Interestingly the first ad hom attack in this thread was you questioning if Papias was really a Christian.
Post 4: The question that comes to mind at this point is, are you an atheist?
That's because he used Howard Van Till as an example of the Theistic Evolutionist view.
Since 'the a priori assumption of universal common descent by exclusively naturalistic means' is your definition of evolution and contains one of your pet anti evolution presuppositional arguments, you are hardly going to get an evo agreeing with it.
It doesn't matter if the agree or not, they demonstrate the truth of what I'm saying with their arguments like clock work.
However, you have been told plenty of times that evolution is broader than the definition, 'the change in allele frequency in a population'. It includes the theory of evolution explaining the changes in alleles, and the billions of years of the evolution of life on earth. How can you claim they are equivocating when they told you again and again that evolution is broader than its narrow definition.
Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true, it makes it redundant. The difference between evolution as natural science and natural history is evident and obvious. The need to separate between what the word means and how it is used by someone is vital to dealing with modernist thought. They like to redefine words without telling you, Paul Tillich is a prime example of putting an atheistic philosophy in theological terminology.
The old saw that I must be anti-evolution because I'm a Creationist is not only not true, it's silly. That is unless you equivocate your naturalistic assumptions with natural science which is the practice of all evolutionists, theistic or otherwise.
Does that mean you can't write a biography about someone who is dead? Can't you write a biography about what happened when they were alive?
Of course you can but we don't call that science, we call that an historical narrative.
How many times have TEs told you they believe God created everything? The only error here is the way you keep making these claims about us no matter how many time we tell you otherwise.
That will get you into Genesis 1 but never get you past it. At least the Intelligent Design crowd give him credit for designing something, TEs can't even do that. What is the difference between a Theistic Evolutionist and a Darwinian who is an atheistic materialist. When it come to the creation of life there is none.
Moses didn't invent the story of Creation and they didn't copy it from cuneiform tablets. The revelation is from the only one who could have known what happened during creation week, God himself. You conveniently ignore this vital point of doctrine along with virtually every point of doctrine in Christian theism which is the practice of most TEs.
Papias has at least identified himself with a formal theology, that ties him to a standard. What do you believe, I'm not trying to be facetious here I'm seriously asking. What makes a person a Christian?
You give me your Christian testimony and I will be happy to share mine. I know all too well what you don't believe, you don't believe Genesis has any credibility as an historical narrative. I know you abandoned the Catholic Church, well, as a matter of fact so did I but that's because I became an evangelical.
What exactly do you believe about God and the historicity of Scripture? As a matter of fact I would like to hear you thoughts on God as you understand him. This is a theology forum after all.