No. It doesn't teach evolution but neither does it teach math or reading. However, when one thing is clearly stated and man teaches something that totally refutes what is written then...it is a lie.
.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I understand what you've been saying, but I patently do not agree. The bible doesn't teach evolution, but it is most correctly interpreted in a way that makes the entire creation/evolution argument moot. It's truth or falseness has absolutely no bearing on scripture, no more than heliocentrisism and a spherical earth do.
Well, this statement is evil because it is in direct conflict with scripture. In the Bible, "Word" is capitalized only a few times, and never when it refers to scripture. In those cases scripture says "word of God" or "God's word". Small "w". We see capital "Word" only when referring to what or who?
WW - Germs, as we know....cause sickness and disease. Is knowledge of germs in conflict with His Word? No.
According to the scripture you provided, yes.
"Matthew 10:1 And when He had called unto Him His twelve disciples, He gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease."
It is in casting out unclean spirites that all manner of sickness or diseases are healed. But germ theory says that many diseases are caused by bacteria, and those can be cured by antibiotics. And no one gave them "power against unclean spirits".
Trying to fit in theistic evolution usually goes hand in hand with attempts at redefining the scriptures themselves, no coincidence.
A local flood is out of the question, your rationalizations really do not matter here.
Despite the fact that such an idea is flat out far fetched and simply not possible, it only becomes "possible" on the basis that it is a convenient way to explain away unwanted outcomes.
Christ referred to Jonah several times, I guess he was just referring to a "story" that must not have really happened, because you know, that's not "logically" possible. Does holding a TE view really skew your perspective of scripture that much? Noah didn't exist ey
No. It doesn't teach evolution but neither does it teach math or reading. However, when one thing is clearly stated and man teaches something that totally refutes what is written then...it is a lie.
.
In God's mind. After all, it is God's Creation that tells us evolution is true. You are ignoring God. Nay, you are denying Him.
WW - You're very mistaken. Jesus is the Word...the Word is written in the Book.
Sorry, but you are too late to pull that. You have already said "His Word" when referring to scripture. What's more, why do you capitalize "Book"? Book isn't normally capitalized. The only place where we capitalize normal words like "him" is when we refer to God. That's why we say "Him" instead of "him". So yes, you do worship a book.
There are so many things not hinted at in the Bible. Electricity, semi-conductors, Boyle's law, heliocentrism, planets beyond Uranus, the Andromeda galaxy, atoms, quarks, DNA, transuranic elements. Shoot, elements period. Why are you using this criteria to reject only evolution and not all the other things? Do you know what Special Pleading is? You might want to look up "logical fallacies" and find it.
C'mon, do you actually think God is male and female? God isn't even material, much less a gender! God is a Burning Bush. What gender did the Bush have?
You mean "in his image"? Not refute, but understand better. You are not using the phrase as it was used then. In this case, we have lost an important colloquialism over time. "In his image" had a definite meaning in that time. Because communication was so poor, an ambassador or representative of a merchant would be given power to negotiate binding treaties or contracts without referring back to the king or merchant. Such an ambassador would be said to be "in the image" or "in his image" of the king or merchant. So the phrase "in his image" in Genesis 1 doesn't really refer to either physical or spiritual appearance, but empowerment. God is telling humans that they are free to act on the environment. That what they do they do "in the image" of God, or with God's full backing. This is seen in the juxtaposition in Genesis 1:26 "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea ..." We tend to separate the image from the dominion, but it appears that those were two ways of saying the same thing. To be "in his image" was also to be given plenipoteniary powers and have dominion.
Paul was referring to the pagan worship in Rome. Did you notice "changed the glory of ... God into an image made like ..." The pagans were making images to worship.
Of course, you are doing the same thing! After all, you think God is like "corruptible man" and has a gender! Congratulations, you have become "vain in your imaginations" and done exactly what Paul warned against.
God created us male and female, but He did so by evolution. Notice that the religious significance of what Jesus said is the same whether God poofed us into existence in our present form or God created us by evolution. In defending your interpretation of scripture, you lost sight of the real message of Jesus.
This has nothing to do with TE. It is an attempt to remove our modern bias and culture from the reading to see scriptures as the ancient Israelites would have. By not giving such matters the proper respect and consideration, you are guilty of adding to the text what is not there.
I do speak in an absolute sense ...
And, what is the Biblical evidence for any form of evolution. There are many things I don't yet understand but for this to be true there has to be some evidence given in His Word that clarifies what is written in Genesis. Where is it?
It causes consternation as it is a lie.
In other words, I did NOT vilify any person. Unless evolution has suddenly become an "other" of one of "those."
And that's why it pushed one of your buttons.You would be mistaken...on three counts. No one pushed a button, it is contrary to His Word and because it is....if you see lying as evil, as do I, then...
Evade, evade, evade.
By your obvious smugness, I assume you believe that all Creationists agree among themselves?
Do the people that constantly bring up the "In His Image" think God has a internal Digestive Track, and other Body parts(Like us humans), or do they forget that God is a Spirit?
The evidence? Where? What scripture is skewed?
Please provide scripture with any hint of an evolutionary process of man.
.
Please provide scripture with any hint of an evolutionary process of man.
.
Don't get me wrong- I'm not denying that God created the Universe and all that is within it. But his mechanism for creating that Universe is not described in any detail in the Bible.
Maybe He created all species, fully formed, during the first 6 days of creation described in Genesis. Maybe he created some living species and then let the rest evolve to produce the multitude of species that we see today.
A biologist who claims that human beings evolved from inanimate matter that accidentally was given the breathe of life and, at exactly the same moment of its inception, was also given the ability to reproduce itself is really stretching the limits of credibility. But a human being who doesn't believe that with God, all things are possible, is also not being credible.
.
The basic building blocks of life are rather......basic. There have been numerous experiments that have shown how simulating the early earth's conditions lead to the formation of these building blocks. And nothing says that such isn't how "Goddidit."A biologist who claims that human beings evolved from inanimate matter
Accident implies intent which claims intelligence. Which would mean that if a person is attempting to debunk the idea of a universe without God then please use proper language. Otherwise we're sort of implying here that God went oops!that accidentally was given the breathe of life and, at exactly the same moment of its inception,
Why am I not surprised you haven't any idea what Timothy is referring to (hint: "All-scripture" doesn't include the majority of the modern day Bible).11 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:Where is it written? Where is what is told us in the very beginning corrected as being evolution? Where?
So if all Scripture doesn't include the majority of the Bible, just what does it include?Why am I not surprised you haven't any idea what Timothy is referring to (hint: "All-scripture" doesn't include the majority of the modern day Bible).
That's an interesting assessment, if Scripture is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" and was given by God, you would think it should be perfect. Are you saying or implying that God's inspiration is flawed and not trustworthy?It's amazing to me that fundies continue to quote that verse as evidence of a perfect Bible when 1) it says nothing about perfection and 2) there was no Bible when that was written.
Are you sure you want to make that argument? After all, according to Paul, God also gave the church apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, and for very similar reasons: "for the perfecting of the saints..., for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ". I don't know about the ones you know, but the pastors and teachers I've known have been flawed and not fully trustworthy, even though they are a gift from God and are inspired by the Holy Spirit.vossler;55928311 That's an interesting assessment said:profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" [/i]and was given by God, you would think it should be perfect. Are you saying or implying that God's inspiration is flawed and not trustworthy?
No. Mankind was created male and female....Adam was formed male. Eve came later, and then the problems arose.
Let me also say that there is a ton of evidence for the Flood that evolutionists seek to minimize and are quite prejudiced against. If you go to websites such as www.answersingenesis.org and www.trueorigin.org you will find many strong arguments for the Flood and for creationism from extremely intelligent, credentialed scientists.
Why am I not surprised you haven't any idea what Timothy is referring to (hint: "All-scripture" doesn't include the majority of the modern day Bible).
It's amazing to me that fundies continue to quote that verse as evidence of a perfect Bible when 1) it says nothing about perfection and 2) there was no Bible when that was written.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?