NarrowPathPilgrim said:
Hey, he said he believed in evolution. Are you going to claim that evolution allows for a 6 day creation?
Depends on what kind of 6 days you are talking about.
Scripture is plain enough.
"And there was evening, and there was morning, the first day."
"And there was evening, and there was morning, the second day."
"And there was evening, and there was morning, the third day."
"And there was evening, and there was morning, the fourth day."
"And there was evening, and there was morning, the fifth day."
"And there was evening, and there was morning, the sixth day."
"On the seventh day, God rested."
And where does it say these were six days on a calendar instead of six days in a catechetical description of creation?
No!I think it is quite evident from my previous posts what I believe. "Let God be true, but every man a liar;" Romans 3:4
Exactly. Which is why I will take the testimony of God's creation over your fallible interpretation of scripture.
lol, animals are never and have never been equal with humans. God didn't create them that way and scripture is clear on that issue.
Scripture indeed accounts humans to be animals. I don't know the relevance of the term "equality".
I didn't say that they are "'nothing more' than other animals". I said "evolution views humans as nothing more than advanced animals."
You did indeed say ""evolution views humans as
nothing more than advanced animals."
I was informing you that you are mistaken. Evolution does not say humans are
nothing more than animals, "advanced" or otherwise.
This goes right back to the genealogy issue...if he was speaking symbolically of the human race why would we have genealogy that goes all the way to Jesus Christ?
To affirm the incarnation. To affirm that in Jesus, the Son of God really became part of the human species and experienced what it is to be human.
A lot
Could you be more specific?
No it does not. Evolution says that animals produce DIFFERENT KINDS. God created them the produce the SAME KIND.
In the KJV the word "kind" is used once in Genesis 1:11, twice in 1:12 in 1:21, and in 1:24 and three times 1:25. If we go back to the Latin Vulgate (since the Latin Vulgate was THE bible in Western Europe for over a thousand years, just as the KJV was THE bible in English-speaking countries for 4 centuries) we find that in 1:11, the first use in 1:12 and thesecond use in 1:21, the first use in both 1:24 and 1:25 the term translated as "kind" is "genus" and in the other instances the term translated as "kind" is "species"
(In Hebrew the original word is "meen" in all cases.)
Since St. Jerome used both terms "genus" and "species" to translate "meen" he is considering these words to be synonyms. Rather as if the KJV translators had sometimes said "sort" or "type" instead of always saying "kind".
It was many centuries later that "genus" and "species" were differentiated as scientific terms.
The point is that scientists borrowed the Latin term "species" for classification purposes. The original meaning of "species" is "KIND"! And up to the late 19th century, biblical scholars understood that "species" was the Latin term for what Hebrew calls "meen" and English calls "kind".
In short, "species" and "kind" are synonyms in English, just as "genus" and "species" were synonyms in the Latin Vulgate translation of scripture.
The whole notion that "kind" is not "species" is an invention of creationists to deal with the observed fact that species are not fixed.
http://christianforums.com/t736563
Evolution doesn't deal with "kinds". It deals with changes in species that produce diversification. So it doesn't say anything about producing new "kinds". Before it could, the term "kind" would need to be given a scientific definition just as "genus" and "species" have been.
I should have used "unchristian" instead of "atheist" because I am referring to those who "Have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof". (2 Timothy 3:5)
Is it your contention 2 Timothy 3:5 applies to every Christian who accepts evolution? Has God given you permission to make that judgement?
I've already posted them.
But, as chaoschristian says, you have not provided the analysis. You haven't shown that these scriptures contradict evolution.
