• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Why does "15 Questions for Evolutionists" brochure confuse the meaning of "evolution?

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by verysincere, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. Split Rock

    Split Rock Conflation of Blathers

    +647
    Agnostic
    Single
    Do you mean the gold plates, with Egyptian hieroglyphs, that Smith read with a magic "seeing stone?"

    No.... I don't believe that.. do you?
     
  2. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    +40,415
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Them's the ones.
    I do not.
     
  3. kiwimac

    kiwimac Bishop of the See of Aotearoa ROCCNZ;Theologian Supporter

    +1,289
    New Zealand
    Utrecht
    Married
    AU-Greens
    That said: the Angel Moroni and his plates have more solid evidence than creationism does!
     
  4. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    +40,415
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    I'll just go ahead and take 670 with a grain of salt.
     
  5. Bungle_Bear

    Bungle_Bear Whoot!

    +1,687
    Agnostic
    Married
    You should ease off on the salt consumption. You'll do yourself some damage.
     
  6. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    +40,415
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Not as miniscully small as I take these posts.
     
  7. KWCrazy

    KWCrazy Newbie

    +1,967
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    You're a minister and you don't believe in the word of God?
     
  8. verysincere

    verysincere Exegete/Linguist

    +73
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Please be honest. "Believing in the word of God" is entirely different from believing in a man-made tradition of relatively recent development, such as "creation science" and SDA Ellen White-GeorgeM.Price-Morris&Whitcomb Young Earth Creationism. These are something else entirely. (They are opinions without scriptural or scientific basis.)

    Once again: your confusion and your cherished traditions about what the Bible states is NOT what other Bible-affirming Christ-followers "believe in".

    You assume that your sect "speaks for God". The rest of us do not.


    .

     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2012
  9. CabVet

    CabVet Question everything

    +150
    Agnostic
    Married
    US-Others
    Not your interpretation of it. But of course, just like dad you claim that your interpretation is the word of God, correct?
     
  10. KWCrazy

    KWCrazy Newbie

    +1,967
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    It't not the part where the Word is interpreted that bothers you. It's when the Bible takes great pains to state that the evening and the morning are one day; when when it describes creation as taking six day. It bothers you when the Bible speaks in very specific terms of a global flood that destroyed every land animal not on the ark. Such events invalidate your claims of molecules-to-man and your contention that the laws of science; not God; control the world. Because you choose to believe that you proclaim the Bible false, God a liar and Christianity to be mythology.

    It doesn't require interpretation to read words and believe that they mean exactly what they say.
     
  11. 46AND2

    46AND2 Forty six and two are just ahead of me...

    +1,510
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others


    Pretty sure none of that bothers Cabvet in the slightest.

    Words aren't always meant to be understood literally. That's the beautiful versatility of language.

    Sometimes gleaning meaning from what the words literally say can be missing the intended message altogether.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2012
  12. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,935
    Agnostic
    The evidence found in the creation is not supposed to be taken literally?
     
  13. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,935
    Agnostic
    Do you not believe in the evidence found in the creation?
     
  14. kiwimac

    kiwimac Bishop of the See of Aotearoa ROCCNZ;Theologian Supporter

    +1,289
    New Zealand
    Utrecht
    Married
    AU-Greens
    1: According to the Bible (if you are taking it literally) the creation took one day
    2: The word for 'Day' used in Genesis is 'Yom' which has the following meanings.

    3: The Book of Genesis is not a science text, it is not about HOW God created but WHY God created. It is allegory and myth rolled into one package.
     
  15. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    +40,415
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Of all those meanings for YOM, which one is it in Genesis 1?

    From Strong's Concordance:

    1) day, time, year
    a) day (as opposed to night)
    b) day (24 hour period)
    1) as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1
    2) as a division of time
    a) a working day, a day's journey
    c) days, lifetime (pl.)
    d) time, period (general)
    e) year
    f) temporal references
    1) today
    2) yesterday
    3) tomorrow
    SOURCE
     
  16. verysincere

    verysincere Exegete/Linguist

    +73
    Non-Denom
    Married
    The OP question remains:
    Why does "15 Questions for Evolutionists" brochure confuse the meaning of "evolution?



    Is it a matter of ignorance of the terminology OR a matter or dishonesty? Or simply a strategy of obfuscation for propaganda tactical purposes?
     
  17. kiwimac

    kiwimac Bishop of the See of Aotearoa ROCCNZ;Theologian Supporter

    +1,289
    New Zealand
    Utrecht
    Married
    AU-Greens
    I note you simply ignored the bits you did not like from my post.

    Also you might like to show me just how I 'Vented my anger and ridicule at YECs' in that particular post. I looked but could find neither anger nor any trace of ridicule.
     
  18. Criada

    Criada Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,792
    Christian Seeker
    Married
    Mod Hat On
    [​IMG]

    This thread has been cleaned.
    Stick to the topic rather than mocking one another, please.
    Thanks

    Mod Hat Off
     
  19. KWCrazy

    KWCrazy Newbie

    +1,967
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    No it doesn't.
    Yes, it does, just as the word day does now. In my day, it was more easily understood. However, an evening and morning always means one calendar day; a single rotation of the earth. It never means anything else.
    Genesis describes the process and the time line. Exodus provides the elapsed time since in terms of the generations. Genesis also describes a global flood. Either you believe that the Bible is the word of God or you don't. It's not any more complicated than that.
     
  20. verysincere

    verysincere Exegete/Linguist

    +73
    Non-Denom
    Married
    1) No. There is no such "rule" in Hebrew. In fact, evening-to-evening has the meaning of one 24hour day. [And because a 24hour YOM starts at sunset on one "calendar day" and ends at sunset on the next "calendar day", your claim about "one calendar day" is totally foreign to the Hebrew cultural mindset.]

    2) "The evening and the morning was the Nth YOM" if interpreted LITERALLY would define one NIGHT......but in fact it is an IDIOM with the meaning, "from start to finish".

    >It never means anything else.

    Except for when it does.


    This a popular logical fallacy among many young earth creationists. They leap from their sect's cherished interpretation to presuming that daring to DOUBT their claims IS EQUIVALENT TO REJECTING THE BIBLE ITSELF! That's quite a leap!

    Of course, it is also rubbish. I left the young earth creationist and "creation science" movement because once I developed enough fluency in the Hebrew language and linguistics in general, I began to rely upon what the Bible ACTUALLY states----as opposed to what your TRADITIONS demand that I believe.

    You see, I could also play your same game and declare: "Here's what the Bible says ---and either you believe it or you don't. It is not any more complicated than that!" [Sound familiar? One thing is for sure: dogmatic declaration is certainly much easier than having to investigate what the Biblical text actually states.]
     
Loading...