How Creationism hurts Christian Colleges

[AV1611VET]

The Nephilim aren't fictitious then?

They would appear to be as fictitious as Paul Bunyan.

Then this remark:

Only AV would believe in the existence of a truly fictitious character.

... can take a hike.

 

[AV1611VET]

The burden of proof is yours. You are claiming that Jesus referred to these Biblical characters as real, literal people. Simply mentioning them is not that evidence, as I have already shown.

You can't find 2,000,000 people in a desert, given their itinerary.

 

[Sayre]

You can't find 2,000,000 people in a desert, given their itinerary.

Uh, that doesn't answer his question, which was a very good one.

Jesus mentioning the name of someone doesn't necessarily mean that person was a literal person in history.

You can't find 2 million people in the desert because IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

 

[FredHoyle]

Uh, that doesn't answer his question, which was a very good one.

Jesus mentioning the name of someone doesn't necessarily mean that person was a literal person in history.

How does anyone know for sure what Jesus said? because the bible says he did? the bible also tells us about a WW flood and a man living inside a fish so we're sure going to believe that book, I don't think.

In case you have all forgotten, not one writer of any of the books in the NT ever met Jesus or was even alive when he was supposed to be alive..

 

[AV1611VET]

Jesus mentioning the name of someone doesn't necessarily mean that person was a literal person in history.

The default position would necessitate we treat it as literal, lest obscurity get the upper hand.

As you guys so aptly demonstrate.

 

[AV1611VET]

How does anyone know for sure what Jesus said?

We have faith in the Documentation.

because the bible says he did?

Yes.

the bible also tells us about a WW flood

That's right.

and a man living inside a fish

Some ... including I ... believe Jonah died in the whale's belly and went to Hell.

so we're sure going to believe that book, I don't think.

Whether Jonah lived or died, you still won't believe It. You've made up your mind you won't. So appealing to Jonah was a nice try, but it makes you look like you're grasping at straws (gnats, actually).

If you don't believe the Bible ... don't blame it on Jonah.

Take responsibility yourself and man up.

In case you have all forgotten, not one writer of any of the books in the NT ever met Jesus or was even alive when he was supposed to be alive..

Thinks you.

 

[Sayre]

The default position would necessitate we treat it as literal, lest obscurity get the upper hand.

As you guys so aptly demonstrate.

Defend why literalism is the default when we are talking about pre enlightenment literature written in a culture where stories and myth were important mediums and the concept of history was different to what it is now.

 

[Sayre]

Some ... including I ... believe Jonah died in the whale's belly and went to Hell.

Whether Jonah lived or died, you still won't believe It. You've made up your mind you won't. So appealing to Jonah was a nice try, but it makes you look like you're grasping at straws (gnats, actually).

If you don't believe the Bible ... don't blame it on Jonah.

Take responsibility yourself and man up.

Thinks you.

Jonah is SATIRE. It's a joke.

 

[AV1611VET]

Defend why literalism is the default when we are talking about pre enlightenment literature written in a culture where stories and myth were important mediums and the concept of history was different to what it is now.

What is this? a Philosophy 101 final?

If you want to deny a literal interpretation of the Bible, don't let me stop you.

Just don't expect me to play along.

 

[AV1611VET]

Jonah is SATIRE. It's a joke.

No comment.

 

[Sayre]

What is this? a Philosophy 101 final?

If you want to deny a literal interpretation of the Bible, don't let me stop you.

Just don't expect me to play along.

Lack of defense is noted.

 

[Sayre]

No comment.

Lack of defense noted. Again.

 

[toLiJC]

and their students.

Article

on the contrary, the science is misleading, because it is based on a misleading experience, for the world was created about 5-6 millennia ago according to the written in the Gospel of Matthew 3:23-38, yet the science found that the process of (the) creation began about 5 billion years ago, but the manifestation of the "darkness" can make the creation to look much older by aging the matter spiritually as well as in other ways

Blessings

 

[PsychoSarah]

on the contrary, the science is misleading, because it is based on a misleading experience, for the world was created about 5-6 millennia ago according to the written in the Gospel of Matthew 3:23-38, but the science found that the process of (the) creation began about 5 billions of years ago, but the manifestation of the "darkness" can make the creation to look much older by aging the matter spiritually as well as by using other ways

Blessings

What? You seem to be missing some words in your sentence, I am having a rough time understanding what you are trying to communicate.