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.
Creation Science is a contradiction in terms.“If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.”
Or what if evolving in that different time happened fast? No need to cower or retreat from N man, or etc.I always assumed we evolved throughout the years but a friend of mine at church ( which I just started attending for the first time) said that the evidence of neanderthal and cro magnon man . Please excuse the spelling are very loose on their factual material. They may have three small parts of bone and try to complete a skeleton based on speculation. Also what if the person was deformed or had rickets or something like that??
I agree, I expect it only took about 15 minutes (in real time) for it to happen in fact it might not have taken that long because God was watching over it, as we all know God can do whatever God wants to do so time was not a factor,Or what if evolving in that different time happened fast? No need to cower or retreat from N man, or etc.
Or we could [rig] vote on it and go from there.... if we like any of the ideas we think up we can incorporate them into our religion then everyone will believe them, they will become part of 'THE TRUTH'.
Or we could [rig] vote on it and go from there.
Would that be better?
Er ... not hardly.Hey, that's how the Bible was canonized!
I bet they teach a very interesting version of how the bible gospels were selected in your church, AV.Er ... not hardly.
Yes, and very amusing too.I assume it would be very interesting to you?
Of course it is --Yes, and very amusing too.
I looked at your post on your 175 link. It's bilge.
As I have said before, the validity of the books were already established.The canonization of the New Testament is about as political as it gets. The Gnostics were kicked out of theology debates and labeled "heretics", and many many theologians in the first century hotly debated the Trinity and many other nuances of theology. It really appears like the winners wrote the history on this one.
It would, in my opinion, take you guys years and years before you finally gave up -- (especially if I threw the Epic of Gilgamesh in for good measure).
And would these 'conservative theologians' agree with your assessment, viz., 'as political as it gets'?Most conservative theologians these days would roll their eyes at your assessment of the canonization process.
Wikipedia said:Evangelicals tend not to accept the Septuagint as the inspired Hebrew Bible, though many recognize its wide use by Greek-speaking Jews in the first century. They note that early Christians evidenced a knowledge of a canon of Scripture, based upon internal evidence, as well as by the existence of a list of Old Testament books by Melito of Sardis, compiled around 170 A.D. (see Melito's canon). Many modern Protestants point to the following four "Criteria for Canonicity" to justify the selection of the books that have been included in the New Testament:
- Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based upon the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their close companions).
- Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the end of the fourth century) as well as accepted canon by Jewish authorities (for the Old Testament).
- Liturgical Use — read publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord's Supper (their weekly worship services).
- Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar to or complementary to other accepted Christian writings.
And would these 'conservative theologians' agree with your assessment, viz., 'as political as it gets'?
Fair enough -- and I don't buy your knock-down-drag-out 'hotly debated' scenario, either.Which I don't buy as an explanation.
You can't use the Bible as evidence that the Bible is the Word of God.
Then get out there and get us some.You can't use the Bible as evidence that the Bible is the Word of God.
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?