as it was,so shall it be/choking on a gnat ?

[twinc]

But it doesn't say how he did it. And since a Day* in scripture is not the same as a day for us, who knows how long it actually took?

* according to Aman777

even though God dwelt in our midst and showed us how He creates and how long it takes - in an instant water was made into wine,in an instant the blind saw and the lame walked and the dead were alive etc - He spoke and it was done - twinc

 

[toLiJC]

But it doesn't say how he did it. And since a Day* in scripture is not the same as a day for us, who knows how long it actually took?

* according to Aman777

the true God is hardly phlegmatic

Blessings

 

[rikerjoe]

even though God dwelt in our midst and showed us how He creates and how long it takes - in an instant water was made into wine,in an instant the blind saw and the lame walked and the dead were alive etc - He spoke and it was done - twinc

Even though what? You're missing the second part of that sentence....

Besides, different time, different method.... not impossible, right?

 

[rikerjoe]

the true God is hardly phlegmatic

According to whose timeline?

 

[dlamberth]

there is no evolution in the Bible, but it is written there that God has created the human and the animals in one day (reference: Genesis 1-2)

The evidence of evolution can be found within God's own Creation, as Created by God.

The Genesis Creation Story is the Creation Story of an ancient middle-eastern tribe of desert nomads.

The Bible is not a science book. It's a book about man's relationship with God.

.

 

[toLiJC]

The evidence of evolution can be found within God's own Creation, as Created by God.

The Genesis Creation Story is the Creation Story of an ancient middle-eastern tribe of desert nomads.

The Bible is not a science book. It's a book about man's relationship with God.

.

the evolution is not a vestige for existence of true God, because it shows sign(s) of biological mutation, while the true God should not be based on such an evolution, otherwise He would more or less be imperfect/unrighteous, e.g. if the Truth turns out that He created undeveloped bodies or organs which are a cause for afflictions, then He would be guilty

Blessings

 

[toLiJC]

According to whose timeline?

the true God does not need evolution - He is enough powerful to create perfect bodies

1 Corinthians 15:51-52 "we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

Blessings

 

[dlamberth]

the evolution is not a vestige for existence of true God, because it shows sign(s) of biological mutation, while the true God should not be based on such an evolution, otherwise He would more or less be imperfect/unrighteous, e.g. if the Truth turns out that He created undeveloped bodies or organs which are a cause for afflictions, then He would be guilty

Blessings

As I look around, it's very clear that evolution IS perfect and IS totally righteous. Just looking at the vast variety of life forms that God's Creation creates through change shows very clearly how perfect and righteous evolution is. God's own Creation, as Created by God is showing us this Truth in how He Creates new life forms. Unless of course one is calling God's Creation a lie.

.

 

[dlamberth]

the true God does not need evolution - ...

In the same breath, God's Creation, as Created by God is showing us that it is through evolution through which He Creates new life forms. So though God doesn't "need" evolution, it is the process that He is using. And He can do that as well.

The Genesis Creation Story is the creation story of an ancient middle-eastern tribe of desert nomads.

The Bible is not a science book. It is a book about man's relationship with God.

.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Genesis Creation Story is the creation story of an ancient middle-eastern tribe of desert nomads.

And the Evolution Story is the story of an Industrial Age European, who neglected his medical studies and left his country to go bird watching on some exotic island and came home diseased.

The Bible is not a science book. It is a book about man's relationship with God.

The Preservation of Favoured Races is not a science book. It is a book about mans' relationship to simian cousins.

 

[StormanNorman]

And the Evolution Story is the story of an Industrial Age European, who neglected his medical studies and left his country to go bird watching on some exotic island and came home diseased.

Which would have died along with countless other scientific hypotheses had there been no phyisical evidence across multiple scientific domains to support it.

 

[Split Rock]

The Preservation of Favoured Races is not a science book. It is a book about mans' relationship to simian cousins.

Why are you arguing with dlamberth on this point? How many times have you stated here that the bible is not a science book? Even when you agree with us, you still argue.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why are you arguing with dlamberth on this point? How many times have you stated here that the bible is not a science book?

Good point.

I musta got caught up in the passion of the moment.

Even when you agree with us, you still argue.

That goes both ways, doesn't it?

I agree with about 95% of what you guys say, including the age of the earth, yet you still argue about it.

 

[Tomk80]

I agree with about 95% of what you guys say, including the age of the earth, yet you still argue about it.

People do not argue with you about the age of the earth. They argue about your lunatic idea of "embedded age" and your completely moronic idea that you can have age without history.

 

[Split Rock]

Good point.

I musta got caught up in the passion of the moment.

That goes both ways, doesn't it?

I agree with about 95% of what you guys say, including the age of the earth, yet you still argue about it.

 

[AV1611VET]

People do not argue with you about the age of the earth.

Okay.

They argue about your lunatic idea of "embedded age" and your completely moronic idea that you can have age without history.

Well then, let's hear it for those who like to argue against lunatic & moronic ideas!

And for the record, chief, it's "maturity without history," not "age without history."

If an idea is going to be 'completely moronic,' let's at least get the proper wording, eh?

 

[Tomk80]

Okay.

Well then, let's hear it for those who like to argue against lunatic & moronic ideas!

And for the record, chief, it's "maturity without history," not "age without history."

If and idea is going to be 'completely moronic,' let's at least get the proper wording, eh?

A distinction without a difference. As is often the case with completely moronic ideas.

 

[AV1611VET]

A distinction without a difference.

Perhaps some cerebrums cannot handle the difference -- maybe because the heart gets in the way?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Perhaps some cerebrums cannot handle the difference -- maybe because the heart gets in the way?

You are the one who tries to think with organs other than your brain, which is the reason you got yourself into this mess in the place.

 

[AV1611VET]

You are the one who tries to think with organs other than your brain, which is the reason you got yourself into this mess in the place.

You mean "first place," don't you, thinker?