How do I "stimulate", my Evolution? I can be stimulated to embrace the theory, but what next?

[AV1611VET]

It's a reference to Mary.
They nearly deify Mary and give her titles like queen of heaven, the co redemptrix, co mediatrix, etc.
all of which are unbiblical.

Indeed.

The angel said:

Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

He did not say:

Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou above women.

That distinction goes to Jael.

Judges 5:24 Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent.

... and has nothing to do with her sinful flesh.

 

[partinobodycular]

That's what 1 John 1:9 is for.

To confess our individual sins.

But the ROOT cause of our sins still remains, since it's in our flesh; and that root needs to be taken care of.

Put another way, 1 John is for the fruit, initial salvation is for the root.

This is for me a very interesting topic, unfortunately it's not the subject of this thread and I'm not allowed in the forums where this subject is generally discussed. Suffice it to say that I think that you and I have slightly different perspectives on sin. We all sin because we all fall short of the glory of God. We're not perfect. And Mr Laurier would probably admit that he's not perfect. But there's nothing intentionally evil about that, and I think that that's what Mr Laurier is referring to, that he doesn't act with evil intent, and for that I'm willing to take him at his word. He's not a sinful person. Does he fall short of perfection? Of course he does, we all do. Are we evil sinful people for doing so...no. Does God need to forgive us for being imperfect...no. I think you err because you're giving sin a connotation that the bible doesn't necessarily intend, that we're all somehow wretched evil people, when this simply isn't true. We're just imperfect.

As I say, this is a very interesting subject...but it's off topic, so unfortunately, I'll try not to deflect the thread any further.

 

[Jamdoc]

I do find this to be a bit odd, you choose not to be a Catholic and yet you use their book. If you're going to question their other doctrines why not question their book as well?

You are of course free to do whatever you want. It just seems a little odd to me.

It's not their book, they didn't write it. They compiled what had already been written, and frankly... the Catholic bible is different than the Protestant bible, so, a second compiling was done.
and.. the Catholics don't stick to their bible, they have a lot of traditions that are extrabiblical, like purgatory, and "venerating" statues.

 

[Gottservant]

But evolution is not a concept. It is a scientific and biological fact, and it happens regardless of what you, I or anyone else in the world thinks about it.

Now I know you are mad, "not a concept"?

You are suggesting that once something has died, no one, anywhere wants to have the child again - this is not true.

 

[Gottservant]

Your question points out a great difference between science and these practices.

Science is the study of what happens in reality.

We do not need to practice being attracted to the earth via the theory of gravity. Gravity happens. You don't need to understand the theory of gravity in order to be subject to gravity. You cannot 'escape' gravity through ignorance or indifference or defiance.

The same is true of evolution. It is a fact of nature. It happens.

Yes, but if I am indifferent to falling, I never discover gravity.

I may still survive, but that survival is not necessarily "more attractive" (on the basis of gravity, anyway).

 

[Gottservant]

No god, no sin. Don't believe in either.

Saying there is no sin, equally breaks the Law (selah)

 

[Gottservant]

And since we can't meet that measure of justice, God meets it for us.
[...]
Our own attempts at justification doesn't cut it.

For the record, there are three types of judgement that God meets out:

1. Justice = getting what we deserve = Hell
   
2. Mercy = not getting what we deserve
3. Grace = getting what we don't deserve = Heaven

And guess which one God offers?

[...]

This inspired me: what we can get from God, is an "Evolution we don't deserve".

 

[Gottservant]

A similar genetic profile, is its own kind of Evolution (selah)

An own kind of Evolution, is greater than Evolution ad hoc (selah).

Evolution ad hoc, never chosen over greater Evolution,, is the first to be weeded out (selah).

 

[Gottservant]

Just FYI, Jesus said to do this:

If you are not getting anything out of Evolution, don't do away with it: question your assumption, that things evolve and try to verify it, "the truth that starts to become evident, because of it"

You can see the parallel, right?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

My ophthalmologist is a YEC.

How do you suppose he's able to stay in practice, in view of the fact that worldly science says it took the eye 364,000 years to evolve?

You don't have to know how metals are mined, refined, and smelted to be a good mechanic - but if you believed the metal supplier conjured them up by magic, you'd be wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

You don't have to know how metals are mined, refined, and smelted to be a good mechanic - but if you believed the metal supplier conjured them up by magic, you'd be wrong.

Would you hire someone who thought that?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Would you hire someone who thought that?

I'd hire a good mechanic, but I wouldn't expect him/her to know how metals are mined, refined, and smelted.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd hire a good mechanic, but I wouldn't expect him/her to know how metals are mined, refined, and smelted.

Should I take that as a NO, or a YES?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Should I take that as a NO, or a YES?

'Yes' if I wanted a good mechanic, 'no' if I wanted someone that knew how metals are mined, refined and smelted. Obviously.

 

[AV1611VET]

'Yes' if I wanted a good mechanic, 'no' if I wanted someone that knew how metals are mined, refined and smelted. Obviously.

In 2000, would you hire someone to teach high-school science (viz., astronomy), that believed we only had eight planets in our solar system?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Now I know you are mad, "not a concept"?

You are suggesting that once something has died, no one, anywhere wants to have the child again - this is not true.

No, that's not what I'm saying in the slightest. You treat evolution like it is a concept. But evolution is not a concept. It is a scientific and biological fact, and it happens regardless of what you, I or anyone else in the world thinks about it.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

A similar genetic profile, is its own kind of Evolution (selah)

An own kind of Evolution, is greater than Evolution ad hoc (selah).

Evolution ad hoc, never chosen over greater Evolution,, is the first to be weeded out (selah).

And nonsense again.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

In 2000, would you hire someone to teach high-school science (viz., astronomy), that believed we only had eight planets in our solar system?

In 2000, I was a software developer, not a headmaster or school HR.

 

[AV1611VET]

In 2000, I was a software developer, not a headmaster or school HR.

Is that code for YES or NO?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Just FYI, Jesus said to do this:

"If you are not getting anything out of Evolution, don't do away with it: question your assumption, that things evolve and try to verify it, "the truth that starts to become evident, because of it"


You can see the parallel, right?

The quoted text you listed didn't match (even closely). This seems like one of your rantings about your miscomprehension of evolution that you're trying to attribute to Jesus.

You claim this text is Luke 13:8, but that text (in a very archaic form in the pop-up) is the Luke's "Parable of the Fig Tree". (Which is just a re-write of the cursing of the fig tree by Jesus in Mark 11:12-14 and Mark 11:20-25. (Luke is probably rewriting this as a parable because the original makes Jesus look a bit unreasonable.)

None of these texts say anything about "Evolution".