Posted on 04/30/2007 1:18:21 PM PDT by mjp
“Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and leader of the world’s 80m Anglicans, has dismissed literal readings of the Creation story in Genesis as a “category mistake””
Archbishop Rowan Williams is the very definition of a “category mistake”.
And your evidence, aside from a book written by man, is?
It seems to me that both the Anglican and the Catholic Churches, plus many main line Protestant denominations, view evolution as the mechanism of creation and reject YEC. That is also what I beleive. There is overwhelming evidence against YEC.
These people are looking for evidence to support their tiny four dimensional thinking capability. There are many more dimensions of this universe that we have no capability of understanding until our souls are released from the Bodies. It has always been a battle between God and Satan. This battle started in the beginning of mankind and is the basis for all our history up to now. We have been the pawns, in Satans eyes, and Children in Gods eyes.
Evolution was just another way Satan has used to deceive us as to the truth. To believe in Evolution is a fools journey that has traps all along the way, and the end is to turn away from Christ. Once a person believes in Evolution, this will immediately discredit the Bible for some and diminish its’ importance to the Christian that accepts Evolution as just a way God made man. There are those that actually believe in God, but think that he used Evolution to make man. To believe this puts a limit on Gods power and all powerful Father we know him to be.
The people around Noah wanted proof that it was going to rain. Well, they got their proof alright, however, many failed to even build a rowboat much less an Ark. Once the proof was provided, it was just a little too late when the arks doors closed. :)
This time, the proof will be a lot of heat......lots of heat.
Oh, yes, I agree, I don’t believe in Religion....I believe in Jesus Christ. :)
Oh, good line!
“That is also what I beleive. There is overwhelming evidence against YEC.”
Jesus taught a literal creation in which man and woman were creaded as such “from the beginning”. You must decided who your final source of authority will be - the Bible or modern theories.
“Science” would reject the posibility of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ outright.
“Oh, yes, I agree, I don’t believe in Religion....I believe in Jesus Christ. :)”
You would know nothing of Jesus Christ were it not for “religion”.
Since Adam wasn't created on the first day, how can man and woman have been in existence "from the beginning"? Your argument is subject to the "how long is a day" problem.
“Science” would reject the posibility of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ outright.
"Science" would say there is no evidence of the resurrection. Which is the same thing that "Law" would say. If you reject "science" for that reason, then will you reject "law" as well?
Apparently the Bishop doesn't know that many creationists believe that the "Turkana Boy" IS a "normal" human (even though he is clearly Homo erectus). Of course other creationists think all H. erectus are just apes. Funny that they ALL agree there are NO intermediates, that apes and humans are perfectly distinct, but there are all sorts of fossils for which they can't agree to which distinct category unconnected by intermediates they belong!
“Since Adam wasn’t created on the first day, how can man and woman have been in existence.”
I’ll direct yo to the words of Jesus. You can argue with Him.
Mark 10:6 “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.”
****************
“Which is the same thing that “Law” would say. If you reject “science” for that reason, then will you reject “law” as well?”
Really?
A Judge looks at the evidence for the Resurrection
http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/Supreme_Court/ll_sc.nsf/pages/SCO_young110406
Also...
http://bangordailynews.com/news/t/news.aspx?articleid=148355&zoneid=20
If you are currently uncertain what to believe about the resurrection, or if you are open to that which would further inform your opinion, you should know about Simon Greenleaf.
Simon Greenleaf was born in 1783. As a young man he prepared for a career in law under the tutelage of Ezekiel Whitman, once a chief justice of Maine. He practiced law here in Maine. He was appointed reporter of Maine’s supreme court when it was established in 1820. His own legal reputation and practice grew until he became, quite possibly, the foremost legal figure in the state at that time.
When he was 50, Greenleaf accepted an offer to become Royal professor of law at Harvard University’s Law School, a distinguished post that he held for 13 years.
Greenleaf was granted Doctor of Law degrees by Harvard, Amherst and the University of Alabama. He wrote a highly respected text and numerous papers, played a role in the formation of Liberia’s original constitution, and on at least one occasion appeared as chief counsel before the U.S. Supreme Court.
A chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court once referred to Dr. Greenleaf as “the greatest authority on legal evidence that ever lived.”
At one point in his career, Simon Greenleaf mounted an intensive examination into evidence from the Gospel accounts for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The result of his work was a published piece entitled “The Testimony of the Evangelists Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice.”
Greenleaf concluded that in any unbiased courtroom in the world, if such evidence were presented, it would be adjudged as absolute historical fact.”
Does the article not note B-XVI's skepticism (at the least) over the curious notion that men are somehow "descended" from apes???
God said that He created Adam and Eve. God holds considerably higher authority than any scientist. Darwin was a failed (and resentful???) theology student as well as a knee-slappingly hilarious author of fables for the gullible among us.
In charity, we ought to consider that the view of Darwin and others that they are decsended from apes may actually be evidence that they are but they have no business maligning the ancestry of humans as though ours were theirs.
Fr. Coyne should find a new line of work: gardening, or carpentry or cooking or swinging through the treetops with a banana in one hand and a vine in the other or whatever. He is over his head on man's ancestry. When we need "science" to reveal religious truth, we will be sure to let the "scientists" know but they ought, in prudence, hold their breath waiting. If God's Word was good enough for real scientists like Louis Pasteur, then it ought to be good enough for the Darwinist pipsqueaks who never seem to produce work as valuable or practical as that of Pasteur.
aug: Well, then, get down on your knees and worship what you conceive to be "science" almighty. A mighty strange god to have before the one genuine God, but free will is free will. AND, when Darwin died, his personal attempts to deny the Truth, ummmm, ended.
Neither resentful (he enjoyed his time in Cambridge and maintained contacts there for many years) nor failed (he took a four year "ordinary" degree and passed his finals well in the top 10 percent, 10th on the list out of 178). He just never went on to take up orders in clergy as his scientific career took of, and he found himself loaded down with scientific work, in the wake of The Beagle voyage.
The rest of your sneering screed is about equally accurate.
If, tomorrow, you awoke to find that the Bible had disappeared from history and all of its derivitive ‘religions’ no longer existed in fact or in memory, in what would you believe? By what system would you live your life? No offense intended; just curious. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.