Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

[PsychoSarah]

This is your answer to why:

Romans 16:17-18
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.




Matthew 7:13-14 (I chose the Message version for you to understand easier)
Being and Doing

“Don’t look for shortcuts to God. The market is flooded with surefire, easygoing formulas for a successful life that can be practiced in your spare time. Don’t fall for that stuff, even though crowds of people do. The way to life—to God!—is vigorous and requires total attention.

It's just saying many people will find the easy way, the WIDE road, and few will find the narrow road and that leads to Jesus.

It is the bibles method of self preservation: the only amazing prediction the bible made was that people would, over time, find evidence that would refute it.

 

[bhsmte]

This is your answer to why:

Romans 16:17-18
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.




Matthew 7:13-14 (I chose the Message version for you to understand easier)
Being and Doing

“Don’t look for shortcuts to God. The market is flooded with surefire, easygoing formulas for a successful life that can be practiced in your spare time. Don’t fall for that stuff, even though crowds of people do. The way to life—to God!—is vigorous and requires total attention.

It's just saying many people will find the easy way, the WIDE road, and few will find the narrow road and that leads to Jesus.

You quote Matthew, so let me ask you a few questions:

-Do you know when Matthew was written?
-Do you know who authored Matthew?
-Who has the originals of Matthew?

You should know the book you rely so much on, so I would expect a quick reply without a need to look it up.

 

[46AND2]

You quote Matthew, so let me ask you a few questions:

-Do you know when Matthew was written?
-Do you know who authored Matthew?
-Who has the originals of Matthew?

You should know the book you rely so much on, so I would expect a quick reply without a need to look it up.

I know the answers to those without looking them up.

 

[bhsmte]

I know the answers to those without looking them up.

Well, many non-believers and former christians do, because not unlike in my case, a thorough investigation of the bible, is what helped me determine, the christianity story, could not be reconciled with the reality of the world we live in.

It is also a reality, that atheists and agnostics, have a higher knowledge of religion in general, than christians do. Why? Because they are more prone to investigate beliefs, to determine if it is something they can believe in. What a concept!

Pew Forum Religious Knowledge Survey: Atheists, Agnostics Score Highest

 

[juvenissun]

No you don't. You are using two independent sets without realizing it. You can't say every student went on the trip, because some students did not go.



Two INDEPENDENT sets...again...if god cannot use all on day 5, like you say, then he cannot use every, either. Don't you see? Every fish is not good, because some haven't been created, yet.

1. Every fish created SO FAR, is good.
2. All the fish created SO FAR, are good.

Means the same thing.

Every IS NOT A SUBSET of all.

In fact, I challenge you to find just one professional who agrees with you. Show me that you actually learned this, rather than just made it up yourself to avoid having to admit you're wrong.

So, if God created fishes on Day 5, and continue to create more fishes on Day 6. Then at the end of Day 5, how should God describe His good work of Day 5 if neither EVERY nor ALL should be used?

 

[juvenissun]

Whatever do you mean?

If I made such logic statement, I will go and hang myself.

 

[PsychoSarah]

So, if God created fishes on Day 5, and continue to create more fishes on Day 6. Then at the end of Day 5, how should God describe His good work of Day 5 if neither EVERY nor ALL should be used?

There is not one item that god takes multiple days to create, unless you count humans, but even then, technically there was a woman made at the same time as Adam (although that is in a book that isn't technically but still kinda is part of the bible. It's complicated).

 

[juvenissun]

How? It is beyond the wisdom of man.

But it is easy with the wisdom of God.

 

[bhsmte]

But it is easy with the wisdom of God.

Ok, that is your latest response I guess.

 

[juvenissun]

Wisdom doesn't need understanding? Really, because that is what I have always viewed to be a quality of wisdom.

You really need to take a religion course. Otherwise, I am not sure when would you know what wisdom is. Wisdom is best shown when we do not understand.

 

[46AND2]

So, if God created fishes on Day 5, and continue to create more fishes on Day 6. Then at the end of Day 5, how should God describe His good work of Day 5 if neither EVERY nor ALL should be used?

Hint: the answer is in my post you just replied to...

But that's just one way to do it. There are many others.

 

[PsychoSarah]

But it is easy with the wisdom of God.

Which you cannot have without being god.

 

[juvenissun]

Hint: the answer is in my post you just replied to...

But that's just one way to do it. There are many others.

I read your post carefully (the only one worths to read in this thread). It does not answer my question.

 

[juvenissun]

Which you cannot have without being god.

Sure I do have and many Christians also have. Otherwise, I will have no wisdom.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Sure I do have and many Christians also have. Otherwise, I will have no wisdom.

Then you have none, because it is the sin of pride to believe that the belief in a god gives you the wisdom of a god. It doesn't.

 

[bhsmte]

Sure I do have and many Christians also have. Otherwise, I will have no wisdom.

Yep. Earlier it was one who had wisdom and then a few and now it is many.

Please, make up your mind.

 

[46AND2]

I read your post carefully (the only one worths to read in this thread). It does not answer my question.

The answer is that you CAN use all OR every, by including the qualifier "so far."

However, one does not need to actually write "so far." It can be implied.

If you want to argue that god created more fish on day 6, without mentioning it, that's fine, and a different topic. My complaint about your argument is your claim that every is a subset of all. It's not. You can use either word without changing the meaning of the text.

All you had to argue is that on day 5, the fish which were created were all (or every) that had been created AT THAT TIME, ON DAY 5. But if god created more fish on day 6, then not all (or every) fish was created on day 5 anymore, because some were also created on day 6.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The answer is that you CAN use all OR every, by including the qualifier "so far."

However, one does not need to actually write "so far." It can be implied.

If you want to argue that god created more fish on day 6, without mentioning it, that's fine, and a different topic. My complaint about your argument is your claim that every is a subset of all. It's not. You can use either word without changing the meaning of the text.

All you had to argue is that on day 5, the fish which were created were all (or every) that had been created AT THAT TIME, ON DAY 5. But if god created more fish on day 6, then not all (or every) fish was created on day 5 anymore, because some were also created on day 6.

Not to mention that your own idea deviates from the text that you base your faith on.

 

[EternalDragon]

That debate ended a long time ago within the sciences. The only people who reject the theory of evolution are those driven by their religious beliefs.

Not true. There are plenty of non-believers and people of different religions that challenge the theory of evolution.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Not true. There are plenty of non-believers and people of different religions that challenge the theory of evolution.

They don't challenge it with creationism. They challenge certain aspects of it, they hope to improve upon it, not destroy it.