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.
What do you consider to be the problem with the platypus?
Whew! And it's a good thing, too!I don't have a problem with them at all.
Paul refers to evolution as:Thanks! Strange!
Charles Robert Darwin, February 1809 – 19 April 1882) was an English naturalist and geologist,[4] best known for his contributions to the science of evolution. He established that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestors,[5] and in a joint publication with Alfred Russel Wallace introduced his scientific theory that this branching pattern of evolution resulted from a process that he called natural selection, in which the struggle for existence has a similar effect to the artificial selection involved in selective breeding.[6]
Darwin published his theory of evolution with compelling evidence in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species, overcoming scientific rejection of earlier concepts of transmutation of species.[7][8
Charles Darwin - Wikipedia
That evolutionists will find a way to fit any animal into the evolutionary scheme. Is that statement false?
I am saying that no matter how unusual the animal might be-they will always find a way to reconcile it with the evolutionary theory. The platypus seems like a good example. Why do you consider it a bad example?
"I deny that I made any implication." That's a perfect reply to my post!I did compare the Platypus to an animal that would indeed appear unusual and which evolutionists would find unusual due to its obviously unusual appearance. But I am not saying that they have difficulties fitting it in. Am I?
Interesting! I never considered evolution as being referred to by that scripture until now. But you are right. It does involve tracing mankind back in time via ancestors and can be understood under the general term of endless genealogies mentioned in that scripture.Paul refers to evolution as:
1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
He also warns that Christians embracing evolution can end up denying the faith:
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Yes, indeed.Interesting! I never considered evolution as being referred to by that scripture until now. But you are right. It does involve tracing mankind back in time via ancestors and can be understood under the general term of endless genealogies mentioned in that scripture.
Without those genealogies you cannot give a date for creation. So which is it - the genealogies are to be heeded = YEC or they are not to be heeded =/= YEC?Paul refers to evolution as:
1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
AV1611VET ≠ YECWithout those genealogies you cannot give a date for creation. So which is it - the genealogies are to be heeded = YEC or they are not to be heeded =/= YEC?
Meh, Devil's advocate time...Without those genealogies you cannot give a date for creation. So which is it - the genealogies are to be heeded = YEC or they are not to be heeded =/= YEC?
Most (I haven't read all of them so it could be all) commentaries believe this is Paul warning not to get bogged down in Jewish genealogies and is very much referring to OT writings.Meh, Devil's advocate time...
The verse refers to "endless genealogies". The genealogies in the Bible do have an end at Adam and Eve, so the Bible isn't referring to itself there.
Speaking of OT writings, Solomon, who had apes imported [probably] for study ...Most (I haven't read all of them so it could be all) commentaries believe this is Paul warning not to get bogged down in Jewish genealogies and is very much referring to OT writings.
Speaking of OT writings, Solomon, who had apes imported [probably] for study ...
1 Kings 10:22 For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
... concluded this:
Ecclesiastes 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
Notice he calls evolution an "invention," not a "discovery" as scientists would have us believe?
Notice you have to quote mine and twist the Bible to make your point? Let's put that verse in context and see what we get, shall we?Speaking of OT writings, Solomon, who had apes imported [probably] for study ...
1 Kings 10:22 For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
... concluded this:
Ecclesiastes 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
Notice he calls evolution an "invention," not a "discovery" as scientists would have us believe?
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?