For me, it's either theistic evolution or nothing.

[Papias]

So what would you conclude when the opposite happens, i.e., several different methods return totally different dates and all of them wrong? Would that not suggest that the method is not as foolproof as is often claimed?

It's rare, but it usually spurs investigation, and there is usually a clear cause. There are many examples of several methods confirming each other. That's why the scientist who use these methods know they are reliable - including the many scientists who are Christians.

In Christ - Papias

 

[Alithis]

There are mountains of evidence for evolution. It is corroborated by research in every field. Scientists are basically unanimous these days. The only ones who won't give in, after 150 years, are the fundamentalists.

So for me, and many others I'm sure, it's either theistic evolution or we simply can not believe in Christianity.
This is why Christians should stop telling people they can't believe in evolution. Is a person's belief in evolution going to send them to Hell, as long as they believe that Jesus has saved them and they have accepted him? No! As long as the central belief is there, it doesn't matter what a person thinks about the origin of the earth. It's like whether a person believes in post-Trib or pre-Trib. Who the hell cares?

If Christians keep pushing the view that people can't believe in both Christianity and evolution, many potential Christians will be lost. They will be pushed away from the church as it becomes increasingly anachronistic. The will say, "I believe in evolution; of course I can't be a Christian." But that's only because Christians themselves have promoted this view. They have a damn grudge match with evolution. Christianity and evolution need not be mutually exclusive.

I believe in evolution, and in my view, if God was involved, it is an absolutely beautiful phenomenon. It is the work of a master artist, a supremely brilliant engineer. A single-celled organism gave way to all of the life we see on earth around us. It's amazing! Praise be to God for this glorious master work that shows us his incredible ingenuity.

there are literal mountains of evidence that show a mountain can be pushed up out of the earth in moments .. in nz here we just saw the sea bed pop up two meters above the the water ..took 1 minute to occur .

theistic evolution, its written in the sticky ';takes scriptural seriously ' sadly ..it just does not believe it .

 

[sfs]

there are literal mountains of evidence that show a mountain can be pushed up out of the earth in moments .. in nz here we just saw the sea bed pop up two meters above the the water ..took 1 minute to occur .

It's not clear what this has to do with the post you're responding to, which is about evidence for evolution, not the origin of mountains.

theistic evolution, its written in the sticky ';takes scriptural seriously ' sadly ..it just does not believe it .

"Theistic evolution" just means acceptance of evolution by a theist. That covers a wide range, from people who take the Bible very seriously indeed to those who have no interest in it.

 

[Alithis]

It's not clear what this has to do with the post you're responding to, which is about evidence for evolution, not the origin of mountains.

"Theistic evolution" just means acceptance of evolution by a theist. That covers a wide range, from people who take the Bible very seriously indeed to those who have no interest in it.[/QUOTE]
There is theories put forth by man.
There is God's word.
Man says a rock is xxx. years old so evolution is true.
Man says this in direct unbelief of God's word.based on his own measuring stick he himself made.
Evedence shows a mountain can form in a day.
One of you is lying about how long things took to occure.
And God can't.
So theistic evolution is spouted by those who read the bible and seriously disbelieve it.

 

[sfs]

There is theories put forth by man.
There is God's word.

Um, you do realize that "The Bible is God's word" is a theory put forth by men, right? As is the theory, "Genesis, when functioning as God's word, should be read as a literal, historical account." Why do you accept these theories?

Man says a rock is xxx. years old so evolution is true.

What kind of idiotic man would say that? I say that evolution is true because of the evidence for evolution, not because of anything to do with mountains.

Man says this in direct unbelief of God's word.based on his own measuring stick he himself made.

On the contrary. You are rejecting the actual work of God in creation, in favor of a measuring stick ("Genesis is literal history") that you made up yourself.

 

[Alithis]

Um, you do realize that "The Bible is God's word" is a theory put forth by men, right? As is the theory, "Genesis, when functioning as God's word, should be read as a literal, historical account." Why do you accept these theories?

What kind of idiotic man would say that? I say that evolution is true because of the evidence for evolution, not because of anything to do with mountains.

On the contrary. You are rejecting the actual work of God in creation, in favor of a measuring stick ("Genesis is literal history") that you made up yourself.

If you believe the bible is a theory put forth by man then your an atheist.. Sorry I didn't notice any tag identifying you as that.
If your are..then this conversation has ended.
Because the word of God is deemed to me to be authoritative and it classes atheists all in the same box. And advices we don't reply to those after there own folly.

 

[sfs]

If you believe the bible is a theory put forth by man then your an atheist.

Your response is confused on multiple levels. First, I didn't say that the Bible is a theory put forth by man, I said the idea that the Bible is God's word is a theory put forth by man. If you disagree, tell me who other than humans gave you this idea about the Bible? Second, being a human theory doesn't make it false -- lots of human theories are more or less true, after all. Third, believing that makes you an atheist? Seriously? Do you really not know that some people (like, hundreds of millions of them) are theists and also don't think the Bible is God's word?

Because the word of God is deemed to me to be authoritative

Yes, it's deemed by you to be authoritative -- as I said, it's an idea put forth by man (and woman), since it's seems likely that you're human.

 

[Paidiske]

MOD HAT ON

Just a friendly reminder to please address the content of posts, and not the poster.
Please abide by CF's rules on flaming and goading.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Alithis]

, I said the idea that the Bible is God's word is a theory put forth by man.1 If you disagree, tell me who other than humans gave you this idea about the Bible? Second, being a human theory doesn't make it false -- lots of human theories are more or less true, after all..

1.God did when he baptised me in the Holy Spirit and proved himself true and faithfully to his word,,No man gave this to me.
Second: : it does if it declares God to be a liar.

You claim to be a christian yes or no ?.you did not make that clear to me yet .
I've been informed to be more precise in my replies to you.I stated are an unbeliever .Of course I'm referring to the topical content .it's written .in 6 days he created the heavens and the earth. You Do not believe that .hence ,'you are an unbeliever of those words '.
Then you say it is just man's theory that the bible is the word of God. So you believe it is only a theory put forth by man that Jesus is the word of God become flesh .
You Dont actually believe he is,by your own reasoning your stating that too is only a theory put forth by man.

So what part of the Gospel do you actually believe ?
The c.f. rules state we cannot say or imply another is not christian.so I'm asking you outright for clarification.

Do you believe Jesus is The word of God who became flesh etc Or do you just believe that is only a theory put forth by man. ?

 

[Speedwell]

Do you believe Jesus is The word of God who became flesh..?

Do you believe that the Bible interpreted as the product of plenary verbal inspiration is the only way we can know this?

 

[sfs]

1.God did when he baptised me in the Holy Spirit and proved himself true and faithfully to his word,,No man gave this to me.
Second: : it does if it declares God to be a liar.

You're completely missing the point. I haven't said anything about what I believe the Bible to be, or what others should believe about it. I'm only talking about the limits to human knowledge.

You had a personal experience with God, and that convinces you that the Bible is God's word. Great -- really, good for you. But you're still relying on human perception for that belief, your own perception of your experience. And the rest of us have to rely on your human testimony about your human experience. Both personal experience with God and testimony about those experiences have a spotty record, though. They're fallible, just as everything we experience and know is -- because we're human. You can't get away from uncertainty and reliance on human faculties. That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that we throw out the Bible. It just means we walk by faith, not by sight, and that we see through a glass darkly.

You claim to be a christian yes or no ?.you did not make that clear to me yet .

You didn't ask. Yes, I'm a Christian.

 

[Alithis]

Do you believe that the Bible interpreted as the product of plenary verbal inspiration is the only way we can know this?

May i take your direct omittance of an answer to a very direct question to be a confession that you do not in fact believe in the lord Jesus .?

 

[Alithis]

You're completely missing the point. I haven't said anything about what I believe the Bible to be, or what others should believe about it. I'm only talking about the limits to human knowledge.

You had a personal experience with God, and that convinces you that the Bible is God's word. Great -- really, good for you. But you're still relying on human perception for that belief, your own perception of your experience. And the rest of us have to rely on your human testimony about your human experience. Both personal experience with God and testimony about those experiences have a spotty record, though. They're fallible, just as everything we experience and know is -- because we're human. You can't get away from uncertainty and reliance on human faculties. That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that we throw out the Bible. It just means we walk by faith, not by sight, and that we see through a glass darkly.


You didn't ask. Yes, I'm a Christian.

You're completely missing the point. I haven't said anything about what I believe the Bible to be, or what others should believe about it. I'm only talking about the limits to human knowledge.

You had a personal experience with God, and that convinces you that the Bible is God's word. Great -- really, good for you. But you're still relying on human perception for that belief, your own perception of your experience. And the rest of us have to rely on your human testimony about your human experience. Both personal experience with God and testimony about those experiences have a spotty record, though. They're fallible, just as everything we experience and know is -- because we're human. You can't get away from uncertainty and reliance on human faculties. That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that we throw out the Bible. It just means we walk by faith, not by sight, and that we see through a glass darkly.


You didn't ask. Yes, I'm a Christian.

You did not answer the rest of the question. Do you believe that Jesus is the word of God that became flesh .. as stated in John ch one. Or di you believe its jus mans words?
If the latter ,upn what do you base your declaration of faith ? For if you claim one part of scripture to be true..but another part to be untrue then your being of two minds .which is it?

and no im not missing the point, im highliting it.
God says one thing ..you say another.
then you say ..but maybe its god nosaying it.
there is zero faith in those words. So how do you say..you walk by faith hen you dont believe Gods words. Are Gods words?

 

[rjs330]

Do you believe that the Bible interpreted as the product of plenary verbal inspiration is the only way we can know this?

What is the other way we can know that Jesus Christ is the word made flesh besides the bible. How do you know he ever existed outside the word of God. How do you know he is the only way of salvation outside the word of God. How do you know there is a Holy Spirit outside the word of God? How do you know he was crucified and rose again outside the word of God? Is the word of God truth or not?

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

 

[sfs]

You did not answer the rest of the question.

Because I didn't read the rest of it. (It would be helpful if you used conventional sentence structure and punctuation, by the way.)

Do you believe that Jesus is the word of God that became flesh .. as stated in John ch one. Or di you believe its jus mans words?

I believe that Jesus is the Word of God. I also believe that John chapter one are words written by a man. I don't know what "just man's words" means.

and no im not missing the point, im highliting it.
God says one thing ..you say another.

Nope, you've missed it again. Here's a question for you: how do you know that God has said something, without in some way depending on a human being for that knowledge?

 

[rjs330]

Because I didn't read the rest of it. (It would be helpful if you used conventional sentence structure and punctuation, by the way.)

I believe that Jesus is the Word of God. I also believe that John chapter one are words written by a man. I don't know what "just man's words" means.

Nope, you've missed it again. Here's a question for you: how do you know that God has said something, without in some way depending on a human being for that knowledge?

How do you know that God said something without in some way depending on the human being. That's the point of God's word. To share the knowledge of God with us. Otherwise the only way to know anything about God would be for him to speak audibly to all of us. He hasn't done that so we are dependant on His word for truth.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

 

[sfs]

How do you know that God said something without in some way depending on the human being. That's the point of God's word.

So you received God's word without benefit of any human intermediaries?

 

[Speedwell]

May i take your direct omittance of an answer to a very direct question to be a confession that you do not in fact believe in the lord Jesus .?

No, you may not. In fact, your implication is offensive and skirts very close to being a reportable violation of forum rules.

 

[Speedwell]

What is the other way we can know that Jesus Christ is the word made flesh besides the bible.

Apostolic Witness. The Bible merely corroberates it.

 

[Alithis]

No, you may not. In fact, your implication is offensive and skirts very close to being a reportable violation of forum rules.

well since the reply was to this post ..

"
I've been informed to be more precise in my replies to you.I stated are an unbeliever .Of course I'm referring to the topical content .it's written .in 6 days he created the heavens and the earth. You Do not believe that .hence ,'you are an unbeliever of those words '.
Then you say it is just man's theory that the bible is the word of God. So you believe it is only a theory put forth by man that Jesus is the word of God become flesh .
You Dont actually believe he is,by your own reasoning your stating that too is only a theory put forth by man.

So what part of the Gospel do you actually believe ?
The c.f. rules state we cannot say or imply another is not christian.(if they identify as such )so I'm asking you outright for clarification.

Do you believe Jesus is The word of God who became flesh etc Or do you just believe that is only a theory put forth by man. ?"

it is made clear that it is not skirting anywhere near the rules . answer the statement instead of slicing one partial sentence from it .

when you refuse the declare belief in such a fundamental question on christianity (which is laid out also in the nicene statement as per the rules of what defines "christian at CF ).. then arriving at the implied conclusion is perfectly acceptable .

it is also a partial question on my way to a point in keeping with the topic of course . so answer the statement and lets get it clarified