What would you say?

[LittleNipper]

Nip don’t doge the point. All religions change over time (even christianity).

One more example is our personal views on religion. Even though we worship the same God, our views are quite different. And thus, we have changed religion from what it was in the past. And it will be different from what it currently is.

(Note: The two of us alone don’t make the change. Generations of individuals do.)

I feel confidnet that Peter, Paul, James, etc., would see me as a fellow Christian. I'm really no different from them----are you?

 

[TheBigAl]

I feel confidnet that Peter, Paul, James, etc., would see me as a fellow Christian. I'm really no different from them----are you?

Just comes to show how different our views are. Thank you for proving my point. You are very kind.

 

[LittleNipper]

Just comes to show how different our views are. Thank you for proving my point. You are very kind.

If Peter, Paul, James, etc., would not see you as a Christian, then the likelyhood of you being one are not very good. Thank you for seeing my point.

 

[TheBigAl]

If Peter, Paul, James, etc., would not see you as a Christian, then the likelyhood of you being one are not very good. Thank you for seeing my point.

I would like to note that you are now the one telling me how the be a christian. Which is what you were accusing me of earlier.

 

[TheBigAl]

What was the original topic of the OP?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Apes don't shave------people do. Apes are not people.

Nobody said they were -- but people are apes.

We cannot share aspects of Creationism in a Public Science Class... That is a fact (today) and not a contradiction. Your memory is bias and seemingly selective....

Because every respected scientist has come to the same conclusion: Invoking an invisible man in the sky to make it all happen like the book is not science.

 

[LittleNipper]

Nobody said they were -- but people are apes.

That is your opinion and suported by your faith in evolution only.

Because every respected scientist has come to the same conclusion: Invoking an invisible man in the sky to make it all happen like the book is not science.

FLOOD research can be investigated and explained without invoking the invisable. Of course, it may offer credence to that which is invisable.... But you don't seem to like that aspect very much.

 

[Army of Juan]

That is your opinion and suported by your faith in evolution only.

That's not an opinion, it's a classification.

FLOOD research can be investigated and explained without invoking the invisable. Of course, it may offer credence to that which is invisable.... But you don't seem to like that aspect very much.

Flood research has been done and it was shown that it did not happen.

 

[DailyBlessings]

The Bible is still the same-----different languages maybe, but the Gospel message remains entirely the same. AND as relevant today as it was 2000 years ago.

But there was no Bible 2000 years ago- it had not yet been written and compiled. The Gospel spread at first through word of mouth, not scrolls. And the Bible has changed ever since then- different denominations have different books included. The Bible cannot the heart of Christianity. Christ is the glue that binds us together, not the manmade book that presumably speaks in His name.

 

[Dannager]

If Peter, Paul, James, etc., would not see you as a Christian, then the likelyhood of you being one are not very good.

And yet he remains a Christian all the same.

 

[Deamiter]

Sorry to break this up (actually I'm not, but please bear with me) but perhaps it's time to retire this argument.

As it stands, I believe I can summarize the exchange like this.

Little Nipper: I am certain that my interpretation of scriptures is correct.
TheBigAl: Nope you're wrong.
Little Nipper: The apostles would think I was Christian!
TheBigAl: Why do you keep contradicting yourself.
Little Nipper: No YOU'RE contradicting yourself.
TheBigAl. What about "xxxxx" and "xxxxx" (taken out of context)

etc...

Now forgive me, but I don't see where this is productive or really related to C&E. Having been here long enough, I DO understand that this is often the basic result of the clash between creationists and Christians who accept evolution so I don't really think there was any instigator per se. However, I think perhaps it's time to retire this thread to avoid further bickering.

Please feel free to discuss EVIDENCE for evolution or creationism in any of the other threads, but lets avoid the personal insinuations and attacks for a while. I would sure hate to close a second thread where you continued this flame war!

 

[Deamiter]

I had this really great witty closing note, but it got lost in the netherworld that is the intarweb...

Basically, let's retire this argument. It's really just a clash between firm belief in a certain interpretation of the Bible, and the looser belief that our origins don't matter at all to the main point -- salvation.

I personally believe that both parties can be saved. Either way, we're not getting any where here. If you want to argue interpretation, argue interpretation. If you want to argue science, argue science (probably not on the same thread). But there's no reason to let this flame war continue.

Then of course they both got posted... *sigh* Such is life I suppose. And on review it wasn't really all that witty either. It's probably because I gave blood today. My head's just not getting enough oxygen at the moment!