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.
Ok so if primates do not go back to Pangaea then what did they evolve from. What common ancestor was alive back at the time of Pangaea?
I accept Collins as the leading expert on the subject. He does not claim to have all the answers and he wants open discussion, that is what science is all about. Collins is a director and it is his job to know enough to get out and lead. As they use to say: lead, follow or get out of the way. Collins is a leader and I follow his teachings but that does not mean I agree with everything he says.Why do you ask? I thought that you accepted the work of Collins.
Don't tell me what you think he said, give me the quote so we can see what he really said.
Genesis chapter one is the first week. Then God rested for a day. Genesis Chapter two is the 8th day or the first day of the second week. Right now we are at the end of the sixth day of the second week.One can look at Genesis 1-2, for instance, and see that there is not just one but two stories of the creation of humanity, and those stories do not quite agree with each other.
I accept Collins as the leading expert on the subject. He does not claim to have all the answers and he wants open discussion, that is what science is all about. Collins is a director and it is his job to know enough to get out and lead. As they use to say: lead, follow or get out of the way. Collins is a leader and I follow his teachings but that does not mean I agree with everything he says.
This doesn't make any sense as an English sentence.
You have NOT answered my question. Which animals were on the Ark that were not already present on this earth? Specifically. Lions but not tigers? Kangaroos but not possums?
Ask him how long Adam lived with Jesus. Go on, I dare you.
Genesis chapter one is the first week. Then God rested for a day.
One can look at Genesis 1-2, for instance, and see that there is not just one but two stories of the creation of humanity, and those stories do not quite agree with each other. That alone ought to be reason enough to argue that the literal interpretation of every verse, in isolation from the rest of the Bible, can’t really be correct. Otherwise, the Bible is contradicting itself
No, you struggle to make the Bible, a work of man, to match reality but fail utterly every time that you try to do so.False. What it shows is that your interpretation of Genesis is wrong. What you falsely suppose is that God made an error and told 2 contradictory stories about the creation. God's Truth agrees in EVERY way with EVERY discovery of mankind IF you have the proper interpretation. Amen?
No, you struggle to make the Bible, a work of man, to match reality but fail utterly every time that you try to do so.
Instead of trying to reinterpret Genesis why not treat it for what it is? A collection of morality tales that can still instruct but have nothing to do with reality.
Because I don't want to go to Hell. Some dorks don't care but I do. How bout you?
You can't go to a place that does not exist. But now we can see the basis of your attempts to reinterpret the Bible. There are countless Christians that have realized that one does not need to read Genesis literally to be a Christian.
Then HOW did they become a Christian apart from God's Word?
Just because a mapping exists between a part of the Bible and reality for any given part does not mean that the Bible actually represents reality. To illustrate - if I say that "monkey fish" means all of physics, and then I tell you "monkey fish," am I a physics genius?False. What it shows is that your interpretation of Genesis is wrong. What you falsely suppose is that God made an error and told 2 contradictory stories about the creation. God's Truth agrees in EVERY way with EVERY discovery of mankind IF you have the proper interpretation. Amen?
-_- I just didn't feel the need to mention all of the various supercontinents that this planet has had.But there were ones before that, as the article that I linked showed. Of course you may have been relying on an older article.
1-_- I just didn't feel the need to mention all of the various supercontinents that this planet has had.
You need to ask them. But for starters they do not probably make the blasphemous error of calling the Bible, a work of man, "God's Word".
Of course you could take the more reasonable route.
Just because a mapping exists between a part of the Bible and reality for any given part does not mean that the Bible actually represents reality. To illustrate - if I say that "monkey fish" means all of physics, and then I tell you "monkey fish," am I a physics genius?
That's easy. A vague statement can be interpreted in many different ways - after the fact, it may seem to match well with our current understanding of reality, but if reality had been different the same vague statement would seem to fit just as well. Saying that life "came from the water" - well, where else would it have come from? Probably the water or the land, right? It could simply be a somewhat lucky guess.Here is reality: God told us more than 3k years ago that "every living creature that moveth" was created and brought forth from WATER. Science announced the discovery of the SAME thing last year. Meet Luca, the Ancestor of All Living Things - The New York Times
Meet Luca, the Ancestor of All Living Things
Now, it's your time to tell us HOW any ancient man who lived 3k years ago, knew and correctly wrote the recently discovered Scientific Truth. No one else can.
If I'm interpreting this correctly, God says that the water should "bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life", and this happens. Importantly, the "water bringing forth" seems to apply to the fowl as well. If I was just looking at this part, it seems like (according to this book) all things were "brought forth" from the waters. However, the next part is:20And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
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?