| Author |
Darvin a NUT? |
gelfen
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Melbourne, Australia
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-07-18 14:25:39, carkitter wrote:
There are parts of the Bible which are non-literal. Those bits are called Prophecy. The rest is literal when taken in context. However, saying that you can pick and choose which parts to believe and which to take with a grain of salt as it suits you, simply devalues your own beliefs. The Bible is the word of God - we measure ourselves by it, we don't change the measure to suit our denials, guilty consciences and whims as many would do. |
|
the point i was trying to make is that you need to understand the context. i was not arguing against its historical accuracy, only it's scientific accuracy.
the creation story does not stand up to any level of non-biblical scrutiny if taken literally. the context must be considered or you get a very odd view of reality. the creation story only works if you consider it to be either (a) metaphorical, or (b) highly imprecise.
there would have been little point in god revealing the intracacies of quantum theory and the big bang to an almost illiterate society. even if he did chose to reveal such to the author(s) of genesis, which may well have been the case, then it would have meant nothing to the ancient hebrews had it been written that way.
knowing where to distinguish between parable and historical fact is part of being christian.
|
|
|
blackspot
Joined: Sep 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Philippines
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-07-18 14:25:39, carkitter wrote:
... saying that you can pick and choose which parts to believe and which to take with a grain of salt as it suits you, simply devalues your own beliefs. The Bible is the word of God - we measure ourselves by it, we don't change the measure to suit our denials, guilty consciences and whims as many would do.
|
|
I totally agree, and sadly I think this is the reason why there are so many religious sects cropping up everywhere.
I also think we should go back to the topic. 
resistance is futile. |
JK
Joined: Feb 24, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: S. Africa - JOZI
PM |
I dont believe in this theory even if its proven, coz i choose to be stubborn!! but heres some links against the theory...
http://www.creationevidence.org/general_info/gnrl_info.html
http://www.creationevidence.o[....]_evid/scien_eviden_creatn.html
www.creationevidence.org
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
@786KBR From the link above -
".......These original excavations yielded human footprints among dinosaur footprints (see the Director’s doctoral dissertation).He then realized that a museum needed to be established in order to appropriately display this evidence, along with sustained excavations and other areas of scientific research for creation."
What a load of old bollocks!!
Sorry, but that goes wholly against most modern intelligent human thinking. Your trying to tell me humans walked on the earth with Dinosaurs.
Before you respond, please bear in mind that it has been established that Dinosaurs became extinct 65 millions years ago and dominated life on earth for 180 million years!!
Tripe, Tripe, Tripe Tripe Tripe!
That is a prime example of the worst type of rubbish that can be found on the internet.
[ This Message was edited by: goldenface on 2005-07-20 12:10 ] |
JK
Joined: Feb 24, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: S. Africa - JOZI
PM |
I never bothered reading everything, some guy sends me mail bout "the gospel of jesus"...
I keep telling him im not interested and asked bout darwins theory ..then he sent this crap. |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
If I was you I'd be very careful about the people who sent you that. The museum they are on about is near Waco, Texas and we all know what happened there don't we. . . :eek:
This message was posted from a T610 |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Seems like I was the one who lived to fight another day. . . :grin: BTW what does the bible say about the Neanderthals?
This message was posted from a T610 |
streaky1
Joined: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 59
From: fermanagh/northern ireland
PM, WWW
|
it says its shit lol
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
What I am getting at is how can people not accept evolutionary theory when other Humanoids have been proven to have existed?
This message was posted from a T610 |
gelfen
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Melbourne, Australia
PM |
i suppose it would come under the "god created all the creatures of the earth" bit. it's not as if genesis provides an exhaustive list.
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
@gelfen. Does it not say in the Book of Genesis that man was created in the image of God?
This message was posted from a T610 |
blackspot
Joined: Sep 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Philippines
PM |
IMO that's another point not to be taken literally. 
resistance is futile. |
Jim
Joined: Jan 20, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM |
So what point you have to take literally ? From those who say evolution is bs, I say God is bs cause there not a single evidence while there are plenty for evolution ...
|
gelfen
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Melbourne, Australia
PM |
well the way i choose to look at it is that in the beginning something had to cause the universe to come into existence.
IMO literal creationism vs. evolution is a no brainer.
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
I Agree. Basically there are 2 theories. The first is that we evolved in Africa and spread out of Africa to replace all previous Hominids. The 2nd is that seperate populations around the globe evolved simultaneously and interbred with each other. Neanderthals did exist at the same time as Modern Humans but are now thought to be not ancestral but did at one time share a common ancestor with us. Interesting.
This message was posted from a T610 |
|
|
Posted: 2005-07-19 01:41
