Posted on 09/20/2005 5:35:52 PM PDT by curiosity
Most adult Sunday school classes don't raise eyebrows, but my church is planning to hold one that's sure to. It's called "Evolution for Christians," and it will be taught this winter by David Bush, a member of the church I lead, Fairfax Presbyterian. David is an articulate government retiree who has been interested in this topic for nearly two decades, teaches a class on theories of the origins of life every five years or so, and once again has really done his homework. His view is that science and religion answer two different sets of questions about creation, with science answering the "how" questions, and religion answering the "why" ones. "With a little bit of wisdom and tolerance on each side," he tells me, "I think they can complement rather than contradict each other."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
On Pumpernickel :-)
Uh-oh. Nomad just announced that "Jackson Roykirk" is the True Creator.
http://www.podster.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fotos/tv_nomad.jpg
ROFL! :-)
Thare ya go! Proof!
If there are any evolutionists who are even interested in understanding the creationist viewpoint; there is a good book out called The Fingerprint of God by Hugh Ross. It would give you some insight into creationist thinking.
YEC INTREP - COMPROMISE ALERT!
Hey!!! Wait a min! I landed on one gross! Whoohoo!
That's the great Bert Williams, by the way.
LMAO!
:-)
I am out as well for the evening.
Most scientists believe in God, a superior intelligence - that our universe is an intelligent design.
But, as far as I have read, with the exception of time travel and "wormholes", the scientific field has not yet researched the miracle of Jesus and the Reincarnation, and His reappearance again.
In one of his lectures, Hawking did ask something to the effect, that if one can travel back in time, why hasn't anyone come forward?
Anyway, it's all very fascinating to me. Talk about mysterious....
Me, too. G'night.
It seems that the best a fossil can do is "prove" that something existed at one time and doesn't anymore.
You are asking for the join between various tips of the evolutionary tree. Well the join occurs further down the tree - ie in the past. The link between the reptiles and bird lineages was long ago for example, and while there are fossils of such bird-reptile forms long ago, there are no living bird-reptile creatures that have survived to this day. There is no reason they should still exist, and certainly no reason at all that modern reptiles would be turning into mammals, or birds.
There are still creatures that exist as they were in pre-historic times, are there not? Why should have the bird-reptile have necessarily gone extinct? Is it because ther was no use for it anymore? That's weird. So, it seems that what you are saying is that modern repitiles would not be evolving anymore. But why not? If they evolved millions of years ago, why did the process stop? If evolution is a continuous process then we should still see transitional forms today as lower forms are evolving into higher ones.
If you regard Genesis as literal, rather than allegorical, how would you define the terms "day", "night", "evening", and "morning" prior to the creation of the Sun on the third "day"?
A friend of mine, who was going for his PhD in antropology and happened to be a Christian who knew Hebrew, told me some very interesting things about the first couple verses in Genesis. If anyone knows Hebrew and can let me know if these are wrong, please do so but, here goes... He said that there is a change in tense between the 1st and 2nd verses of chapter one. The first verse indicates creation and the second verse indicates that the Earth BECAME void, as if something happened to it to change its original form. From then on God had to clean it up, so to speak, and make it habitable for man. His theory was that it was the fall of Satan, shen Satan was cast out of Heaven. There are other Scripture verses that indicate that at one time Earth was a place of great mineral beauty.
As an aside, I also don't see why a 6 day creation is inconsistent with the laws of physics, etc. God could have simply established those laws at the same time He created the Universe. Just because there are oil and coal deposits, doesn't mean He couldn't have created the Earth with them in place, knowing that we would someday need them.
Like I said, I've already been to talkorigins and have a slight problem with some of their "science".
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.
