Posted on 12/06/2012 9:47:52 AM PST by ksen
What claim? For myself I think laws imply a lawgiver. But that is philosophy and theology, not science.
Sorry that there is no practical application for supernatural causation explanations. Irrationally attacking me about it won’t help.
Would you please show us where in scripture that is stated and the correct interpretation of the original language meaning? >>Am I literally made from dust?<<
Have you ever noticed that a decayed corps simply becomes back to part of the earth? >>Do I reject God via my knowledge that cellular processes involving DNA were also involved?<<
Evolved you say? So the DNA from a ape became the DNA of a man? Are you sure? No evolved included. >>The argument that to reject creationism makes one not a Christian and destined for hellfire is rather idiotic<<
Really? To deny what God did doesn’t deny Christ? So you would say that the account of how God created this earth is fiction or what? If so, do you believe other parts of scripture are also fiction?
According to zoology - man is an ape. The two closest related apes are humans and chimps. Humans and chimps are closer in DNA than either is to a gorilla.
Rev 7:1. Acts 10:11. Rev 20:8.
I don’t deny that God is responsible for it all - that God created me “from dust” - I just know that there were physical forces involved - and that knowing and understanding these physical forces is useful - while supposing that it was all caused by supernatural intervention is useless.
Right now stars are forming off in the universe through gravity and nuclear fusion. Are these stars not also created by God? Are they less created by God than our Sun?
Do you think the Pope denies Christ when he accepts the evidence for biological evolution?
According to zoology? Simply because there are some alleles the same? You and a duck both have legs too! Anything there?
>>and that knowing and understanding these physical forces is useful<<
I don’t recall anyone saying they weren’t. In fact, all have said the God set things in motion and laws to keep this whole thing working.
>>while supposing that it was all caused by supernatural intervention is useless.<<
There you go with that “supposing” word again. That’s out and out denying what God said in Genesis. He created everything and set it all in motion. It was all caused by God’s “supernatural intervention” and to deny that is to call God a liar.
>>Right now stars are forming off in the universe through gravity and nuclear fusion.<<
Yeah so? God also destroyed this earth with the flood and killed everyone but Noah and his family. He had done that once before after Satan corrupted the entire population of this earth you know.
>>Do you think the Pope denies Christ when he accepts the evidence for biological evolution?<<
Yep! And that’s not the only way the Pope is wrong.
Well I am in good company with the Pope. I think we can withstand the slings and arrows of zealots insisting that neither of us can be Christian because we accept scientific evidence that you deny and/or are ignorant of.
Piety is not established on a sliding scale of how wacky your cosmology is.
Do you call God a liar when you deny that there are literally four corners of the Earth?
The correct way to answer
QUESTION: "how old is the earth?":
Answer: A lot older than your earwax. Have you got a serious question?
I'm so old, I remember when there was a field of study called "natural history" I'm not sure that history has an end, but "natural history" definitely died somewhere in the 20th century.
According to scripture we are created unique and in God’s image. Scripture has never been proven wrong. Science on the other hand?
>>Well I am in good company with the Pope.<<
That’s that wide road again.
>>Do you call God a liar when you deny that there are literally four corners of the Earth?<<
You haven’t shown me where God said that.
Isaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
The word used is the Hebrew word, KANAPH which really means “extremity”. In Numbers 15:38 it is translated “borders”.
The Greek equivalent in Revelation 7:1 is gonia. Gonia literally means angles, or divisions and sometimes quadrants.
No where it scripture does God say that the earth has “four corners”. You really need to study scripture rather than science. Your atttempts at discrediting scripture is rather telling.
Sad to say the left is never going to play “fair” and if you ever need evidence tune into a night on Fox, watch Hannity ask Juan Williams why isn’t Obama having to compromise on the fiscal cliff or offer a plan and Juan Williams says simply, “he has”.
No proof, no thought, no nothing but lie rinse, repeat.
The left has continued to hijack the language and ALL of us are guilty for falling for it...and worse, repeating it!
Everytime I hear “occupation” or invasion of Iraq and/or Afghanistan...I try to correct it and restate “liberation” of Iraq/Afghanistan.
The latest thing I’ve noticed is the top 2% of taxpayers make $250 K or more.
REALLY?
Think about why those two figgers are interchangeable to the left for a moment!
WHY doesn’t anyone correct this????
The same works for libtards. Actually they are much much worse. The party of inclusiveness is infatuated and obsessed with all their differences...race, gender, class...
Wasn't it Al Sharpton that said the zerrhoid wasn't black enough?
If there’s no scientific debate upon the age of the Earth, then it’s settled science and that age is known.
Right?
No need to extend it every couple of years in order to accomodate this or that recent discovery that throw some theory into question.
Right?
So, what’s the age of the Earth?
Wonder what percentage of people think that all we know and observe and experience happened without any kind of intelligent input, just all happenstance...just because?
I’m just reading all this and not participating in discussion/argument, but in Revelation 7:1 John the apostle relates a vision: “After this I saw 4 angels standing at the 4 corners of the earth, holding back the 4 winds of the earth, so that no wind should blow on the earth or on the sea or on any tree.” The 4 corners and winds are commonly understood to mean north, south, east and west.
When Jesus speaks in Matthew 24:31 about the return of Christ, He says: “And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect [meaning the Jews] from the 4 winds, from one end of the sky to the other.” In other words, from north to south and east to west.
Good point and we would also be wrong if we thought a 5 year old child was 45 years old if they suffered from progeria.
metmom took you to pieces...but one thing I need to ask, you seriously think millions of Chritians don’t believe God in genesis 1 and 2?
As for Galileo, you likely will find some objections on that, and see comments here: http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/09/interpreting-actions-of-pope-even-popes.html
And there are still significant RCs defending geocentrism, such as RCA Robert Sungenis (http://galileowaswrong.blogspot.com/).
And this which was previously listed on http://www.catholicintl.com/ /index.html: Galileo was wrong, the church was right: theologians attempting to defend the Church by arguing that the condemnation of Galileo did not engage the Church’s authority or impose an obligation in conscience on the faithful to hold geocentrism as true have of course laid themselves open to the argument of liberal Catholics or would-be Catholics that they are therefore free to reject other decrees of the Holy See on any topic from scriptural interpretation to the immorality of contraception.” — The Theological Status of Heliocentrism,http://www.ldolphin.org/geocentricity/Daly.pdf;
Sungenis also criticizes the Catechism for denying the literal understanding of Genesis, claiming it is not the historical position of the church: http://www.catholicintl.com/index.php/catholic/theology/786-the-us-catechism-more-problems-and-erroneous-concepts
The most basic question is “Did God create the heavens and the earth?”
Evolutionists, including Darwin, say “No” and develop their theories to support that conclusion. That’s not science - it’s a religious zealotry.
I believe, based on the evidence that I see around me that God did create the heavens and the earth (”The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” - Psalms 19:1; “For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” - Romans 1:20). I don’t know how He did it, and I don’t know for sure how long it took (although I tend to believe in the literal 6 days, but am awaiting final judgement until I can ask Him), and I can’t prove that He did. But, the evidence is unmistakable.
Some would say “What evidence?” There are innumerable examples of a special creation - let me mention just a few:
- The angularity between the Sun, Moon and Earth result in spectacular eclipses - there is no other system that even comes close to matching this phenomenum.
- The probability of all of the factors that are required to support life on Earth occurring in one place are astronomically low.
- There is evidence anywhere one chooses to look of Intelligent design.
- The evidence of God’s Son coming to Earth is indisputable, and the preservation of His Word through the ages is truly miraculous, so why would I doubt anything else written in His Word?
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.