Do creationists accept the evolution of plants?

[stevevw]

So which is it, then? Will the laws not pass until the heavens and earth pass, or have they passed before the heavens and earth passed?

Also, Matthew is a direct quote of what Jesus said. Romans and Galatians are people who are not Jesus saying things. Why would Romans and Galatians, things regular people said, over-rule what Jesus Himself said?

They all mean the same thing. Paul is just explaining it in more detail. Paul was instructing the church about what the sacrifice of Jesus meant. If you look at the book of Hebrews it will go into it even more as this was to the Jews who were even more into the law and all its rituals. He was trying to tell them that Jesus had come to fulfill the law. The law is still there but before the law condemned people so they lived and died by the law. They could never live up to its standards because their weak sinful nature was always failing to keep the laws. They had to keep doing these rituals like sacrificing animals to atone themselves.

So now Jesus sacrifice was the ultimate sacrifice and His blood brought pardon for our sins. Thats why He came to fulfill the law and defeat the power of sin and death. So when we accept Christ we are born again as new people and live by the spirit and not the flesh. The flesh is weak and sins. The spirit is strong against sin because it is powered by the blood of Christ.
1 John 3:9
No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God.
"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith" (Galatians 3:13-14).


If you read Romans 6 . 1 to 23 this will explain the law and Gods grace through Jesus Christ.
14For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. 15What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! 16Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?

 

[rockytopva]

I cannot imagine a plant seed evolving.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The bible is full of spiritual truths. Being carnal and, according to scripture, an antichrist, you cannot understand spiritual truths.

Another fail by justlook.

Sorry, if you cannot define or defend a term you should not use it. Actually there are several terms there that you need to define. And your conclusion is not justified by any evidence given by you.

It looks like you are losing six ways to Sunday.

 

[Skaloop]

I cannot imagine a plant seed evolving.

You need to work on your imagination.

Besides, personal incredulity doesn't matter. I can't believe that I can take a picture of our cats on my phone and send it through the air almost instantly to my wife several miles away.

But hey, I just did that.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

So the verse of Scripture that lets us eat shellfish happens to be a hallucination?

If the Law is still in effect, should the Jews still be sacrificing animals for peace offerings, trespass offerings, sin offerings, wave offerings and meat offerings?

The Jews stopped making sacrifices because their temple was destroyed and the site desecrated.

The situation is called being under an abomination of desolation.

 

[46AND2]

I cannot imagine a plant seed evolving.

You don't have to. There is plenty of scientific literature on the topic.

 

[rockytopva]

You don't have to. There is plenty of scientific literature on the topic.

I still cant see a plant seed evolving. Its like... What came first... The plant or the seed?

 

[Skaloop]

I still cant see a plant seed evolving. Its like... What came first... The plant or the seed?

Plants. Since seedless plants were around about 50 million years before seed.

 

[46AND2]

I still cant see a plant seed evolving. Its like... What came first... The plant or the seed?

I can't see a magical being poofing something into existence, so...

And the plant came before the seed, as skaloop mentioned..

 

[rockytopva]

You don't have to. There is plenty of scientific literature on the topic.

If you want to out your eternal souls security on such stuff as that be my guest. In the eternal picture our life is a puff of smoke. Better choose wisely!

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you want to out your eternal souls security on such stuff as that be my guest. In the eternal picture our life is a puff of smoke. Better choose wisely!

Pascal's Wager fail.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I cannot imagine a plant seed evolving.

I know, its just sitting there, right? How can it be . . . evolving?

But a seed might harbor a mutation, and that mutation might have an advantage or disadvantage . . .

and then, several generations later, we might see more copies of that seed than would be its expected fair share . . . or fewer.

That's evolution!

Clearly, it would take hundreds of generations to see results.

 

[rockytopva]

The plant seed contains genetic code.... Programmed there by God himself.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The plant seed contains genetic code.... Programmed there by God himself.

Who do you think set up the whole evolution scenario, anyway?

 

[rockytopva]

Pascal's Wager fail.

On the cosmic scale the epic of life is very short. On that scale earth will soon look like mars. There will be none that will look on the scortched elements and wonder what kind of life existed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

On the cosmic scale the epic of life is very short. On that scale earth will soon look like mars. There will be none that will look on the scortched elements and wonder what kind of life existed.

That is true, life is very short. But you still used an old failed argument.

First, your devotion to your God is not free. Or at least it is not supposed to be free. Second if your God does not exist there are much better things you could be doing with your time. Third, there have been thousands if not millions of gods over the history of the Earth. Believing in the wrong one can be catastrophic. What reliable evidence do you have that your God is the right one. Remember that anything that is not based upon empirical evidence can probably be claimed by many other religions on Earth. If you think your God is unique so do the believers of other Gods.

If you are going to use Pascal's Wager, wouldn't it make more sense to pick the god with the best heaven?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The plant seed contains genetic code.... Programmed there by God himself.

Do you have any evidence that backs this claim? Without evidence you have nothing.

 

[rockytopva]

Do you have any evidence that backs this claim? Without evidence you have nothing.

No more evidence than you have.

 

[rockytopva]

That is true, life is very short. But you still used an old failed argument.

First, your devotion to your God is not free. Or at least it is not supposed to be free. Second if your God does not exist there are much better things you could be doing with your time. Third, there have been thousands if not millions of gods over the history of the Earth. Believing in the wrong one can be catastrophic. What reliable evidence do you have that your God is the right one. Remember that anything that is not based upon empirical evidence can probably be claimed by many other religions on Earth. If you think your God is unique so do the believers of other Gods.

If you are going to use Pascal's Wager, wouldn't it make more sense to pick the god with the best heaven?

The end of life is to be like God, and the soul following God will be like Him. Socrates

 

[46AND2]

If you want to out your eternal souls security on such stuff as that be my guest. In the eternal picture our life is a puff of smoke. Better choose wisely!

Evolution has nothing to do with my eternal soul, but thanks for passing along the oh-so-benevolent threat just the same.