Jump to content
A Christian 1985

God used Evolution to 'create' man

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Abdicate said:

I have support, God's word, you all just choose to ignore the word of God. The problem isn't me, no matter how many accusations are thrown at me. None of the theories of evilution will ever disprove the word of God. Period.

You must have misreads some of my post.  I am a staunch supporter of creation, based on Gods inspired, and inerrant word. specifically on "after their kind."  I reject evolution as not based on science and none of it can be proved.

Love, peace , joy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, one.opinion said:

FYI... you and @omega2xx are arguing the same thing. It is completely comical that neither of you actually read the posts enough to realize this.

We are not.  I believe the Genesis flood was global, she does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, omega2xx said:

You didn't answer the question.

I did answer the question - just as I have done in multiple other posts. I don't know if I can explain it any more clearly than I have already, but I will try. If "eretz" refers to a regional area, and not the entire globe, then only the land IN THAT AREA would have been covered in water. Mt. Everest was not in that area.

24 minutes ago, omega2xx said:

Also, all life was destroyed.  If there was some land not under water some life could have survived.

If all life not on the Ark were destroyed, then a miracle unmentioned in the Bible would have been required to restore stable ecosystems. This claim is also inconsistent with the evidence God has made available to us.

28 minutes ago, omega2xx said:

The fact that you think a global flood is inconsistent with geological, etc evidence is  only you opinion.

It is evidence-based opinion. Let's look specifically at a particular case of biogeography - the mammal life on Australia. Virtually all mammals (except those that have been recently introduced) on the continent are marsupials. Why would placental mammals, which are far more numerous on the rest of the planet, be absent from Australia? Did they simply run faster off the ark than the placental mammals, and put up a "do not enter" sign after they arrived? A better explanation, that is consistent with the fossil record and geological record, is that the Australian continent separated from the rest of the land masses on earth millions of years ago and mammalian life developed there differently than the rest of the planet.

34 minutes ago, omega2xx said:

Henry Morris, who is much more qualified in this field than you are says there was.

You know that a single opinion is insufficient evidence. There are many opinions that the moon landing was a hoax. A vast majority of experts in the field believe differently from what Morris did. If you want to produce evidence, I'll be happy to look at it.

39 minutes ago, omega2xx said:

Those who believe in evolution are not conservative Christians.

Why do you think you have the only opinion that matters on what is "conservative"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, omega2xx said:

We are not.  I believe the Genesis flood was global, she does not.

And the comedy continues... @Abdicate, do you want to set the record straight here?

Edited by one.opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...