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.
Well, if that is how you feel, what would you consider to be evidence then? As in, give an example of a hypothetical medium of information by which I can display evidence, that you would consider valid.
Isn't the Immaculate Conception supposed to take care of that?
Given the DNA studies that have been done over the last few years...the fossil record is NOT even needed to show evolution. We know that ALL humans came from Africa, and adapted to their environment. We know the indigenous people here in the Western Hemisphere are related to the people of Asia, genetically. We know that having blue eyes is a genetic mutation that can be pinpointed in time. The study of plate tectonics tells us that at one time all the land was gathered into one mass and has broken up over millions of years. We also know that the Pacific Ocean is growing while the Atlantic is shrinking.
Why is it so hard to comprehend that the bible is not a science text? Understanding evolution does nothing to denigrate one's faith. Acknowledging the immensity and the beauty of what we see is seeing God in it. Understanding the "Big Bang" theory takes me back to the uncaused first cause...who caused that? I believe God did it. Understanding science does nothing to undermine my faith at all.
It still doesn't change the fact that God could have "created" humanoid lifeforms, separate and in their own little pocket of the world, separate from what had evolved...
Understanding evolutionism...a faith in itself...undermines the reason why Jesus came as a Savior.
You say, no Adam. No Eve. No garden. No deception. No fall.
You say sin and death was not caused by one man.
You say man was not formed from the dust (1st Cor 15:47)....why do you filter your bible through science?
Don't you know science says when you are dead...you stay dead on day 3.
It doesn't follow at all that evolution undermines the notion that Jesus came as a savior, -57. However, one's interpretation of evolution is definitely connected with Christ. Granted, some evolutionary scientists are atheistic and coal upon evolution to back them up here. However, they are interpreting evolution to mean we are just random accidents in a universe which has no ultimate purpose. But is that an accurate understanding of the evolutionary process? There are major thinkers who have challenged this bleak picture. If evolution is purposeless in nature, why is their a definite direction? What does it seem to be moving upward, creating more and sensitive organisms? Why consider us a freak accident, alone and up against a universe otherwise composed of passive, inert, dead matter? In my why of thinking, evolution is telling us that a matter is alive, that the universe is a gigantic organism, not a machine. If so, the universe must have a mind, just as does any complex organism, and that means God. If the Incarnation is to be considered truly revelatory, then it has to represent God's general MO with the world and that means the universe can be thought of ass the body of God. You might try reading a major 20th-century thinker, Teilhard de Chardin. He introduces the concept of the Cosmic Christ and presents evolution as the hand by which God delivers us to himself. Bottom line: evolution does not necessitate one become an atheist, and could actually further develop your understanding of God's revelation through Christ.
Then why do we need Jesus? If evolution was directed by God and this God placed in our DNA the nature that we will choose against Him. Doesn't make sense. The account in Genesis tells us it was a choice. A bad choice. With your theology man simply evolved it. (directed by God)
As to Teilhard de Chardin..and the Cosmic Christ....No thanks. It's just a respreading of the lie in Genesis that you strangly seem to think was baby talk. Teilhard de Chardin are spreading the original lie....You can become the Cosmic Christ....A God.
Too much New Age. Definately not what a Protestant would hear from the pulpit on a Sunday Morning.
It makes not the slightest difference whether we evolved or were specially created. In both cases had the ability to rebel against God, and in both cases we chose to do so.
Then Paul lied.
My personal experiencial evidence stands on it's very own as enough proof for me
Then why do we need Jesus? If evolution was directed by God and this God placed in our DNA the nature that we will choose against Him. Doesn't make sense.
To quote John Walton, Paul was using Adam as an archetype.
It's called "free will." Does it make sense regardless of how God gave it to us?
being an agnostic it probably doesn't mean much to you...but the bible tells us why we sin. Those that have faith in evolutionism must change the reason why the Word of God says we sin.
If this is true, why in the world are you letting anything else bother you?
Why? Humans sinning had nothing to do with human origin, technically speaking.being an agnostic it probably doesn't mean much to you...but the bible tells us why we sin. Those that have faith in evolutionism must change the reason why the Word of God says we sin.
But you already know that I do not support the Universal ancestor idea in the first place, so why would I have to defend a component which I disagree with?Numerous people claim to have evidence, based on the scientific method, for the 'how' of Darwinist evolution which produced humanity from an alleged single life form of long ago. The burden of proof is on them to offer the evidence for their claim, something not a single one of them have done.
If you claim to have this information, please post it. The burden is on you, not me, to support your claim.
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?