Subduction Zone
Regular Member
Yes, Paul, a man who never saw Jesus, said that 500 people saw him. I never met Elvis. If I said that 500 people saw Elvis after his death that would be similar.
Upvote
0
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.
1Co 15:5 And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 1Co 15:6
After that, He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 1Co 15:7 After that, He was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 1Co 15:8
And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
The last verse is speaking of Paul, who was taken to the 3rd Heaven, to see the resurrected Jesus and obtain His Gospel.
You need to quit the false accusations. I never said that there was not a man named Jesus. And it was not a cop out. I want to keep the discussion on topic.
Job 1 7:Chapter and verse from Job, please.
Nice post thanks. It is common for some of us Christ followers to use expressions like "We did not evolve from monkeys" I may be splitting hairs here but that is not what the theory of evolution teaches. I suggest that anyone who is interested in this subject read Darwin's "Origin of Species." Stay away from authors like Richard Dawkins who have an axe to grind and go to the source for the theory of evolution. If we have some knowledge of the theory we can talk to others about it in a meaningful way.Whenever I see a poster talk about theories being proven or unproven, I know immediately that the poster knows next to nothing about science and how science works. Theories are models about how something works based on a great deal of observation and much testing. However, theories are always tentative and provisional in that it is never possible to have all the evidence. It is always possible that new evidence will require that the theory be modified, or in some cases, discarded completely. The history of science is filled with examples of this. The word 'proof' simple does not apply in science the way it does in logic or in mathematics. What then can we say about evolution? We know from observation that evolution is a fact --- life on this planet has changed dramatically over time and that change continues even today. That fact cannot be argued. But what drives that change? How exactly does it work? That is where the theory of evolution comes in. However, this being said, it is possible to disprove the theory of evolution. All that would be needed are solid facts. That has not happened in the century and a half since Charles Darwin first proposed his theory.
Creationist Todd Woods wrote:
A very honest man!
You hand waved a poster away because he asked you where everything came from. He probably doesn't know that evolutionists avoid the beginning and fall back on their basic definition which falsely assumes that everything was already there BEFORE magical evolution took place.
Falling back to descent with modifications, which you call evolution, is a cop out because you avoided answering his question. Amen?
LOL ... I beg your pardon?Yes, Paul, a man who never saw Jesus,
University of Minnesota, go Gophers. Which is why I know that according to the story the Ark was made in Minnesota. And when it comes to religion your education in the matter is probably worse than my own. I don't claim to be an expert, so I will rely on experts when needed.LOL ... I beg your pardon?
Serious question, Subduction Zone ... may I ask what college you attend(ed)?
There's a term that escapes me right now,* and it means someone who is educated in one field, but speaks outside of his area of expertise.
I would say that applies here.
* I think the word is "consilience," but I'm not sure.
Then they changed their stance on it.It is common for some of us Christ followers to use expressions like "We did not evolve from monkeys" I may be splitting hairs here but that is not what the theory of evolution teaches.
Paul by his own admission never say Jesus. He had a "vision".
That is not "seeing Jesus". That is seeing a vision.
Just when does a vision strike one blind? Your knowledge of Scripture is found wanting.
If a creationist admits that he is wrong about evolution I will gladly discuss abiogenesis.
Once again, you need to remember the Ninth Commandment. You are not accurately representing what others say. This is not Christian proper Christian behavior.You mean magical chemical generation? I thought evolutionists used actual evidence to support their beliefs. Why don't you?
That is not "seeing Jesus". That is seeing a vision.
That's true.
Once again, you need to remember the Ninth Commandment. You are not accurately representing what others say. This is not Christian proper Christian behavior.
Darwin theorized that apes, monkeys and humans must have a common ancestor because of the similarities between us. Make of this what you will but those who study his theory don't believe he is saying we evolved from apes or monkeys.Then they changed their stance on it.
If my memory serves me correctly, "monkeys" has now been changed to "apes."
Just out of curiosity, what do you think when they refer to miracles as "magic"?
At least we old-timers grew up being taught it was monkeys.
But academians use "magic" as a pejorative.
Off the record, I'm a big Columbo fan!
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?