Posted on 12/09/2008 12:32:05 AM PST by marthemaria
WASHINGTON (AFP) — US President George W. Bush said in an interview Monday that the Bible is "probably not" literally true and that a belief that God created the world is compatible with the theory of evolution.
"I think you can have both," Bush, who leaves office January 20, told ABC television, adding "You're getting me way out of my lane here. I'm just a simple president." But "evolution is an interesting subject. I happen to believe that evolution doesn't fully explain the mystery of life," said the president, an outspoken Christian who often invokes God in his speeches.
"I think that God created the Earth, created the world; I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution," he told ABC television. Asked whether the Bible was literally true, Bush replied:
"Probably not. No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it." "The important lesson is 'God sent a son,'" he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
Okay, Petronski.
That's the classiest resignation in defeat I've read in a long time.
There is really nothing more to be said on the subject. You simply refuse to point out where I "twisted" anything, you deny Scripture that is as plain as the nose on your face, and you accuse me of "personally interpreting" Scripture, when, as a God-fearing individual, I would not dare to do such a thing.
Don't flatter yourself. I just don't feel like wasting any more of my time.
That's not me. You're claim is false.
You simply refuse to point out where I "twisted" anything...
I have done so. Your claim is false.
...you deny Scripture that is as plain as the nose on your face...
I have not denied Scripture. Your claim is false.
...and you accuse me of "personally interpreting" Scripture...
It's not an accusation, it is a statement of fact, as I have shown. Your claim is false.
Four statements, four falsehoods...an excellent performance.
You misunderstand.
I’m not saying that salvation isn’t found in Jesus. I’m saying that *all* have sinned, even those who haven’t specifically “rejected Jesus.” *All* are in need of a Savior, for their sins against the Creator. Indeed, we were all “dead” in our sins, unable to actively do anything, including “reject” Jesus. We were simply dead, and now, by God’s grace, we’ve been made alive in Christ.
Please slow down and show some grace and understanding toward a fellow believer.
The bombardment of responses to my original post has me a tad shellshocked - and the hostility toward the post by some who I never thought would have the reaction they did was surprising, to say the least.
Anyway, again, I sincerely apologize. It's been a long day.
He gets no argument from me.
I figure he has the same right to talk about it as you do, wouldn’t you agree?
More like a hairless yeti.
George Bush has the same right to talk about it as we do. I’m talking about the office of President, though that’s the only reason they interviewed him at all.
Yes, he does. But as with the Pope, he is simply wrong. He has not thought it through. Whether the Bible is literally true or not throughout, evolution is still patent nonsense. Exactly when did God infuse humanness into the succession of organisms which started from an amoeba? If you don’t believe that higher mammals came from single-cell random sparks of protoplasm, you cannot believe in evolution, as it is taught. It is beyond silly. Best, Bob
It all breaks down if/when one starts to look at the pieces in ‘the mountain of evidence’
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
"The great apes are the members of the biological family Hominidae which includes humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans."
This means that if you're not an ape, you're not human...by definition. So what are you, exactly? Enquiring minds want to know!
But I do enjoy the ‘Planet of the Apes’ movie series! And I’m certain you do too! But I do enjoy the ‘Planet of the Apes’ movie series! And I’m certain you do too! But I do enjoy the ‘Planet of the Apes’ movie series! And I’m certain you do too! But I do enjoy the ‘Planet of the Apes’ movie series! And I’m certain you do too!
The first two were loads of fun. Numbers 3 and 4 were pretty weak, and the last one was really lame.
George Taylor: Do you have any weapons, any guns?
Cornelius: The best, but we won't need them.
George Taylor: I'm glad to hear it. I want one anyway.
That isn't the problem. The problem is that the theory of evolution denies design, intention, and purpose on the part of God in the administration of His creation. That is one thing which makes it incompatible with Christianity.
The theory of evolution says there is no such thing as design in nature. How do you rationalize that as being compatible with Christianity? A non-literal interpretation of the Bible is not much help on this point.
Not the most important thing, however. Evolution requires mutation (randomness and damage). Mutations are VERY seldom helpful, ie, mostly harmful. Evolution requires predation and disease and, overall, death.
The bible clearly states that death and disease and random harm entered the world after Adam sinned. Adam had to have existed in order TO sin. The bible also clearly states that all manner of animals already existed at the time of the fall.
The doctrine of sin is essential.
Man was created sinless, chose to sin, and cannot get reconciled with the Creator without a Savior. Jesus is that divine, sinless Savior. This is ESSENTIAL.
When the interpretation of the "evidence" contradicts the clear meaning of the bible, the interpretation of the evidence needs to be examined for hidden assumptions that may not be true.
I don't think so. People who say that evolution can be squared with Christianity should take some time out to read what evolutionists say. They are, after all, the authorities on their theory. Here is Darwin's Bulldog, T.H. Huxley:
"When I first read Mr. Darwin's, book, that which struck me most forcibly was, that Teleology (Design), as commonly understood, had received its death blow at Mr. Darwin's hands. For the teleological argument runs thus: 'An organ is fitted to perform a function or purpose, therefore it was specially constructed to perform that function.' This is precisely what Darwin denies with regard to plants and animals. If we apprehend the spirit of the Origin of Species rightly, then nothing can be more entirely and absolutely opposed to Design in Nature than the Darwinian hypothesis.""In addition to the truth of the doctrine of evolution, indeed, one of its greatest merits in my eyes, is the fact that it occupies a position of complete and irreconcilable antagonism to that vigorous and consistent enemy of the highest intellectual, moral, and social life of mankind--the Catholic Church."
Leaving the judging to God? What’s up with that? Oh wait - it’s a commandment...shame everyone doesn’t know that though.
Nice post. Hell, Paul Johnson’s laundry list probably would make an awesome read. Did you read his book on God by the way? The man just plain gets it, be it religion, art, history or whatever he puts his amazing mind to...
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.