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 ...
"My Church is the Body of Christ, not a body governed by men. My authority is Christ and His Word..."
Does your church allow divorce?
Does your church allow divorcees to remarry?
Ever?
Speaking of chest thumping do you feel better now? And who pray tell put YOU in charge of ANYTHING I may say or do.
As for your assumption that I didn't read past the first page, that is all it is an assumption. I asked for evidence, not "theories" made up to fit someone's agenda which is mostly what "evolution" is. There is all this "evidence" and NO REAL way of making it fit the evolutionary agenda. Period. End of discussion with you.
That was a huge post. First, I encourage you to stay focused on one topic per debate. If we arrive at an impasse until we resolve a point...what qualifies as Scripture...then we can hold off from the first point, argue the second to resolution then return to our first.
Second, the reference you made about death and sin. That is referring to spiritual death for man. Related to that. Death is the result of sin. It isn't the act of sin that brings spiritual death. The spirit of every man is dead as a result of Adam's sin, and he being our root parent has passed that sin nature to each of us.
The spirit is made alive by the power of Christ in His resurrection.
The physical death is a result of sin as well. But, some, such as Enoch won't experience death physically.Many Christians will still be alive at the Rapture, and will not see physical death either.
The judgement of sin is seperation from God. Jesus took that judgement upon Himself on the cross, and that is why he cried out that God had forsaken Him.
Third, unfortunately, I won't be able to respond any more for several hours as I am going to be away from the computer. Given the number of topics I discuss daily, I doubt we will be able to go further with this, but I would like to very much.
The question that you refuse to answer is, how do you know this is figurative speech? By what line of reasoning do yo find it to be figurative?
Lots of very intelligent people have taken it literally.
What you were spewing sounded like the "Higher Anti-Semitism" to me. Of course, people who don't know what the Torah is, how it was really given, or how it has been transmitted have no business declaiming on the subject.
Don't tell me, you're one of those guys who thinks that the Lubavitcher Rebbe was Mosiach.
Well now, if Mashiach had come, we'd all know about it, right? Unless you're one of those people who believe a non-literal "spiritual messiah" came two thousand years ago.
But you refuse to answer how you know that, or why your reading differs from that of centuries of educated, highly intelligent people who read the Bible in the original languages.
How do you go about deciding which passages are literal and which are figurative?
As do most Jews.
What does Job have to do with my quote?
You may of course reappear on the next thread dumb-as-a-stump demanding once again to know "Where O where is the evidence for evolution?" Strike a pose. Look about, flat hand shading the eyes.
In suggesting that you do not, I am cautioning you that you already look absolutely bogus. When you ask for evidence of evolution, be ready to deal with it. Thus far, you have not dealt with it.
As for your assumption that I didn't read past the first page, that is all it is an assumption.
"Page?" You noted that the first article was hosted on Talk Origins, said "Talk Origins, humbug!" and hit the "Send" button. You have not dealt with any line of evidence whatsoever by so doing. I don't have to assume anything when I say that every line of evidence presented in the link I gave in post 111 stands unanswered.
I asked for evidence, not "theories" made up to fit someone's agenda which is mostly what "evolution" is.
You do not know the evidence from the theory. Here is the theory: "The diversity of life on Earth is the result common descent diverging under varying conditions as the result of random variation and natural selection."
Post 111 links a small sampling of the evidence.
Period. End of discussion with you.
No, THIS POST is the end. Phhhttt!!!
According to the Bible, how old was Adam when he died?
Given you have the ability/authority to discern which parts of the Bible are to be taken literally and as fact, is the Bible correct on Adam's age?
I am going to eschew responding to the rest of the posts on this thread and focus on the discussion with you, because this is interesting.
I appreciate your desire to focus on "one topic per debate".
The topic, as I see it, boils down as follows:
We can't discuss the science of evolution directly, but must cross reference it to the Bible. This is by your insistence, because in your religious tradition, the Bible is the source of our knowledge of God. I disagree profoundly, but if I don't agree to limit myself to a discussion of the Bible - if I don't consent to stay on your selected turf - then we can't have a discussion at all, because you'll keep citing the Bible for all of your propositions, and accept nothing external to it. So, I have left off any discussion of scientific evidence and moved straight into the Bible.
This then raises many questions:
WHICH Bible?
Why THAT one?
How do you know THAT is the right one?
How do you deal with direct contradictions in the Bible.
Now, I agree that it would be good to be able to focus on one issue at a time.
The most important issue, the kernel, the nugget is this: Why do you think that the proper approach is to focus on the Bible?
Which is to say: Why do you think the Bible is the supreme and final authority on everything?
We have to resolve THAT issue, really, before it makes any sense to move the discussion out of evolutioniary science and into the Bible. I am willing to do that, but I think you should first be put to the proof of demonstrating WHY THE BIBLE?
I think the answer to that is because your tradition has taught you that, and you believe your tradition. Certainly it does not say in the BIBLE that you ought to do that.
Theory...abstract reasoning.....speculation....assumption...conjecture. Seems like the correct name is applied...theory.
If science answers the "how?" in a way that leaves out any possibility for non-material causes, then is there any room or reason for religion to answer the question, "why?" -- isn't the "how" also the "why", if the how excludes any possibility of a creator?
"Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For the prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
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.