Some questions for Christians who accept evolution

[AV1611VET]

Ruth couldn't have known -- her book is attributed to Samuel. And the Jews (who should know, really) tend to attribute the Book of Esther to Mordecai.

Was that before or after the police confiscated their writings?

(I'm just trying to see this from HitchSlap's point of view. After all, the Bible says holy men wrote the words of God. But, after all, if It was just written arbitrarily by human authors, why couldn't some of them have been women?)

 

[AV1611VET]

What's next, Illiad and The Odysey as history books?

No, but I am wondering if you think an accountant wrote the book of Numbers?

Or if a Quinn Martin wrote the book of Acts? (You older guys [and gals] should get that one! )

 

[AV1611VET]

There were other writings, then just the bible AV.

Do you believe everything you read?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Not in any way, actually. This universe God made and it will be recreated one day. This world right here was different in nature and laws the bible seems to indicate. No invented other world's or universes involved whatsoever.

Jesus came to restore and establish the law. The fallen creation is in a lawless state that violates the law of God. The attempt of science to describe this fallen condition defies logic and reason.

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, but I am wondering if you think an accountant wrote the book of Numbers?

Or if a Quinn Martin wrote the book of Acts? (You older guys [and gals] should get that one! )

You fire off jokes quicker than a six shooter.

 

[AV1611VET]

You fire off jokes quicker than a six shooter.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Was that before or after the police confiscated their writings?

(I'm just trying to see this from HitchSlap's point of view. After all, the Bible says holy men wrote the words of God. But, after all, if It was just written arbitrarily by human authors, why couldn't some of them have been women?)

He didn't say they couldn't, he said they weren't. He's right, you know.

 

[HitchSlap]

No, but I am wondering if you think an accountant wrote the book of Numbers?

Or if a Quinn Martin wrote the book of Acts? (You older guys [and gals] should get that one! )

Nope. Men selected which men they wanted in the bible. No other explanation necessary.

 

[HitchSlap]

Do you believe everything you read?

No, but it appears you do.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Nope. Men selected which men they wanted in the bible. No other explanation necessary.

The Bible continues to stand the test of time. Each generation and each individual is called to take a fresh new look. At times we need to throw away the stale old interpretations that just do not hold up to the evidence we currently have. Our approach to the Bible can be very scientific. The bible can more than handle all the scrutiny of the scientific community. People need to quit using science as a lame excuse for honest study into the validity of the word of God. They need to be healed so they no longer need that crutch anymore.

 

[Michael]

Do you have a better suggestion?

Ya, ancient Hebrew, Coptic, or even Hieroglyphics or Sanskrit for that matter. Why pick a "modern" language?

 

[Michael]

The Bible continues to stand the test of time. Each generation and each individual is called to take a fresh new look. At times we need to throw away the stale old interpretations that just do not hold up to the evidence we currently have. Our approach to the Bible can be very scientific. The bible can more than handle all the scrutiny of the scientific community. People need to quit using science as a lame excuse for honest study into the validity of the word of God. They need to be healed so they no longer need that crutch anymore.

The "problem" with your logic is that different sects within "Christianity" tend to *interpret* that single book quite differently. Catholics for instance tend to embrace evolutionary theory and the concept of an ancient Earth, and they have faith in their interpretation of the 'Bible' too.

In fact there isn't even a "single" version of a "Bible", or a single translation of the "Bible", let alone a single *interpretation* of that book.

 

[Papias]

wow, what a tangent. To get us back on topic.....

NBC, back in post #167 I asked you this. Here it is again for your convenience:

I don't have time to go into the technical stuff that scientists deal with, but I place my trust in those scientists who start from the standpoint that God did it now let's find out how, rather than those scientists that have decided that no god is necessary as everything got going and organised itself all on its own.

So, then if we look only at the scientists who are Christian, and ignore those who are atheists, Islamic, Hindu, Taoist, etc, and if they overwhelmingly agree on one way that God created, you go with their expert, Christian, position, right?

In His name-

Papias

 

[AV1611VET]

Ya, ancient Hebrew, Coptic, or even Hieroglyphics or Sanskrit for that matter. Why pick a "modern" language?

I'm asking what language you thought Adam & Eve spoke/wrote?

 

[bhsmte]

Do you believe everything you read?

I tend to give more credibility to older writings that stand up to the historical method.

 

[Loudmouth]

I can't respond on the actual post because it says I have "insufficient privileges". All I'd say to the one that shows the skulls is, what is that supposed to tell me?

Just making sure you can see the skulls.

What you are looking at is multiple skulls with a mixture of modern human and basal ape features. Those are transitional fossils. They are evidence of evolution.

 

[dad]

Tell that to AV.

I don't plan to obey a wife....to each his own.

We each have our place and it is not the same place in a family, or even a church...etc

 

[dad]

Jesus came to restore and establish the law.

? I thought He came to fulfill scripture and save us?

 

[joshua 1 9]

The "problem" with your logic is that different sects within "Christianity" tend to *interpret* that single book quite differently. Catholics for instance tend to embrace evolutionary theory and the concept of an ancient Earth, and they have faith in their interpretation of the 'Bible' too.

In fact there isn't even a "single" version of a "Bible", or a single translation of the "Bible", let alone a single *interpretation* of that book.

We do not trust in "sects" to save us we trust in Jesus. God is long suffering not wanting any to perish but wanting all to come to a saving knowledge of the truth.

 

[joshua 1 9]

? I thought He came to fulfill scripture and save us?

All the books in the world could not contain all that He came to do.