To: 43north
DID DEATH ENTER THE WORLD THROUGH SIN, OR WAS IT ALWAYS PART OF GOD'S PLAN? SCRIPTURE SAYS THE FORMER; DARWIN SAYS THE LATTER. IF DEATH DID NOT COME INTO EXISTENCE BECAUSE OF SIN, THEN JESUS CAME FOR NO REASON.
DARWINIANISM IS AN ATTACK AGAINST THE ATONING SACRIFICE OF JESUS. SOUNDS DRASTIC, BUT IT REALLY IS.
CHOOSE: JESUS, OR DARWIN.
34 posted on
09/09/2006 9:10:55 PM PDT by
Theo
(Global warming "scientists." Pro-evolution "scientists." They're both wrong.)
To: Theo
Oh please. Are you really that dense?
Death of the body does not equal death of the spirit or the soul.
Life is a sexually transmitted condition that is invariably fatal.
39 posted on
09/09/2006 9:14:36 PM PDT by
43north
(7 of 11 living things are insects. This explains liberals and islamofascists.)
To: Theo
DARWINIANISM IS AN ATTACK AGAINST THE ATONING SACRIFICE OF JESUS. SOUNDS DRASTIC, BUT IT REALLY IS.
Your paranoia is not evidence of any deliberate motive on behalf of an anti-Christian motive in Charles Darwin's work.
86 posted on
09/09/2006 10:24:10 PM PDT by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Theo
As futile as it seems, I would have followed up with...
Romans 1:19-25
19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
92 posted on
09/09/2006 10:45:04 PM PDT by
loboinok
(Gun control is hitting what you aim at!)
To: Theo
Just observed auto with the "Darwin" fish and bumper sticker that read: "He died in 33 A.D. GET OVER IT"
As a searching, humble agnostic I was disgusted and offended. Then I pondered the irony of this ignorant jerk apparently unaware that A.D. is the Year of the Lord... Anno Dominus.
What a neanderthal!!! LOL The Lord of Laughter - and what a sense of humor.
Kindly,
sp
156 posted on
09/10/2006 7:38:08 AM PDT by
sodpoodle
(I have no idea how I got here - but I like it and I plan to stay.)
To: Theo
"DARWINIANISM IS AN ATTACK AGAINST THE ATONING SACRIFICE OF JESUS. SOUNDS DRASTIC, BUT IT REALLY IS.
CHOOSE: JESUS, OR DARWIN.
You're right, Theo.
But compromisers can't stand truth.
It's so.... arrogant!
To: Theo
CHOOSE: JESUS, OR DARWIN. Or you'll cut off his head?
Do you realize how you sound?
224 posted on
09/10/2006 10:47:09 PM PDT by
higgmeister
(In the Shadow of The Big Chicken!)
To: Theo
Concerning Romans chapter 5: Let me ask you this question: what did Paul intend to communicate in that verse, or better, in that entire section of Romans? He hardly intended to say something of timeless value regarding the theory of evolution. Apart from the question of whether he is talking about "biological death" or "ultimate death" in Romans 5,12-21, the key point is that Paul is not talking about Evolution at all in these verses. Using the reasoning process, "If this, then how much more that," Paul is saying: if death entered via the sin of one person through disobedience, then how much more will life enter through this person's obedience"; and Paul wants his audience to embrace the life given by the risen Jesus.
Here as elsewhere in Paul's letters it is important to distinguish between Paul's principles and Paul's arguments and Paul's rhetoric. It is possible to accept completely Paul's timeless principles and at the same time to recognize that his arguments are conditioned by the level of knowledge at his time.
288 posted on
09/11/2006 1:41:48 PM PDT by
Remole
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson