The inherent cause of the 'evolution/creation' apparent discrepancy

pgardner2358

AChristian1985
Sep 28, 2014
40
0
Visit site
✟7,765.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Specific Cause of the "Evolution vs. 'Creationism'" Controversy, and of the apparent discrepancy between science and the Bible

1. Human beings cannot understand abstract, invisible realities without first learning visible, concrete references. Radio waves are a good example: you cannot detect them directly with the 5 physical senses- yet they are nonetheless real. Spiritual matters are likewise not amenable to direct mental comprehension.
2. It is impossible to understand the Bible merely with the finite human mind alone, regardless of how much time and theology you employ to do so. The truths contained in the Bible must be REVEALED spiritually in order to be correctly understood mentally.
3. The best means to convey this is the illustration of learning a language. You cannot directly learn a language, the components of the language must first be directly correlated to visible concrete objects. A human being (a child, for instance) is first shown a visible picture of a physical object and then the audible or written symbolic language component is linked to it to give comprehension.
4. Likewise, the spiritual reality to come forth in the New Testament would be totally incomprehensible without firstly having the detailed typology of the Old Testament.
This is the crux of the reason why the mind alone is incapable of understanding the Bible: some of the accounts are literal, and some are allegorical. Without revelation, you confuse the two and fall into systematized error.
5. For example: "Behold the Lamb of God". Certainly allegorical- Christ is not being described as the 4-legged offspring of a sheep here. 'The New Jerusalem, the bride of the lamb'. Is the lamb marrying a physical city? No! Again, obviously allegorical. If the Bible is the Word of God, then scientific, empirical knowledge cannot help but verify it. Any apparent discrepancy is due to one of three things: A. Unjustified, inductive extrapolations of scientific findings. B. Incorrect, dogmatic (present on both sides of the E. vs. C. issue) interpretations <usually traditional> of either secular or scriptural <or both> evidence. C. Lack of evidence in critical, specific areas for the purpose of preserving free will. Example: IF science ascertained factually that there was no fossil record prior to 6,000 years ago (i. e.: Adam and Eve, the human race magically and instantaneously appeared) don't you realize that this would be such prima facie evidence of direct Divine intervention that it would interfere with free will?
Now, to apply these parameters to the crux of the matter.
Life, like radio waves, is abstract and mysterious: it cannot be analyzed and comprehended directly. So any depiction of the process of life must be communicated allegorically.
6. The Bible is a book of LIFE, NOT a book of knowledge. Genesis Chapter One is an account of the propagation of life, NOT creation per se. It is an allegorical depiction of the relationship of the Spirit, the Word, light, and life. It is NOT a scientific chronology of creation. If a person interprets it literally instead of allegorically, then they are doomed to try to fit the square peg of the fossil record into the round hole of their mistaken (and incorrect scripturally) dogmatic, religious fallacy.
To my dear brothers and sisters: When did 'Creationism, et. al.' become an article of the faith? Why is it virtually considered heresy to believe that God may have used evolution to create man?
To those who are not yet my brothers and sisters: The world is headed inexorably in one direction, and no one can prevent it. Christ will return and, by all indications, sooner not later. THIS FACT, and not any amount of accumulation of the details of the physical universe, needs to be your primary consideration. The outward picture of the Flood and the Ark is a type foretelling a spiritual reality to come. It would be 'wise and prudent' for you to expend a modicum of time and effort to ascertain what the 'ark' symbolizes, and how you can enter into Him before the flood comes.
amessageforthehumanrace.org

I. The Bible is unique
There is no comparison with any other works of mankind. No other books had anywhere near the number of contributors (39+), nor have any been written over such a long span of time (1,600 years). Yet it is profoundly cohesive in all of its contents.
II. The Bible is God's word
In addition to the infinite profundity of the whole, it contains prophecies of many events that are still future in terms of time. These are given with adequate and specific details to be able to unmistakably predict in advance the events recorded.
It is not possible that it is merely human in origin because many of its ramifications are beyond human capabilities.
III. Creationism aka 'Intelligent Design' are not scientific disciplines and therefore should not be taught as such in schools.
"The scientific view of the Universe is such as to admit only those phenomena that can, in one way or another, be observed in a fashion accessible to all, and to admit those generalizations (which we call laws of nature) that can be induced from those observations."
Any explanation of observed phenomena, that invokes to any extent supernatural influence such as divine motivation, is thus inherently self-disqualified from being a scientific discipline.
IV. Evolution is valid
Evolution, however, is the only valid scientific theory which adequately explains the known data. And it has been verified by the correlation of the relevant data corresponding to its testable conclusions.
Dear reader: please lay aside any and all traditional, biased schools of thought within the realm of prideful, puffed-up knowledge. Objectively consider that God may have used evolution to create man. Do not disregard so doing due to bias, dogmatism, or love of argumentation.
amessageforethehuman.org
 

Nithavela

our world is happy and mundane
Apr 14, 2007
28,140
19,587
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟493,833.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Oh boy...

The Specific Cause of the "Evolution vs. 'Creationism'" Controversy, and of the apparent discrepancy between science and the Bible

1. Human beings cannot understand abstract, invisible realities without first learning visible, concrete references. Radio waves are a good example: you cannot detect them directly with the 5 physical senses- yet they are nonetheless real. Spiritual matters are likewise not amenable to direct mental comprehension.

So, you can't believe in it until you believe in it. Great.

2. It is impossible to understand the Bible merely with the finite human mind alone, regardless of how much time and theology you employ to do so. The truths contained in the Bible must be REVEALED spiritually in order to be correctly understood mentally.
And why would an almighty god work like that?

3. The best means to convey this is the illustration of learning a language. You cannot directly learn a language, the components of the language must first be directly correlated to visible concrete objects. A human being (a child, for instance) is first shown a visible picture of a physical object and then the audible or written symbolic language component is linked to it to give comprehension.
Which is not how a child learns language at all.

4. Likewise, the spiritual reality to come forth in the New Testament would be totally incomprehensible without firstly having the detailed typology of the Old Testament.
This is the crux of the reason why the mind alone is incapable of understanding the Bible: some of the accounts are literal, and some are allegorical. Without revelation, you confuse the two and fall into systematized error.
And to think that God could have averted this issue with a disclaimer at the start of each chapter. "This part is only allegorical". Guess that didn't occur to him.

5. For example: "Behold the Lamb of God". Certainly allegorical- Christ is not being described as the 4-legged offspring of a sheep here. 'The New Jerusalem, the bride of the lamb'. Is the lamb marrying a physical city? No! Again, obviously allegorical. If the Bible is the Word of God, then scientific, empirical knowledge cannot help but verify it. Any apparent discrepancy is due to one of three things: A. Unjustified, inductive extrapolations of scientific findings. B. Incorrect, dogmatic (present on both sides of the E. vs. C. issue) interpretations <usually traditional> of either secular or scriptural <or both> evidence. C. Lack of evidence in critical, specific areas for the purpose of preserving free will. Example: IF science ascertained factually that there was no fossil record prior to 6,000 years ago (i. e.: Adam and Eve, the human race magically and instantaneously appeared) don't you realize that this would be such prima facie evidence of direct Divine intervention that it would interfere with free will?

And still people claim that there are divine interventions every day and try to use them in conversion, citing cured cancer victims or making their flock drink castor oil turned into pineapples or handle poisonous snakes.

Now, to apply these parameters to the crux of the matter.
Life, like radio waves, is abstract and mysterious: it cannot be analyzed and comprehended directly. So any depiction of the process of life must be communicated allegorically.
Actually, radio waves can be very much analysed and comprehended. Perhaps not by you.

Life? Likewise.

6. The Bible is a book of LIFE, NOT a book of knowledge. Genesis Chapter One is an account of the propagation of life, NOT creation per se. It is an allegorical depiction of the relationship of the Spirit, the Word, light, and life. It is NOT a scientific chronology of creation. If a person interprets it literally instead of allegorically, then they are doomed to try to fit the square peg of the fossil record into the round hole of their mistaken (and incorrect scripturally) dogmatic, religious fallacy.
To my dear brothers and sisters: When did 'Creationism, et. al.' become an article of the faith? Why is it virtually considered heresy to believe that God may have used evolution to create man?
It isn't, the vast majority of christians, as their biggest denomination, the catholic church, firmly believe in evolution (If belief is the right word).

To those who are not yet my brothers and sisters: The world is headed inexorably in one direction, and no one can prevent it. Christ will return and, by all indications, sooner not later. THIS FACT, and not any amount of accumulation of the details of the physical universe, needs to be your primary consideration. The outward picture of the Flood and the Ark is a type foretelling a spiritual reality to come. It would be 'wise and prudent' for you to expend a modicum of time and effort to ascertain what the 'ark' symbolizes, and how you can enter into Him before the flood comes.
amessageforthehumanrace.org
I 'don't believe' you.

I. The Bible is unique
There is no comparison with any other works of mankind. No other books had anywhere near the number of contributors (39+), nor have any been written over such a long span of time (1,600 years). Yet it is profoundly cohesive in all of its contents.
That's because a council of old people came together and decided on the composition of the bible, discarding anything that didn't fit (which we today call apocrypha).

How do we know that the bible is perfect? Because everything fits!
How do we know that something isn't part of the bible? Because it doesn't fit!

*bashes head against desk*

II. The Bible is God's word
In addition to the infinite profundity of the whole, it contains prophecies of many events that are still future in terms of time. These are given with adequate and specific details to be able to unmistakably predict in advance the events recorded.
It is not possible that it is merely human in origin because many of its ramifications are beyond human capabilities.
Call me if any of these future predictions ever come to pass. Until then, they are as good a guess as mine (and most likely, less so), because in contrast to the bronze age authors and iron age editors of the bible, I have wikipedia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Split Rock
Upvote 0

pgardner2358

AChristian1985
Sep 28, 2014
40
0
Visit site
✟7,765.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Now from the fig tree learn her parable: when her branch is now become tender, and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that the summer is nigh; even so ye also, when ye see all these things, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished. (Matt. 24:32&#64979;34)

It has been realized by students of the Bible for more than a hundred years (Footnote #305, published in 1876) that the parable of the fig tree meant that Israel would become a nation again. The prophecy of the Lord related to the parable of the fig tree stated that the generation that sees the fig tree put forth its leaves shall not pass away till “all these things” are accomplished. "All these things" refers to verses immediately preceding these verses, verses that describe outward signs of the end times and include the actual, physical return of Christ to the Earth.
Israel became a nation again on May 14, 1948. This event was the fig tree becoming tender (showing unmistakable signs of life). However, the last generation starts with the putting forth of the leaves by the fig tree and not with her branch becoming tender. This (as we shall see very shortly) refers to 1967.

Notice that Luke 21:25&#64979;26 is a description of outward signs also occurring at this time, since it is at the same time as these outward signs that the powers of the heavens are shaken and Satan and his angels are cast out. What causes the roaring of the sea and the billows (waves)? What is the main cause of wave action? Mainly tidal forces resulting from the influence of the moon and the sun form waves. What are the only signs in the sun that are visible to the naked eye? Sunspots!
The word translated as 'stars' in Luke 21:25 may equally be in reference to the planets. Is there a connection between the cause of this great earthquake and these other, simultaneously occurring outward signs?

Let us narrow the time span for the most likely occurrence of this earthquake. What day of the year should we choose as the focal point of most likely occurrence? The most likely time for the triggering of the earthquake is the time midway between the spring and fall of 1982. Thus, the focal point of likeliest time is midnight August 4- 5, 1982 (Israeli time), midway between spring and fall. Are there any other outward prophetic signs that we may refer to?

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matt. 24:30)

What is the sign of the Son of man (accent on and in reference to His humanity), which will appear "in heaven" before the time of Christ's actual return?


Due to the juggling of records by the Roman Catholic Church, Christ was actually born in the year that we record as 4 B.C. Subtracting 4 B.C. from 240 B.C. gives us 236 years between the time of the star that the Wise&#64979;men followed and the recorded date of the visit of Halley's Comet in 240 B.C. Dividing 236 years by three (the number of intervals between successive visits) gives us 78 years and 8 months per interval- within the 74 to 79 year variation of the period of Halley's Comet. Undoubtedly, Halley's comet was considerably more brilliant then than now. Almost certainly this was the star that the Wise&#64979;men followed, and it was the tail of Halley's comet that was used by God to point their way.

The next appearance of Halley's comet will be in 1986 ... it will appear brightest in February of 1986 . . 318

Coincidence or fulfillment of prophecy? I also find it to be very significant that Halley's Cornet reached its apogee and thus began its return to the vicinity of the Earth's orbit in 1948, the year of Israel's reestablishment.
The alignment of the planets converges with a sunspot peak only once every 1,969 years. Due to the mortality of short&#64979;period comets, this will almost certainly be the only time that such a convergence is followed at the appropriate time by an appearance of Haley’s Comet. In this situation, we have the precise concurrence of a series of events that is unique, with a single event (Israel) that is likewise unique, all of which was prophesied nineteen centuries ago. Mathematically, there is no chance whatsoever that these events are merely coincidental.
Only one statement can be made with complete assurance concerning the timing of the commencement of the rapture (and of the occurrence of the great earthquake of the sixth seal): No one (including this author) can know precisely when it will be. Also, we will not know what week Christ will probably return in until the Antichrist rises to power. Nevertheless, there are strong indications that can be drawn from the correlation of prophecy and astronomical-geological data.
It is as close to 100 percent certainty as possible that the generational deadline for the return of Christ applies to the generation that witnessed the possession of all of Jerusalem by Israel. However, the precise length of such a generational period is not 100% definitive.
Scripturally, we know also that Christ will not return physically until after the "sign of the Son of man" appears. If Halley's comet is indeed this sign, then the great earthquake cannot occur until the first week of August 1982, at the earliest. We know also, from Scripture, that this great earthquake does not occur until after the signs in the sun and moon and stars (planets) concur. The concurrence of the signs in the sun and planets only narrows down the timing of the occurrence of this prerequisite prophecy to the year of 1982. To narrow the timing of this prophecy further, we must consider what must be the fulfillment of the "sign in the moon."

What is the only natural sign in the moon, and does such occur in 1982? The only natural sign in the moon, an eclipse, occurred on the night of July 5&#64979;6, 1982. How does this eclipse relate to the beginning of the likeliest time for this earthquake, the first week of August 1982? The most likely time of day (although by no means conclusively) for the commencement of the rapture (the rapture of the man&#64979;child and first&#64979;fruits) is midnight ("At midnight, a cry was made."), Israeli time. This spectacular total eclipse in July occurred precisely one lunar cycle before midnight (Israeli time), August 4&#64979;5, 1982; which, in turn, is exactly mid-way between Spring and Fall. It is my opinion that the inference to be drawn from this sign in the moon is that the last week of years can start at any time after midnight of August 4&#64979;5 1982.


This date of 4004 B.C. is a date indicated by the Scriptures. Its actuality may not be verifiable directly from Scripture. This is to be expected as a ramification of free will, since the direct determination of an exact date would be too prone to objective methods of proof and disproof. However, the very fact of its indicativeness increases the significance of this date, since this indicated date applies as well to the date of Adam's "creation," i.e., his receiving of a human spirit.
As we have seen previously, Christ was actually born in the year that we record as 4 B.C. Thus, it was four of the Lord's days (exactly 4,000 of our years) from the indicted date of "creation" to the birth of Christ. Using the same reckoning, the time of the Lord's return (which will be at the beginning of the seventh day, the millennium) should be the year 1996. If He has not returned by this time, then He has tarried because the bride still hasn’t made herself ready.


amessageforthehumanrace
 
Upvote 0

ThinkForYourself

Well-Known Member
Nov 8, 2013
1,785
49
✟2,284.00
Faith
Atheist
The Specific Cause of the "Evolution vs. 'Creationism'" Controversy, and of the apparent discrepancy between science and the Bible
...

Disagree with points 1 -> 6.

...
To those who are not yet my brothers and sisters: The world is headed inexorably in one direction, and no one can prevent it. Christ will return and, by all indications, sooner not later. THIS FACT, ...

The fact is, there is as much chance of Professor Dumbledore coming to life.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,220
3,838
45
✟926,829.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
I think a lot of the evolution/creation dichotomy come from a simple thing: the YEC/OEC interpretation of scripture.

Both Christians and non believers can read Genesis as literal and that run directly against evolution.

Only isolated weirdos like Andy Schlafley or Morse have issues with general laws of physics for Christan reasons, but many people done like evolution.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟281,096.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The Specific Cause of the "Evolution vs. 'Creationism'" Controversy, and of the apparent discrepancy between science and the Bible

1. Human beings cannot understand abstract, invisible realities without first learning visible, concrete references. Radio waves are a good example: you cannot detect them directly with the 5 physical senses- yet they are nonetheless real. Spiritual matters are likewise not amenable to direct mental comprehension.
2. It is impossible to understand the Bible merely with the finite human mind alone, regardless of how much time and theology you employ to do so. The truths contained in the Bible must be REVEALED spiritually in order to be correctly understood mentally.
3. The best means to convey this is the illustration of learning a language. You cannot directly learn a language, the components of the language must first be directly correlated to visible concrete objects. A human being (a child, for instance) is first shown a visible picture of a physical object and then the audible or written symbolic language component is linked to it to give comprehension.
4. Likewise, the spiritual reality to come forth in the New Testament would be totally incomprehensible without firstly having the detailed typology of the Old Testament.
This is the crux of the reason why the mind alone is incapable of understanding the Bible: some of the accounts are literal, and some are allegorical. Without revelation, you confuse the two and fall into systematized error.
5. For example: "Behold the Lamb of God". Certainly allegorical- Christ is not being described as the 4-legged offspring of a sheep here. 'The New Jerusalem, the bride of the lamb'. Is the lamb marrying a physical city? No! Again, obviously allegorical. If the Bible is the Word of God, then scientific, empirical knowledge cannot help but verify it. Any apparent discrepancy is due to one of three things: A. Unjustified, inductive extrapolations of scientific findings. B. Incorrect, dogmatic (present on both sides of the E. vs. C. issue) interpretations <usually traditional> of either secular or scriptural <or both> evidence. C. Lack of evidence in critical, specific areas for the purpose of preserving free will. Example: IF science ascertained factually that there was no fossil record prior to 6,000 years ago (i. e.: Adam and Eve, the human race magically and instantaneously appeared) don't you realize that this would be such prima facie evidence of direct Divine intervention that it would interfere with free will?
Now, to apply these parameters to the crux of the matter.
Life, like radio waves, is abstract and mysterious: it cannot be analyzed and comprehended directly. So any depiction of the process of life must be communicated allegorically.
6. The Bible is a book of LIFE, NOT a book of knowledge. Genesis Chapter One is an account of the propagation of life, NOT creation per se. It is an allegorical depiction of the relationship of the Spirit, the Word, light, and life. It is NOT a scientific chronology of creation. If a person interprets it literally instead of allegorically, then they are doomed to try to fit the square peg of the fossil record into the round hole of their mistaken (and incorrect scripturally) dogmatic, religious fallacy.
To my dear brothers and sisters: When did 'Creationism, et. al.' become an article of the faith? Why is it virtually considered heresy to believe that God may have used evolution to create man?
To those who are not yet my brothers and sisters: The world is headed inexorably in one direction, and no one can prevent it. Christ will return and, by all indications, sooner not later. THIS FACT, and not any amount of accumulation of the details of the physical universe, needs to be your primary consideration. The outward picture of the Flood and the Ark is a type foretelling a spiritual reality to come. It would be 'wise and prudent' for you to expend a modicum of time and effort to ascertain what the 'ark' symbolizes, and how you can enter into Him before the flood comes.
amessageforthehumanrace.org

I. The Bible is unique
There is no comparison with any other works of mankind. No other books had anywhere near the number of contributors (39+), nor have any been written over such a long span of time (1,600 years). Yet it is profoundly cohesive in all of its contents.
II. The Bible is God's word
In addition to the infinite profundity of the whole, it contains prophecies of many events that are still future in terms of time. These are given with adequate and specific details to be able to unmistakably predict in advance the events recorded.
It is not possible that it is merely human in origin because many of its ramifications are beyond human capabilities.
III. Creationism aka 'Intelligent Design' are not scientific disciplines and therefore should not be taught as such in schools.
"The scientific view of the Universe is such as to admit only those phenomena that can, in one way or another, be observed in a fashion accessible to all, and to admit those generalizations (which we call laws of nature) that can be induced from those observations."
Any explanation of observed phenomena, that invokes to any extent supernatural influence such as divine motivation, is thus inherently self-disqualified from being a scientific discipline.
IV. Evolution is valid
Evolution, however, is the only valid scientific theory which adequately explains the known data. And it has been verified by the correlation of the relevant data corresponding to its testable conclusions.
Dear reader: please lay aside any and all traditional, biased schools of thought within the realm of prideful, puffed-up knowledge. Objectively consider that God may have used evolution to create man. Do not disregard so doing due to bias, dogmatism, or love of argumentation.
amessageforethehuman.org

Actually, there's every indication that the bible is written by man and mostly fabrication.

*bold mine
 
Upvote 0

pgardner2358

AChristian1985
Sep 28, 2014
40
0
Visit site
✟7,765.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I already interpreted prophecy accurately beforehand: some of which has already occurred AFTER I predicted it. Unlike Hal Lindsey, who said that when the 9 members of the common market became 10 that the anti-christ would appear. Still haven't read an apology or explanation of this incorrect interpretation.
 
Upvote 0

pgardner2358

AChristian1985
Sep 28, 2014
40
0
Visit site
✟7,765.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
To avoid any possible misunderstanding, let me finally, firmly, and completely clarify my position regarding 'Evolution vs. Creationism, et. al.' :
It is absolutely vain babbling (spiritually speaking) to speculate about man's origins. Such speculation is totally from the wrong tree- the tree of knowledge of good and evil; and as such it is totally incapable of conveying spiritual nourishment and edification.
I have no motive whatsoever to attempt to validate 'Evolution'.
However, I am 100% against any and all persons (regardless of purity of motivation) who in any way make the disbelief in Evolution a tenet of the Christian Faith, a Faith given once to all whom God has chosen to be His people.
I challenge anyone to dispute the following assertion: "It is completely possible to believe in 'Evolution' and to receive Christ as one's personal Savior, becoming genuinely born again."
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cerad

Zebra Fan
Dec 2, 2004
1,473
110
65
✟10,975.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I challenge anyone to dispute the following assertion: "It is completely possible to believe in 'Evolution' and to receive Christ as one's personal Savior, becoming genuinely born again."
Well that is easy enough to dispute. People are only born once regardless of their beliefs so the assertion is nonsense.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Oh boy...



So, you can't believe in it until you believe in it. Great.

Is that what you got from that?

What they actually are trying to say is, "you can't understand it fully until you believe in it"

The Bible is meant to be understood, on the most basic grounds. Once you believe it's theme and trust in it, your eyes will be opened to the compelex nature of it. It is truly a living book.

And still people claim that there are divine interventions every day and try to use them in conversion, citing cured cancer victims or making their flock drink castor oil turned into pineapples or handle poisonous snakes.

Just so you know, a very close friend of mine was "getting his affairs in order" so to speak. He had cancer in his throat and it had spread to his gall bladder after about a year. He went to a faith healer and.....nothing,,

He was getting depressed. Very depressed. Four children and now a relatively young man, was going to pass away and leave them fatherless.

Never walk his daughters down the isle. Never meet his future daughter in laws.

Anyway, after a CT scan to check the progress, with further depressing conformaiton of his ultimate state of health, he went back to the healer.

This time, he knew from the moment of the healers touch. The depression left, instantainiously. He went to the doctor who refused a CT scan, again, so soon, based on "religous" bunk. He then went for a scope of his throat. The doctor who did this was amazed. NO tumour, not even scarring.

The gentleman waited several months before announcing his news. The doctors, then, did complete work up and are astonished. No cancer in his body anywhere.

Say what you like, this man is healed, somehow.

Actually, radio waves can be very much analysed and comprehended. Perhaps not by you.

This is facinating. Can you hear radio brodcasts without a radio reciever to convert them electrical waves and sound through speakers??? That should be on Ripleys believe it or not....


It isn't, the vast majority of christians, as their biggest denomination, the catholic church, firmly believe in evolution (If belief is the right word).

I believe you are correct that the catholic church probably has the largest "congregation". I believe that the "pope" has publically stated that the catholic church has caved to the belief of evolution.

However, numbers, as stated by many here, mean nothing. Someone went to great lengths in on thread to state, basically, "the truth is the truth no matter how many believe it, or what is presented, what changes in history, no matter what, truth is a constant".

That's because a council of old people came together and decided on the composition of the bible, discarding anything that didn't fit (which we today call apocrypha).

They probably weren't old at the time. However, the council that got together to put together the cannonized scripture toiled over it and used many different methods, rules and procedures to determine what was and wasn't cannon.

How do we know that the bible is perfect? Because everything fits!
How do we know that something isn't part of the bible? Because it doesn't fit!

I believe that God lead the men that cannonized the scripture just as much as He lead the men who penned it.

*bashes head against desk*

Call me if any of these future predictions ever come to pass. Until then, they are as good a guess as mine (and most likely, less so), because in contrast to the bronze age authors and iron age editors of the bible, I have wikipedia.

I won't be here to call you. However, you will be well aware that the "future predictions" are taking place. You won't be able to escape them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟21,267.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Evolution is backed by evidence to the extent that it is considered to be a fact, creationism is backed by words written when people knew very little about anything and is considered for this reason to be a myth.
People who believe in myths are not doing themselves or their offspring any favours, in fact it is possitively detriment in more ways than one to them all.

Evolution is backed by fantasy stories you seem to accept as fact.
The evidence we all have to examine speaks extremely against
Darwinian evolution. Unless you just mean variation in species
which is fact.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Evolution is backed by evidence to the extent that it is considered to be a fact, creationism is backed by words written when people knew very little about anything and is considered for this reason to be a myth.
People who believe in myths are not doing themselves or their offspring any favours, in fact it is possitively detriment in more ways than one to them all.

The evolution camp wants it to be a fact so badly that they criticise, slam, disparge, reprehend, trash, condescend, protest anyone speaking against it, no matter what their age, sex, education or the facts that they are presenting.

Anyone who publically comes out to back creation is publically humiliated so that it discourages others to do the same. It's bullying at it's best.


The fact of the matter is, all the data and evidence that evolutionists use to back evolution is the same evidence used to prove it is a farce. It just depends on who is presenting it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,141
Visit site
✟98,005.00
Faith
Agnostic
The evolution camp wants it to be a fact so badly that they criticise, slam, disparge, reprehend, trash, condescend, protest anyone speaking against it, no matter what their age, sex, education or the facts that they are presenting.

What we want is for creationists to present an honest argument that is based on fact. Sadly, they can't do it. Instead, we get posts like yours.
 
Upvote 0