Posted on 10/11/2009 6:56:59 AM PDT by OneVike
c. something you don’t understand...
Like for instance Man being created in God’s image a fully functioniing adult. If God can do that, then certainly he can create a world that looks older than it is.
It’s not “willfull disregard of the evidence”.
It’s interpreting it in a way that some can not or will not acknowledge.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2359966/posts?page=106#106
I never said He couldn't.
Methinks another reading of the thread is in order, my FRiend.
Thanks. I appreciate the calm and reasoned reply.
It is much less sweeping a statement than the one I originally questioned you on, and considerably more accurate (IMO) as a result.
Really? You ask that with a straight face?
<><><><><><
Sure did. And got a calm and reasoned (presumably also with a straight face) reply (thanks again metmom).
Chuckling. It’s called conversation. You might give it a try sometime.
Methinks another reading of the thread is in order, my FRiend.
I never said you said He couldn't...I merely pointed out to you the possibility you failed to mention...
so if anyone needs to re-read anything...
that would be YOU.
Is it that you’re embarassed you have no source and just make things up as you go along...
or embarassed that you ARE your source?
Either way, I do understand your embarassment.
Sure did. And got a calm and reasoned (presumably also with a straight face) reply (thanks again metmom).
Chuckling. It’s called conversation. You might give it a try sometime.
No kidding...REALLY dmz???
Uhhh yeah dmz...I’m aware of #170, in fact I referenced it to another poster.
metmom has infinitely more patience than I do, so what’s your point?
(She always does, and yet she’s still regularly attacked anyway.)
Frankly, I’ve seen post #170 posted on here, explained and re-explained on news/religion.etc. in about these exact same words for several YEARS now, thus my question to you.
It amazes me that on FR of all places, there’s still resistance to the idea that liberals hijack science to advance their ideology.
metmom has infinitely more patience than I do, so what’s your point?
<><><><><><><><>
No point. You jumped into the middle of a calm and reasoned discussion with your typical sarcasm. I don’t mind, it’s worth a chuckle or two.
Actually, the desire to not get banned overrides my desire to say what I'm thinking many times.
I don't know walking away from the keyboard is patience or not.
But thanks for the vote of confidence. I do try.
“No point”.
Well, you’ve got honesty going for you! ;)
I am not embarrassed. Please do no make personal comments about that which you have no comprehension. You are not a god.
Do you have any other explanations?
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt...
the way I see it when someone asks you for your source and you just keep sourcing yourself...
speaking of...
“you are not a god”...
what then is your explanation?
Do you, after all, have any idea whatsoever why something of perfect design has to necessarily be uncorruptable?
I’ve never heard of such an idea.
You do understand that the 'serpent' was not an actual snake, but was a representation of what was 'within' mankind?
Take any human, and tell them they cannot do something. See what happens.
Oh. I understand now, I think? Sort of like how the 'days' in Genesis are not really our 24 hour days. Thank you.
So, when God had the snake slither away forever to eat dust, God was throwing evil out from 'within' man?
Thanks for the response. Sorry for the formation of the statement.
It was a terrible way to put it.
I think the serpent was meant to refer to the Bible principle that God gave free will to man, and with it he chose to disobey God.
I should not have stated it as if it was a 'given' you were ignorant of, or that I insisted you believe.
So, when God had the snake slither away forever to eat dust, God was throwing evil out from 'within' man?
I don't believe God had the snake slither away forever to eat dust, and if God was throwing evil out from 'within' man, it didn't work.
Let me now ask, was the snake to blame for Eve's decision? Adam's?
Did God blame the snake? Is that why he told the snake he would be under the heel of man?
He was certainly ticked off at the serpent!
14: And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
An honest evo, is that what you are calling me?
Surely my honesty must be a cover for reproductive advantage, as that is all that is motivating us evos. Even though we don’t know it.
Soulless great apes can be honest
_____
Stop. You’re making me blush.
Why do I feel better about being called a soulless great ape than an evo-fascist atheist?
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.