• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Your thoughts on this story....

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mickey1953

Senior Veteran
Sep 14, 2006
3,297
451
✟28,165.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Finds test human origins theory



By James Urquhart

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6937476.stm



999999.gif


_44047091_herectus_nmk_203.jpg
The small H. erectus skull had to be removed from sandstone

Two hominid fossils discovered in Kenya are challenging a long-held view of human evolution.

The broken upper jaw-bone and intact skull from humanlike creatures, or hominids, are described in Nature.
Previously, the hominid Homo habilis was thought to have evolved into the more advanced Homo erectus, which evolved into us.
Now, habilis and erectus are thought to be sister species that overlapped in time.
The new fossil evidence reveals an overlap of about 500,000 years during which Homo habilis and Homo erectus must have co-existed in the Turkana basin area, the region of East Africa where the fossils were unearthed.....
 

KerrMetric

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2005
5,171
226
64
Pasadena, CA
✟6,671.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
There must be about 5 threads on CF on this story.

At least one on the creation/evolution board. One in GA and one in News & CE.

The new fossil evidence reveals an overlap of about 500,000 years during which Homo habilis and Homo erectus must have co-existed in the Turkana basin area, the region of East Africa where the fossils were unearthed..

That quote sums it up. What more is there to say?
 
Upvote 0

Mickey1953

Senior Veteran
Sep 14, 2006
3,297
451
✟28,165.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
There must be about 5 threads on CF on this story.

At least one on the creation/evolution board. One in GA and one in News & CE.



That quote sums it up. What more is there to say?


I usually check out to see if a story is already posted - this time I did not do it....
And I do not know what more there needs to be said, that is why I posted the story.... I will check out the other threads....

:wave: Mickey


 
Upvote 0

laptoppop

Servant of the living God
May 19, 2006
2,219
189
Southern California
✟31,620.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Don't worry -- the evolutionists will come up with a new fairytale to describe why this fits just fine. I find it fascinating -- over and over they don't find it necessary to understand, but rather to postulate how things might have been. The *DATA* supports us. Their speculations and stories do not. A great example is the bacterium flagellum. They accept the wildest speculative stories as "proof" that it evolved -- despite no physical evidence to support it in all its complexities. The best story they come up with (TTS/TT3) has been shown to be a degredation of the flagellum, not its precursor. Oh well -- their mind is made up, don't confuse them with facts. Let he who has ears to hear understand that the one True God, who created heaven and earth, does not lie, and understands all things. Praise His Name!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mickey1953
Upvote 0

laptoppop

Servant of the living God
May 19, 2006
2,219
189
Southern California
✟31,620.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Just to be very very clear. I believe evolution is a satanic lie designed to deceive. HOWEVER, I believe that precious brothers and sisters in Christ can be deceived by the lie and still be saved. The lie is attractive, wrapped in layers of intellectual superiority and hubris, but it remains a lie standing against the revelation of God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mickey1953
Upvote 0

KerrMetric

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2005
5,171
226
64
Pasadena, CA
✟6,671.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Just to be very very clear. I believe evolution is a satanic lie designed to deceive.
Of course you do - it makes willful ignorance easier on the conscience.
HOWEVER, I believe that precious brothers and sisters in Christ can be deceived by the lie and still be saved.
How gracious thou art.
The lie is attractive, wrapped in layers of intellectual superiority and hubris, but it remains a lie standing against the revelation of God.
You mean - damn I can't follow the arguments therefore I'll stand on typical literalist anti-intellectualism.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Don't worry -- the evolutionists will come up with a new fairytale to describe why this fits just fine. I find it fascinating -- over and over they don't find it necessary to understand, but rather to postulate how things might have been. The *DATA* supports us. Their speculations and stories do not. A great example is the bacterium flagellum. They accept the wildest speculative stories as "proof" that it evolved -- despite no physical evidence to support it in all its complexities. The best story they come up with (TTS/TT3) has been shown to be a degredation of the flagellum, not its precursor. Oh well -- their mind is made up, don't confuse them with facts. Let he who has ears to hear understand that the one True God, who created heaven and earth, does not lie, and understands all things. Praise His Name!
It think you are forgetting how the ID argument works. It was never a case that evolution depended on discovering the exact evolutionary pathway to the flagellum. There is a lot that is lost to us in the history of the life and genes do not fossilise.

No, the ID argument took a very different approach. It claimed it was impossible for the flagellum to evolve because simpler combinations of the flagellum proteins would be non functional and all the parts would have to come together in one go. To answer this, biology does not have to prove exactly how the flagellum did in fact evolve, all it has to show is that the ID argument is wrong and that there are functional structures made from combinations of a fraction of the flagellum proteins. This has been done. The ID argument is wrong. And the True God who created the heaven and the earth does not rely on bad human arguments to support a bad interpretation of scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Impaler

Regular Member
Feb 20, 2007
147
6
Adelaide
✟22,809.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Don't worry -- the evolutionists will come up with a new fairytale to describe why this fits just fine.

How does it not support evolution? It just shows that two hominids lived a couple of hundred thousand years off from what we originally thought. Hardly a scientific revolution.

I find it fascinating -- over and over they don't find it necessary to understand, but rather to postulate how things might have been.

So you say "Goddidit" because it's necessary to understand?

The *DATA* supports us.

No data supports any notion of a god, let alone one that created the universe in 6 days 6,000 years ago.

Their speculations and stories do not. A great example is the bacterium flagellum. They accept the wildest speculative stories as "proof" that it evolved -- despite no physical evidence to support it in all its complexities.

When has anyone ever said that's proof the bacterial flagellum evolved? It does prove it's possible to evolve.

How is saying something can't evolve any more scientific?
 
Upvote 0

Jase

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2003
7,330
385
✟10,432.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Democrat
Just to be very very clear. I believe evolution is a satanic lie designed to deceive. HOWEVER, I believe that precious brothers and sisters in Christ can be deceived by the lie and still be saved. The lie is attractive, wrapped in layers of intellectual superiority and hubris, but it remains a lie standing against the revelation of God.
For someone constantly getting upset over the supposed ridicule of creationists by evolutionists, its telling to see that you are no different.

You just better hope you never have a bacterial infection, lest you need to rely on Satan for your antibiotics.
 
Upvote 0

crawfish

Veteran
Feb 21, 2007
1,731
125
Way out in left field
✟25,043.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Just to be very very clear. I believe evolution is a satanic lie designed to deceive. HOWEVER, I believe that precious brothers and sisters in Christ can be deceived by the lie and still be saved. The lie is attractive, wrapped in layers of intellectual superiority and hubris, but it remains a lie standing against the revelation of God.

Well, I feel creationism - and in a larger sense, literalism - are methods Satan uses to make it seem like you must deny fact, overwhelming evidence and all sense of reason in order to be a Christian. It is an attractive lie, to think that God spelled things out so clearly, and it comes wrapped in a comfortable coat of pious posturing and judgementalism, but it remains a lie standing against the reality of God's creation. I do believe that precious brothers and sisters in Christ who are deceived by this lie can and will still be saved; salvation lies apart from our belief about creation. YEC is being used more to affect those who don't have faith yet than those who believe in it; it is a crisis of outreach.

I just thought that if you were going to lay all your cards out on the table, it was only fair for me to do the same. :)
 
Upvote 0

laptoppop

Servant of the living God
May 19, 2006
2,219
189
Southern California
✟31,620.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Please note -- I am making a careful distinction between the theory of evolution and people who agree with it.

The theory of evolution is a subtle lie from the father of lies. It is designed to replace the understanding of the direct actions of God with a fairytale that needs no God, that admits no God, that desires no God. It is the same lie as in the Garden of Eden -- men can have all understanding and be like God -- taken to a new level.

The people who hold the TOE are not "bad" people. They are not (for the most part) liars, con men, charlatans, etc. (Of course there are some classic examples of charlatans in the midst who were accepted for a long time because they reported what others wanted to hear) However, people who accept the TOE are wrong. They are deceived by the lie. They may be precious wonderful brothers and sisters in Christ, but they've got this point wrong.

The TOE is a poison, which infects many many other things. It affects the worldview -- the lens through which we interpret reality. The part that bugs me the most is that it affects the view of Scripture. It is inconsistent to hold to a literal view of the flood if one supports the TOE. Yet a literal view of the flood is a big part of understanding God's plan/purpose/hatred of sin, etc.

The TOE has affected how people view archeology, geology, sociology, etc. It is a cancer upon the body of science, corrupting the viewpoints, and replacing them with a progressive climb toward secular humanistic nirvana.

There is nothing wrong with science that explores and seeks to understand how God's creation works. There is much that I have no problem accepting and using. But it is when "Science" (i.e. the popular consensus view) becomes more authoritative than the revelation of God Himself that I reject it.

My point about the flagellum was not a discussion of the ID argument. (as an aside, Dr. Behe shows in his latest book why the ID argument still stands strong in the case of the flagellum) Rather, it was pointing out that the standard of proof used in developing evolutionary theory is amazingly low -- as demonstrated in the posts responding to me. One must only show what "might" have happened to be accepted as truth. No direct evidence is required. Another classic example is the trilobite eye, part of the cambrian explosion of life. One need not have fossils to demonstrate progression, only a fairytale of what might have been.

The fossil record does not record a gene by gene change from one critter to another. The fossils show fully developed animals, adapted for their environments.

Goddidit -- the intellectual putdown of saying that it is somehow childish to say that God acted in accordance with how He said He did. I prefer a childish faith, accepting God at His word over the fairytales of men.

"Its just your interpretation of the Bible" is another common refrain. However, this is not even close. God gave us the Scriptures that we might know Him. The Scriptures are written, not for "scholars" that reject all supernaturalism, but for the general population. Yes, they are deep, and have meaning upon meaning, and plumbing their depth is always a rewarding thing to do. But we must not put ourselves in a place of judging the Scriptures. God is the God of Noah, Isaac, Abraham, Jacob, etc. He is real, and has acted in real history, not just spiritual tales. The Hebrew people are totally unique in this regard. Their memorials, altars, wells, etc. commemorated real events, not stories. It is when they forgot this and accepted the lies of the deceiver as equal to the Truth of God that they fell into error -- for which they were punished.

May the God of creation enlighten your heart and mind in Christ Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Jase

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2003
7,330
385
✟10,432.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Democrat
Please note -- I am making a careful distinction between the theory of evolution and people who agree with it.
No you aren't. You are directly insulting Christians who accept evolution. Which by the way, happens to be the overwhelming majority of Christians in the world. Saying the ToE is from Satan implies that those who accept it are followers of Satan. You constantly give us grief about calling Creationists dishonest, or stupid because they have no understanding of science, and yet you see no problem with calling us followers of Satan?

The theory of evolution is a subtle lie from the father of lies. It is designed to replace the understanding of the direct actions of God with a fairytale that needs no God, that admits no God, that desires no God. It is the same lie as in the Garden of Eden -- men can have all understanding and be like God -- taken to a new level.
Is the Theory of Gravity also a subtle lie from Satan? Considering evolution has far more evidence supporting it than gravity, logic would dicate that you dismiss the Theory of Gravity well. Otherwise you're nothing more than a hypocrite.

The people who hold the TOE are not "bad" people. They are not (for the most part) liars, con men, charlatans, etc. (Of course there are some classic examples of charlatans in the midst who were accepted for a long time because they reported what others wanted to hear) However, people who accept the TOE are wrong. They are deceived by the lie. They may be precious wonderful brothers and sisters in Christ, but they've got this point wrong.
Glad to know humility isn't one of your strong points. Does God usually reward know it alls? Of course, we all know the difference is your knowledge is based on your opinion, whereas evolution is based on solid evidence.

The TOE is a poison, which infects many many other things. It affects the worldview -- the lens through which we interpret reality. The part that bugs me the most is that it affects the view of Scripture. It is inconsistent to hold to a literal view of the flood if one supports the TOE. Yet a literal view of the flood is a big part of understanding God's plan/purpose/hatred of sin, etc.
Creationism requires you to stop using your God given brain to accept something never intended to be taken literal. Do you think God is proud of you by rejecting the intelligence and reason he gave you? If we throw away our reason and intelligence, what is left to make us in God's image?

The TOE has affected how people view archeology, geology, sociology, etc. It is a cancer upon the body of science, corrupting the viewpoints, and replacing them with a progressive climb toward secular humanistic nirvana.
Actually, Geology and Archaeology are far older than evolution. Geology was the first field of evidence that disproved the global flood. The person responsible for disproving that was a minister and creationist.

There is nothing wrong with science that explores and seeks to understand how God's creation works. There is much that I have no problem accepting and using. But it is when "Science" (i.e. the popular consensus view) becomes more authoritative than the revelation of God Himself that I reject it.
If science has proven so effective in the areas you do accept, don't you think you are being inconsistant by rejecting the science that just disagrees with your view? Think about that very hard laptop. Science has proven overwhelmingly successful in everything from the internet and engineering to medicine. And yet, despite it being so successful, as soon as science crosses into an area you personally disagree with, suddenly its hundreds of years of success comes crashing to a halt? That's called illogical.

The fossil record does not record a gene by gene change from one critter to another. The fossils show fully developed animals, adapted for their environments.
Adaptation is evolution. But seeing as you as well as most creationists refuse to actually learn the definition of evolution, you still refuse to accept that fact.

Goddidit -- the intellectual putdown of saying that it is somehow childish to say that God acted in accordance with how He said He did. I prefer a childish faith, accepting God at His word over the fairytales of men.
Of course, the truth is, you very well could be accepting your word over the truth of God.

"Its just your interpretation of the Bible" is another common refrain. However, this is not even close. God gave us the Scriptures that we might know Him. The Scriptures are written, not for "scholars" that reject all supernaturalism, but for the general population. Yes, they are deep, and have meaning upon meaning, and plumbing their depth is always a rewarding thing to do. But we must not put ourselves in a place of judging the Scriptures. God is the God of Noah, Isaac, Abraham, Jacob, etc. He is real, and has acted in real history, not just spiritual tales. The Hebrew people are totally unique in this regard. Their memorials, altars, wells, etc. commemorated real events, not stories. It is when they forgot this and accepted the lies of the deceiver as equal to the Truth of God that they fell into error -- for which they were punished.
It is about interpretation, because Genesis is an allegorical song written from an ancient mindset. Trying to just apply a 21st century view on it, and saying that's the only correct interpretation is downright arrogant.

May the God of creation enlighten your heart and mind in Christ Jesus.
"You're all followers of Satan... but may Christ enlighten you".... :sigh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: theFijian
Upvote 0

laptoppop

Servant of the living God
May 19, 2006
2,219
189
Southern California
✟31,620.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No you aren't. You are directly insulting Christians who accept evolution. Which by the way, happens to be the overwhelming majority of Christians in the world. Saying the ToE is from Satan implies that those who accept it are followers of Satan. You constantly give us grief about calling Creationists dishonest, or stupid because they have no understanding of science, and yet you see no problem with calling us followers of Satan?
No, no, no. You may NOT put words in my mouth. I can differentiate between the belief and the person holding the belief. I'm sorry you don't understand that. I'm also sorry you don't see the difference between saying someone is mistaken and saying that someone is deliberately conning people and lying. By the way -- I would say that all of us have swallowed / are swallowing lies of satan all the time. For example, right now I'm struggling to correct an imbalance between my working and my family. I'm spending way too much time at work. At various times I have bought satan's lie that I should never say "no" to an assignment at work.

Is the Theory of Gravity also a subtle lie from Satan?
Oh, please. Not this old canard again. There is a huge difference between science that conflicts with the revelation of God and science that does not.

Considering evolution has far more evidence supporting it than gravity, logic would dicate that you dismiss the Theory of Gravity well. Otherwise you're nothing more than a hypocrite.
Actually I would strongly disagree that evolution has more supporting evidence.

Glad to know humility isn't one of your strong points. Does God usually reward know it alls?
Nice. I guess only evolutionists are allowed to express their viewpoints around here?

Of course, we all know the difference is your knowledge is based on your opinion, whereas evolution is based on solid evidence.
Nope! Evolution is NOT based on solid evidence. It is based on INTERPRETATION of evidence and CONJECTURE. I find the interpretation to have major flaws.

Creationism requires you to stop using your God given brain to accept something never intended to be taken literal. Do you think God is proud of you by rejecting the intelligence and reason he gave you? If we throw away our reason and intelligence, what is left to make us in God's image?
Not even close. I completely reject your characterization of evolution = intelligence and reason (and the implication that creationism = stupidity and non-reason). For hundreds of years, the Christians were at the top of intellectualism. It is logic, reason, evidence and faith that leads me to reject evolution.

Actually, Geology and Archaeology are far older than evolution. Geology was the first field of evidence that disproved the global flood. The person responsible for disproving that was a minister and creationist.
Yes they are. However, modern Geology and Archaeology have been very heavily influenced by evolutionary interpretations. Also, the flood has never been "disproved" -- that is also an old repeated false statement. If it has been disproved -- what is your evidence? Where is your case? Just calling it disproved proves nothing.

If science has proven so effective in the areas you do accept, don't you think you are being inconsistant by rejecting the science that just disagrees with your view? Think about that very hard laptop. Science has proven overwhelmingly successful in everything from the internet and engineering to medicine. And yet, despite it being so successful, as soon as science crosses into an area you personally disagree with, suddenly its hundreds of years of success comes crashing to a halt? That's called illogical.
NO. Again, I reject only the conclusions that stand in opposition to the explicit revelation of God. This is especially easy when there is no conflict between the physical evidence and the Scripture. Yes, there is a conflict between the interpretations of that evidence -- but not the evidence itself.

Adaptation is evolution. But seeing as you as well as most creationists refuse to actually learn the definition of evolution, you still refuse to accept that fact.
I am not talking about the narrow use of the word, but the broad one. In particular, I have no problem with mutations and variation -- to a point. Variation within a kind -- no problem. Beyond a kind -- never demonstrated. (and I've linked to technical discussions of the boundaries and definitions of kinds in the past -- it is an active area of research and discussion at this time.)

Of course, the truth is, you very well could be accepting your word over the truth of God.

It is about interpretation, because Genesis is an allegorical song written from an ancient mindset. Trying to just apply a 21st century view on it, and saying that's the only correct interpretation is downright arrogant.
I could very well be wrong. I'm human. Calling me arrogant is laughable compared to the arrogance and hubris exhibited around here every day. If I'm wrong when WE get to heaven, I'll buy the first round of sasparilla.

However, I'm not going to call the sky purple with green spots on it. Its blue. God caused the Scriptures to be written to man throughout the ages. He knew it needed to stand for a loooooong time. Jesus reaffirmed them. They have relevance and meaning to us. They are unique from every other ancient writing. They contain Truth. They portray actual events. (Yes, they also have parables, stories, word pictures, etc -- but those are not the sticking point, are they?) When the Scriptures present a global flood as real history, it IS real history, and it is supported by the physical evidence that we have all around us. God's Scriptures stand firm. They are NOT just the spiritual stories of ancient people. To claim that they are is to deny God's work. Just to make sure we didn't mistake them, He included information that the authors could not have known as validation and a sign that it was from Him, not them.
"You're all followers of Satan... but may Christ enlighten you".... :sigh:
No. TEs are typically brothers and sisters in Christ who are mistaken on this point. Don't put words in my mouth. Yes, you have been lied to by satan. We all have, all the time. It is up to you to choose to value God's revelation over the fairytales of satan.
 
Upvote 0

KerrMetric

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2005
5,171
226
64
Pasadena, CA
✟6,671.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
(and the implication that creationism = stupidity and non-reason).
It's more than implication. Perhaps not true in every last case but certainly the vast majority of them - after all some people just accept it without every reading a thing in the area so they can be excused the implication somewhat.
 
Upvote 0

laptoppop

Servant of the living God
May 19, 2006
2,219
189
Southern California
✟31,620.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
By the way -- If you really think I have called TEs names -- then report my post. I want us to be free to discuss the flaws in the belief systems but respectful regarding the people. I think I have been walking that fine line. If you think attacking the TOE is attacking the folks that hold it, I'm sorry that you identify so much with it. The TOE is either true or false. If it is false, then it is a falsehood that came from somewhere. Since it has such negative impact on people's worldviews, I see it as a lie from satan. Crawfish made a similar statement about creationism and literalism. We need to be able to discuss the theology and even the physical evidence without implying the other side is stupid, ignorant, uneducated, etc.
 
Upvote 0

KerrMetric

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2005
5,171
226
64
Pasadena, CA
✟6,671.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
and even the physical evidence without implying the other side is stupid, ignorant, uneducated, etc.

But what are you supposed to do when the other side exhibit those traits? I say spare the rod and spoil the child.

Years ago I used to try to hand hold creationists through the science but I long ago realised that this is almost fruitless. A combination of being either stubborn or dumb just makes it near impossible.

I really don't think you Creationists realise just how dumb the scientific arguments you make are. It's not like you guys are just missing to make contact - they are complete whiffs that get nowhere near the ball.
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
Nope! Evolution is NOT based on solid evidence. It is based on INTERPRETATION of evidence and CONJECTURE. I find the interpretation to have major flaws.

Well, vossler was never able to pin down for me just where the conjecture in the theory of evolution is. Perhaps you can. Would you like to try?


For hundreds of years, the Christians were at the top of intellectualism.

And the ones who accept evolution still are.


It is logic, reason, evidence and faith that leads me to reject evolution.

I have yet to be shown how any one of those would lead to that rejection. I know you have listed some of the evidence you find convincing, but I see that as 1) only some of the evidence, with other countervailing evidence being ignored and 2) even that evidence often being misinterpreted.


Also, the flood has never been "disproved" -- that is also an old repeated false statement. If it has been disproved -- what is your evidence? Where is your case? Just calling it disproved proves nothing.

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=10768618&postcount=2

This post contains a list of many CF threads dealing with evidence about the flood. I'd be willing to go over any one of them you choose.


NO. Again, I reject only the conclusions that stand in opposition to the explicit revelation of God.

But you don't accept that it is your fallible opinion as to what is and is not explicit.


I am not talking about the narrow use of the word, but the broad one. In particular, I have no problem with mutations and variation -- to a point. Variation within a kind -- no problem. Beyond a kind -- never demonstrated.

Probably because the existence of a kind (in the creationist sense) has never been demonstrated.

When the Scriptures present a global flood as real history, it IS real history, and it is supported by the physical evidence that we have all around us.

In the first place it is your unsupported opinion that it is presented as real history. What are the criteria that distinguish a narrative of real history from a narrative of mythical/allegorical history?

In the second place, even if it is "presented" as real history, if the facts of God's creation show what is presented as real history is in error then it is the history that is in error not created nature.

All history, after all, is basically human interpretation of events and their significance, just as filled with fallibility as any interpretation of physical nature. Certainly so when there is no independent documentation of the event.

God's Scriptures stand firm. They are NOT just the spiritual stories of ancient people. To claim that they are is to deny God's work.

True. Remember none of us denies that scripture does contain some real history. In fact, most of us also believe there is real history involved even when it is clothed in mythical trappings. The dispute is not over whether the bible contains history or allegory. We both agree it contains both. So it is really a question of whether these stories (creation/fall/flood) are more in the area of straightforward history or are mostly, if not wholly, told in the form of allegory and myth.

Just to make sure we didn't mistake them, He included information that the authors could not have known as validation and a sign that it was from Him, not them.

That too is interpretive opinion based on a fallible human choice of hermeneutic.

It is up to you to choose to value God's revelation over the fairytales of satan.

But first we have to decide what is genuinely revealed in scripture and who Satan is telling fairy-tales to.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.