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.
So only young-Earth creationists are really Christians?You will have read my other posts about believing that the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore totally accurate, is an absolute requirement for anyone having a genuine faith in Christ as contrasted to just an intellectual religion that has no value with God at all.
Yes, there is historical evidence - the Bible.Sure, that's what the Bible says. That doesn't mean that it happened and it certainly isn't supported by other evidence.
That's nice.
However, that doesn't address the fact that even if a world-wide flood did occur at some point in history (even human history), it doesn't necessarily make the theological concepts in the Bible true.
Which goes back to your prior post that suggested the people reject the idea of a world-wide flood because of theological implications. That's not the case. People reject it because it's not supported by evidence.
Well, the Bible says that God created the universe and the world in six days just by speaking it into existence. Therefore it is not scientific, because science has no answer to how a whole universe and planet can be created out of nothing by a Person just telling it to exist. Genuine Christians believe the Bible as it is written as the true evidence of the events that took place. None of us were there at the time, so the Bible is all we have.So only young-Earth creationists are really Christians?
Yes, there is historical evidence - the Bible.
I don't need to. The Bible is all the evidence I need to satisfy me that the event actually happened. The faith that enables a genuine believer to believe the literal account of the Bible comes from the Holy Spirit. If they don't have that God-given faith they cannot believe what is written in the Bible.The Bible is not historical evidence that a global flood occurred. It's tells us a story, but that's about it.
If you want corroborative evidence you need to look to other disciplines (biology, geology, etc). That is where the evidence does not support the idea of a global flood haven taken place.
I don't need to. The Bible is all the evidence I need to satisfy me that the event actually happened. The faith that enables a genuine believer to believe the literal account of the Bible comes from the Holy Spirit. If they don't have that God-given faith they cannot believe what is written in the Bible.
There is "not interbreeding" and "unable to."what did they breed with? Many of the animals that would have to be within a kind can't reproduce. Not all foxes can interbreed, and that would create massive bottlenecks worse then what we see with the cheetah. So what did the first red fox mate with if they had to change in one generation.
what did they breed with? Many of the animals that would have to be within a kind can't reproduce. Not all foxes can interbreed, and that would create massive bottlenecks worse then what we see with the cheetah. So what did the first red fox mate with if they had to change in one generation.
Fossils take time to form.I don't get this (who said "there are not"? )
- there are fossils, seashells and other things, found on mountains directly because the worldwide flood Yahuweh sent to destroy mankind all over the earth left them there. Simple. We don't have to "imply" anything.
Anyone can call themselves a Christian, just like anyone putting on a marshal's badge and calling themselves the Marshal of Tombstone.What about other Christians that claim to have the Holy Spirit but don't believe that a global flood took place?
The 6000 year time frame seems pretty well established for biblical literalists; t wasn't only Ussher who made the calculations. And the Jews, whose book and tradition it is agree as well. Their liturgical calendar is based on the assumed date of creation and gives the current year as 5779.
There is "not interbreeding" and "unable to."
The second is more rare.
Fossils take time to form.
yes, but they are also going to be within a large enough group, you create that many changes that fast and they will have problems, you look at some species like horse and a donkey you would call same kind can produce offspring but they are sterile, same with leopards and lions...or is it tigers, but they are 99% sterile, then you have cheetahs that can't produce any offspring with other cats. For many species their offspring become sterile. So if you have a big cat progenator produce a lion and a leopard, who do they mate with? And where is all that information coming from? Where is the big cat progenator getting the dna for tigers, puma's, lions, leopards and jaguars plus maybe more I don't know of?
Fossils in a flash from an evolutionist site
Surprise! Fossils in a flash
We believe God gave the kinds all the DNA needed for a variety of species. How many kinds that was to start with we don't know. Maybe it was one large cat kind but it could have been two.
We believe God gave the kinds all the DNA needed for a variety of species. How many kinds that was to start with we don't know. Maybe it was one large cat kind but it could have been two.
well how come they can interbreed then, and kind is a useless word that has no actual meaning but what ever you guys want to make up at the time.
Fossils in a flash from an evolutionist site
Surprise! Fossils in a flash
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?