Why does "15 Questions for Evolutionists" brochure confuse the meaning of "evolution?

[OllieFranz]

Wow! AV had to go all of the way back to 1890 to find a long-dead scholar who agrees with him!

But Strong didn't entirely agree with him, and AV had to cut off the quote of the definition to make it appear that Strong did.

1) day, time, year

a) day (as opposed to night)
b) day (24 hour period)

1) as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1
2) as a division of time

a) a working day,
b) a day's journey
​

c) days, lifetime (pl.)
d) time, period (general)
e) year
f) temporal references

1) today
2) yesterday
3) tomorrow
​

 

[AV1611VET]

Fine. Please do not mention the Bible to me again or defer to religion in any way. You are confusing your arguments; bouncing between a purely naturalistc belief and attacking my interpretation of a Bible you don't believe in. There's no sense in using Biblical arguments with a person that doesn't believe in God. You can't separate the miracles of God from God. If you don't believe in miracles, then the world is your god.

 

[AV1611VET]

Wow! AV had to go all of the way back to 1890 to find a long-dead scholar who agrees with him!

Hmmm, I wonder if scholarship has made any progress in the past 122 years? Ya think? (Naaaah. I mean, what are the chances of that?)

Plus, AV once posted "Lexicons can take a hike!" But in this case, he cites the lexicon portion of an 1890 English Bible tool for laypeople. (Hmmm, I wonder if that is selective use of evidence----the kind of evidence that he usually says can take a hike?)

No doubt he and KWCrazy are both accustomed to having their tails between their legs after such topics are raised. AV apparently abandoned the 6+1=7day week argument of my post and instead resorted to simple denial. Good for him. It's all he's got.

You're welcome.

 

[Loudmouth]

But if you're talking about evidence about the Creation week, no evidence in the universe is going to convince me I'm wrong.

So evolution could be true and you would still claim that it is false.

 

[AV1611VET]

But Strong didn't entirely agree with him, and AV had to cut off the quote of the definition to make it appear that Strong did.

What do you mean Strong didn't agree with me?

Strong says YOM in Genesis 1 is a 24-hour period.

There was no need to post the rest of it.

We're talking Genesis 1 ... remember?

 

[Loudmouth]

Fine. Please do not mention the Bible to me again or defer to religion in any way. You are confusing your arguments; bouncing between a purely naturalistc belief and attacking my interpretation of a Bible you don't believe in. There's no sense in using Biblical arguments with a person that doesn't believe in God. You can't separate the miracles of God from God. If you don't believe in miracles, then the world is your god.

You don't have to believe in a religious text to know that it is wrong. If the Bible states that the Sun moves about the Earth, then the Bible is wrong no matter if you believe in it or not.

Also, as an atheist I have no gods that I believe in. It comes with being an atheist.

No, it did not, and again you're confusing your own argument. Aesop told a fable. Jesus taught using parables. Whether His parables were true only He knows. What matters to us was the meaning behind them, not whether they were based on actual events.

Perhaps you should think on that.

 

[AV1611VET]

So evolution could be true and you would still claim that it is false.

As long as I claim it is false, I am not going to claim it could be true.

 

[verysincere]

But Strong didn't entirely agree with him, and AV had to cut off the quote of the definition to make it appear that Strong did.

Yeah, I used to post that observation every time that AV posted the "selective excerpt". But he doesn't care because "Evidence can take a hike!"

Plus, in the creationist world, "settling" a debate simply involves quoting from somebody who agrees with whatever they are saying at the time. It doesn't matter if the source is relevant or authorative or accurate. It is simply a ritual, "I found someone that I will claim agrees with me---therefore, I'm right and everybody else is wrong!"

After all, creationists are accustomed to having a hard time finding the one in a thousand "expert" who will not contradict them and tell them that they are wrong!

 

[Loudmouth]

As long as I claim it is false, I am not going to claim it could be true.

Reality does not conform to your beliefs, AV. I am talking about reality, not your beliefs.

 

[KWCrazy]

2nd Timothy 3:
"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money....lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.

....In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

 

[KWCrazy]

You don't have to believe in a religious text to know that it is wrong.

I would think that if you knew it was wrong you wouldn't believe in it, and if you did believe in it you would be convinced it was right. Who believes in that which they know is wrong?

If the Bible states that the Sun moves about the Earth, then the Bible is wrong no matter if you believe in it or not.

The Bible makes no such false claims. It does, however, mention thermal currents, the fact that air has weight, the fact that the earth "hangs on nothing," that east and west can never meet but north and south can and many other things it took scientists centuries to learn.

Also, as an atheist I have no gods that I believe in. It comes with being an atheist.

Perhaps you should update your icon. It reads that you are an agnostic.

 

[verysincere]

But Strong didn't entirely agree with him, and AV had to cut off the quote of the definition to make it appear that Strong did.

I suppose we should let AV enjoy feeling like he has found someone to reinforce his position. (After all, how pathetic must it be to have to go back more than a century in hopes of finding somebody who might possibly agree with him?? Considering that AV spends his life coming up with strange ideas that others shun, it has to be a lonely feeling. I mean....this is the guy who insists that Noah got the pitch for waterproofing the ark in New Jersey! And he thinks Adam and Eve spoke Jacobean English. So if he can find an imaginary friend that applauds his Biblical exegesis, I suppose we should just let him imagine and enjoy the accolades!)

 

[KWCrazy]

2nd Timothy 4:
"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

How true that is. Paul predicted the arrival of evoutionists!!

 

[Loudmouth]

I would think that if you knew it was wrong you wouldn't believe in it, and if you did believe in it you would be convinced it was right. Who believes in that which they know is wrong?

So how do you determine if a claim is true or false? If I said that the Sun moved about the Earth, what would you do to convince me otherwise? Would you cite evidence?

The Bible makes no such false claims.

"But to want to affirm that the sun really is fixed in the center of the heavens and only revolves around itself (i. e., turns upon its axis ) without traveling from east to west, and that the earth is situated in the third sphere and revolves with great speed around the sun, is a very dangerous thing, not only by irritating all the philosophers and scholastic theologians, but also by injuring our holy faith and rendering the Holy Scriptures false."--Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615

He sounds a lot like you.

It does, however, mention thermal currents, the fact that air has weight, the fact that the earth "hangs on nothing," that east and west can never meet but north and south can and many other things it took scientists centuries to learn.

The Bible also says that the Earth sits on foundations and does not move.

Perhaps you should update your icon. It reads that you are an agnostic.

Same thing.

 

[verysincere]

The Bible makes no such false claims. It does, however, mention thermal currents, the fact that air has weight, the fact that the earth "hangs on nothing," that east and west can never meet but north and south can and many other things it took scientists centuries to learn.

1) Where does the Bible stay that "east and west can never meet but north and south can" ?

2) Who and when did scientists "learn" this "fact"?

(Sounds like someone's traditions are controlling their imaginations again.)

 

[Loudmouth]

2nd Timothy 4:
"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

How true that is. Paul predicted the arrival of evoutionists!!

Sounds like creationists to me. Creationists are the ones running away from the scientific evidence towards their own myths.

 

[AV1611VET]

I suppose we should let AV enjoy feeling like he has found someone to reinforce his position. (After all, how pathetic must it be to have to go back more than a century in hopes of finding somebody who might possibly agree with him?? Considering that AV spends his life coming up with strange ideas that others shun, it has to be a lonely feeling. I mean....this is the guy who insists that Noah got the pitch for waterproofing the ark in New Jersey! And he thinks Adam and Eve spoke Jacobean English. So if he can find an imaginary friend that applauds his Biblical exegesis, I suppose we should just let him imagine and enjoy the accolades!)

Ask me where the water went.

 

[verysincere]

2nd Timothy 4:
"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

How true that is. Paul predicted the arrival of evoutionists!!

This is an excellent example how KWCrazy (and others like him) use the Bible as their personal "proof text fishbowl) where they can impose any meaning they wish upon the Biblical text.

Obviously, anyone who actually READS the Apostle Paul's letter to Timothy knows that he was talking about Christian DOCTRINE, not some scientific theory of many centuries in the future!

Indeed, the text is actually CONDEMNING the very thing that Bible-ignorers like KWCrazy like to do: They decide what they WANT to hear and then impose it on the Bible as if it reflected what the Bible actually states.

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think (at any time in Church history) that Christian scholars thought that the Apostle Paul was exhorting Timothy about SCIENCE instead of CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE? No.

This is the worst sort of disrespect for the Biblical text: to assume that one can capriciously make the text say anything one wishes---especially in CONDEMNING whoever one perceives as "enemies".

KWCrazy, I can only take solace in the likelihood that you are continuing your "role playing" in order to mock those of us who are Bible-affirming Christ-followers. (Are you another Edward Current wannabe?) I have no empathy for those who mock the scriptures by anachronistically imposing their modern day squabbles with scientists into a letter written in the first century to encourage and exhort a young preacher to remain faithful to SOUND CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. Indeed, Paul was adamant that believers are to focus on the CROSS OF JESUS CHRIST and not to introduce man-made doctrines as if they are central to the Gospel--- some YEC leaders are prone to do.

No wonder KWCrazy goes silent when confronted with actually TORAH PASSAGES destroying his Genesis claims. The above is yet another demonstration that he hasn't the slightest idea (nor does he care) what a Biblical text was intended to mean. He can impose any tradition or imagination upon the text as he wishes.

Sad. Just plain sad.

 

[verysincere]

Sounds like creationists to me. Creationists are the ones running away from the scientific evidence towards their own myths.

Sad to say, most of the creationists who abuse the Biblical text in that way have no idea that the Apostle Paul was talking about doctrinal intrusions into the church, such as GNOSTICISM.

I apologize for the appalling display of scripture abuse being demonstrated in his posts. His mocking and contempt for the text is not in keeping with the teachings of Christ.

 

[KWCrazy]

So how do you determine if a claim is true or false? If I said that the Sun moved about the Earth, what would you do to convince me otherwise? Would you cite evidence?

Geocentrism is not a part of Biblical teaching.

But to want to affirm that the sun really is fixed in the center of the heavens and only revolves around itself (i. e., turns upon its axis ) without traveling from east to west, and that the earth is situated in the third sphere and revolves with great speed around the sun, is a very dangerous thing, not only by irritating all the philosophers and scholastic theologians, but also by injuring our holy faith and rendering the Holy Scriptures false."--Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615

I'm not Catholic. To me, a Cardinal is a bird. Jesus did not speak those words, nor is it written even in the earliest of books. That's like me quoting the words of the Rolling Stones and pretending it was written in the Gospels. How very dishonest of you.

He sounds a lot like you.

Nice flame. However, I've made no such assertions about cosmology, so I will take your petty, childish insult in keeping with the petty, childish way you worship the rocks and deny the one who created them.

The Bible also says that the Earth sits on foundations and does not move.

Of course, Jesus later states that He is that rock. By the way. You DO know that foundations are not always physical, right?
noun
1. the basis or groundwork of anything: the moral foundation of both society and religion.
2. the natural or prepared ground or base on which some structure rests.