Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
The last sentence sounds like creationism. Creationism is god-of-the-gaps theology. Insert God into a place where there is no material connection between members of the universe. Such as between chemicals and life.
This reduces God to a member or creature of the universe.
Literal 6 Day Creationist ''An Evening and a Morning''
44
Join Date: 12th March 2003
Posts: 7,020
Blessings: 41,232
Reps: 770 (power: 0)
Re: Re: Is Evolution Dagon worship revisited
Today at 12:50 PM LewisWildermuth said this in Post #10
Well, I guess you could but Genesis says it so much better...
"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. "
(Genesis 1:20 KJV)
Now that would be primodial soup...
But since Evolution has nothing to do with the primodial soup anyway and Abiogenesis favors life forming deep in the crust or ocean floors and not the earlier primordial soup in shallow puddles, I guess you'd be wrong on just about every count.
Lewis, I can honestly say that piece of work is the best distorting of scripture I have seen yet.
They really should come up with an award for ''Best Distortion of Scripture" to give out here.
<font color="#880000" ></font>The sum of everything = zero
Join Date: 4th April 2002
Posts: 1,973
Blessings: 41,761
Reps: 143,091 (power: 152)
Ha ha ha, this is very funny. Maybe the Philistinian mythology is more in line with what we see in the natural world than in Judeo-Christian mythology. So much for the "everything in the bible is supported by science" idea.
Of course I am just kidding. Evolution is Science, not religion.
Suppose that a primitive culture living in the Amazon was discovered to have a mythology that stated that the world was billions of years old, and that all life on Eath had a common ancestry. YOu know what that would be called? A COINCIDENCE!
__________________ "We’ve been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture," Pastor Ray Mummert speaking out against teaching evolution in Pennsylvania schools To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The flood becomes harder and harder to support when you get more information. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Late_Cretaceous; 30th March 2003 at 02:18 PM.
Today at 01:02 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #11
Of course you would.
Nice rhetoric. No substance. Anytime you actually want to post an argument refuting mine, FoC, I'm listening. But wait, you haven't posted any argument refuting mine yet, have you?
Oh really, that isn't what I read and studied in my Biology Textbook. Obviously they need to change the info in those textbooks again Lewis.
Textbooks constantly get updated, Lanakila, as new data is found. When was your textbook written?
Lewis is right. Darwin's "warm little pond" has been supplanted by hypotheses placing the formation of life at hydrothermal vents or deeper in the crust. Several papers in the last 10 years have shown that the building blocks and polymers of life can be synthesized at hydrothermal vents. One paper even shows that protocells can be formed there.
Nice rhetoric. No substance. Anytime you actually want to post an argument refuting mine, FoC, I'm listening. But wait, you haven't posted any argument refuting mine yet, have you?
Paul was a self proclaimed ''Pharisee of Pharisees''. I am sure that he adhered to the letter of the OT.
If you think that you will drag me into a debate as to what Paul meant in that passage, think again.
NOT interested.
Today at 11:02 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #18
Paul was a self proclaimed ''Pharisee of Pharisees''. I am sure that he adhered to the letter of the OT.
Paul certainly did not adhere to the letter of the OT after he was converted to Christianity. That was the basis of his whole battle with the Jerusalem disciples, remember? Paul relaxed the Laws to allow gentiles to become Christians whereas Peter was requiring gentiles to become Jewish before they could become Christian.
Paul cut and pasted OT theology to fit the new theology and Christology he developed. Paul basically constructed a new religion on the fly. You can admire or criticize him, but the one thing you can't do is claim that Paul adhered to the letter of the OT.
If you think that you will drag me into a debate as to what Paul meant in that passage, think again.
NOT interested.
Creationism fits the description of the passage. Creationism's god-of-the-gaps theology leads directly to making God a creature.
LOL! Of course you don't want to discuss it. Because it shows that creationism isn't Christian theology.
FoC, Francis Bacon realized 400 years ago that creationism led inevitably to heresy. You are simply demonstrating that this is so. Here is what Bacon said:
"This vanity some of the moderns have with extreme levity indulged so far as to attempt to found a system of natural philosophy [science] on the first chapters of Genesis, on the book of Job, and other parts of the sacred writings ... because from this unwholesome mixture of things human and divine there arises not only a fantastic philosophy [science] but also an heretical religion." Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, 1xiv
FoC, it has been an article of faith among creationists that they are the "good guys" defending Christianity against the horde of "pagan" evolutionists. It's way past time that faith was examined to see if it is reality.
What I am seeing as I examine the issue is that creationists are not the "good guys", nor does Scripture support them against evolution. Instead, creationism is based on the sin of pride and leads to heresy and apostasy. Creationism also, by making God be testable, sets Christianity up to be falsified by science. This is wrong. Science can't falsify Christianity. But creationists blithely continue despite the possible destruction of Christianity. More pride again.
Rather than being the "good guys", my conclusion is that creationism is the greatest danger Christianity has ever faced. If Christianity is to survive, then Christians are going to have to continue to stand up to it and resist it.
Today at 11:02 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #18
Paul was a self proclaimed ''Pharisee of Pharisees''. I am sure that he adhered to the letter of the OT.
Paul certainly did not adhere to the letter of the OT after he was converted to Christianity. That was the basis of his whole battle with the Jerusalem disciples, remember? Paul relaxed the Laws to allow gentiles to become Christians whereas Peter was requiring gentiles to become Jewish before they could become Christian.
Paul cut and pasted OT theology to fit the new theology and Christology he developed. Paul basically constructed a new religion on the fly. You can admire or criticize him, but the one thing you can't do is claim that Paul adhered to the letter of the OT.
If you think that you will drag me into a debate as to what Paul meant in that passage, think again.
NOT interested.
Creationism fits the description of the passage. Creationism's god-of-the-gaps theology leads directly to making God a creature.
LOL! Of course you don't want to discuss it. Because it shows that creationism isn't Christian theology.
FoC, Francis Bacon realized 400 years ago that creationism led inevitably to heresy. You are simply demonstrating that this is so. Here is what Bacon said:
"This vanity some of the moderns have with extreme levity indulged so far as to attempt to found a system of natural philosophy [science] on the first chapters of Genesis, on the book of Job, and other parts of the sacred writings ... because from this unwholesome mixture of things human and divine there arises not only a fantastic philosophy [science] but also an heretical religion." Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, 1xiv
FoC, it has been an article of faith among creationists that they are the "good guys" defending Christianity against the horde of "pagan" evolutionists. It's way past time that faith was examined to see if it is reality.
What I am seeing as I examine the issue is that creationists are not the "good guys", nor does Scripture support them against evolution. Instead, creationism is based on the sin of pride and leads to heresy and apostasy. Creationism also, by making God be testable, sets Christianity up to be falsified by science. This is wrong. Science can't falsify Christianity. But creationists blithely continue despite the possible destruction of Christianity. More pride again.
Rather than being the "good guys", my conclusion is that creationism is the greatest danger Christianity has ever faced. If Christianity is to survive, then Christians are going to have to continue to stand up to it and resist it.
With every post you make, it becomes more evident that you understand little to nothing of scripture.
Linear Mode
