We are not made in Gods image biologically it is a soul that makes us different than the animal kingdom. Christians at one time believed that the earth was the center of the universe based

on misapplication of scripture and scientists and believers alike were told they weren't true Christians if they didn't believe the same interpretation of the text- have you read " finding Darwin's God"? It is written by a conservative Christian who happens to look at science and faith.

If you look at the biochemistry of the body and even simple bacteria it is so complex and awe inspiring - and it shows the handiwork of God- understanding and belief in evolution doesn't negate God's role in any of this it points toward a loving and caring and creative creator.

One thing that evolution doesn't and cannot answer is where did all of this matter come from? What is the point? Is there anybody out there? And who is this Jesus? Those are answers that only Christianity can answer.

Peace be with you

[Guest shiloh357]

The council reaffirmed the inspiration of the canon - and one should not do away with part of the bible in order to justify his beliefs - isn't that your point in this argument?

No, that is not my point.

I don't know Hebrew so I am definately out of my league but several scholars use genesis 1 as an example of parallelism in Hebrew literature - I am going to actually have to study this in more depth than copy and pasting an article from some sight I googled -

The poetic argument is usually made by liberal, higher critics. Genuine Christian scholarship accepts Genesis as it is written, instead.

I agree that it is more than just a polemic against near east religion (paganism) and that it contains factual historical narrative and you are right this is a story of redemption but how does evolution have any affect on our need for redemption?

Because evolution is predicated on an impersonal process, which is unguided an unplanned and absent of any intelligent entity. It stands to usurps God's authority, by precluding His existence. If God doesn't exist, then there is judge or moral lawgiver for man. Man is just another cog in the wheel of evolution and has no more significance than slug or a rock. Man is just a higher animal having no purpose for even existing.

We are not made in Gods image biologically it is a soul that makes us different than the animal kingdom.

We are made in God's image which makes us a special creation, created apart from the rest of the created order. We did not evolve from a missing link. We are as God created us to be.

Christians at one time believed that the earth was the center of the universe based

on misapplication of scripture and scientists and believers alike were told they weren't true Christians if they didn't believe the same interpretation of the text-

There is a difference. Geocentricism was not a religious belief. It was also a secular view as well. The problem is that you are trying to compare disimilar things. At that time, the church was the government. Many of the "bishops" and "archbishops" were nothing more than political appointments. It was a case of secular men holding sacred positions and lording their power over others and forcing everyone to acquiese to their dictates. Being a "Christian" in socio-political context did not mean the same thing then as it does today.

Evolution is something altogether different. Even evolutionists can see the obvious contradictions between evolution and the Bible.

If you look at the biochemistry of the body and even simple bacteria it is so complex and awe inspiring - and it shows the handiwork of God- understanding and belief in evolution doesn't negate God's role in any of this it points toward a loving and caring and creative creator.

Evolution is actually rather barbaric and contradicts everything the Bible teaches about God's character and nature.

One thing that evolution doesn't and cannot answer is where did all of this matter come from? What is the point? Is there anybody out there? And who is this Jesus? Those are answers that only Christianity can answer.

which shows the inferiority of evolution and superiority of the biblical creation account.

[CSLewis]

"Because evolution is predicated on an impersonal process, which is unguided an unplanned and absent of any intelligent entity. It stands to usurps God's authority, by precluding His existence. If God doesn't exist, then there is judge or moral lawgiver for man. Man is just another cog in the wheel of evolution and has no more significance than slug or a rock. Man is just a higher animal having no purpose for even existing. "

This makes no sense if God used evolution to create- it's not an impersonal process - it is amazing the

ability that God created of life to adapt and change and this earth is extremely diverse and beautiful because of it - adaptation doesn't happen by chance there are just so many dynamics and causes and effects of environment on natural selection that it is impossible for man's finite brain to predict - but God knew the end result of his creation even before he started creating - because of his omniscience. Nature isn't outside his knowlege He created all matter and the processes in which it reacts. It isn't like God is up there rolling dice-

[MorningGlory]

Once again the bible says nothing about mitochondria either- it is not a science book.

No, it's sure not; it's a history book. And it spells out quite clearly how we were created. Doesn't mention apes at all.

[Fez]

Once again the bible says nothing about mitochondria either- it is not a science book.

No, it's sure not; it's a history book. And it spells out quite clearly how we were created. Doesn't mention apes at all.

Common ancestor. And it gave rise to Homo genus not homo sapiens. We evolved from that genus.

And it's a now book! And it's a future book!

[CSLewis]

Once again the bible says nothing about mitochondria either- it is not a science book.

No, it's sure not; it's a history book. And it spells out quite clearly how we were created. Doesn't mention apes at all.

It doesn't spell out how God created the earth - how did God create the earth? Where does it say how God created the earth.

[Guest shiloh357]

There is a difference. Geocentricism was not a religious belief. It was also a secular view as well. The problem is that you are trying to compare disimilar things.

They are not different at all, gencentrism was long-defended using the bible and Christian philosophy as a defence. I you read the OT with no knowledge of modern science you will come away thinking the earth is stationary, the ONLY reason we know the earth revolves around the sun is because of science which has become so overwhelming that Christians were forced to re-evaluate their interpretations of scripture.

Again, Geocentricism was not purely religious belief. It was secular belief. My point is geocentrism was not a church doctrine. Geocentrism was not a theological concept. Yes, there were Chrisitans who believed it, but then so did everyone. Geocentrism did not originate from the Church, So, you cannot parade this around as a triumph of science over the Church. Science changed how HUMANITY viewed the relationship of the sun and earth.

[CSLewis]

Geocentrism was a religious belief - and to believe otherwise was to be in direct violation of church doctrine. First Galileo and now Darwin. And geocentrism was accepted theory until heliocentrism the same way literal six day creationism was held by humanity even the secular realm until evolution.

[spiritman]

Once again the bible says nothing about mitochondria either- it is not a science book.

No, it's sure not; it's a history book. And it spells out quite clearly how we were created. Doesn't mention apes at all.

It doesn't spell out how God created the earth - how did God create the earth? Where does it say how God created the earth.

Sorry CS; I needed a break from this for a while; According to the scripture God brought the universe into existence just by speaking it into existence.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. Gen 1:3 (KJV

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. Gen 1:6 (KJV)

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. Gen 1:9 (KJV)

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Gen 1:11 (KJV)

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. Gen 1:14-15 (KJV)

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

Gen 1:20 (KJV)

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so

Gen 1:24 (KJV)

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Gen 1:26 (KJV)

It seems to me if taken in this context that God spoke the universe into existence.

[spiritman]

Very poor reader? Tell me all knowledgeable sir - who are you to decide what parts are to be read literally or not? Transubstantion and eschatology are two areas in which Christians disagree on the literal interpretation of the text in addition to soterology and genesis 1. I was obviously being sarcastic about the plant comment - and of course I believe in the virgin birth and resurrection - my point is that you are pulling the two accounts out of creation out of context by claiming a day was 24 hours and not a figure of speech which really was to show the importance of the sabbath.

CSLewis; Sorry I didn't answer your other questions

you asked me if I believed Jesus turned into a plant - Answer no

You asked me if I believed that Jesus body is literally bread to be eaten. Answer NO

I wish to pass on to you this information; There are rules in reading any written material, these rules are called; Hermeneutics and Exegesis. Please look into these terms.

They will help improve your interpretation skills. And that includes knowing when a text should be taken as literal or metaphorically

In Love

thank you for that - Hahaha Hilarious

CS; my suggestion was not meant to be funny or a put down in any way; this is how I do research, I use Hermeneutic and Exegesis, I suggested it out of a true desire to give you a tool to help in your studies.