- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Creationist Ken Ham blames atheists and ‘fake news’ for failing Ark Encounter theme park
Posted on 6/26/17 at 2:52 pm to DavidTheGnome
Posted on 6/26/17 at 2:52 pm to DavidTheGnome
Good question. It is all important. Jesus taught the OT. Sin offerings and sacrifice was required in OT. Jesus became the one and final sacrifice.
0
Posted on 6/26/17 at 2:53 pm to northshorebamaman
still waiting
Posted on 6/26/17 at 2:58 pm to Collegedropout
quote:
still waiting
Still waiting on what? Let's start here: is it your belief that the theory of evolution puts forth that we're descended from tadpoles?
I'm honestly not that interested in debating someone who believes the earth is flat.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:01 pm to Collegedropout
If the earth is flat, how is there a center filled with molten lava?
If the earth is flat, explain the Theory of Magnets.
If the earth is flat, explain the Theory of Magnets.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:01 pm to Collegedropout
Why don't you give us a rundown of your own personal understanding of Evolution.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:05 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Why don't you give us a rundown of your own personal understanding of Evolution.
Was man created by ANY other method than by God in His own image?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:08 pm to SSpaniel
I don't understand the question.
All life evolved into what it is today from a single cell organism.
You could say that God created the process, therefore the answer is "yes".
All life evolved into what it is today from a single cell organism.
You could say that God created the process, therefore the answer is "yes".
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:16 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
You could say that God created the process, therefore the answer is "yes".
No...
On the sixth day, God created man in his own image.
quote:
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Not.. started the ball rolling or created the process or well.. He created the microorganism that kept changing, evolving and growing and eventually became man....
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:19 pm to SSpaniel
quote:
No...
On the sixth day, God created man in his own image.
In other words, *poof*, Adam appears?
Of course not. Only an insane person would believe that.
There is literally no evidence to support that position, and thousands upon thousands of pieces of evidence, spanning every single branch of life sciences, that supports Evolutionary Biology.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:23 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Of course not. Only an insane person would believe that.
Not to derail that...but why is THAT insane and the various supernatural parts of Jesus' story not? There are a ton of "crazy" things about the Jesus story...but to toss those out would be to toss out Christianity, so they stay.
I'm just asking why HIS supernatural claims without evidence are crazy but the others are perfectly reasonable?
This is kind of why I'm in bed with their position of all or nothing. Frankly, it's easier to defend.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:23 pm to Fun Bunch
Bruh, that was all planted by the devil to fool us. Didn't you see the video on the first page?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:25 pm to SSpaniel
The verse you quoted is in English, a language that was not original to the Bible thus has undergone translations (probably many) over the years. With translation comes the inevitable risk of error.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:27 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
Not to derail that...but why is THAT insane and the various supernatural parts of Jesus' story not? There are a ton of "crazy" things about the Jesus story...but to toss those out would be to toss out Christianity, so they stay.
I'm just asking why HIS supernatural claims without evidence are crazy but the others are perfectly reasonable?
This is kind of why I'm in bed with their position of all or nothing. Frankly, it's easier to defend.
I don't believe in any of those either, but I do believe in bridging gaps. Theistic Evolution is an olive branch.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:30 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
The verse you quoted is in English, a language that was not original to the Bible thus has undergone translations (probably many) over the years. With translation comes the inevitable risk of error.
You are right. I'm sure in the original Hebrew it said something like..
God was up in the heavens piddling around, and some atoms crashed together, formed a universe. The earth was part of that. Then some stuff clung together and formed a microorganism. That evolved into something bigger and kept evolving until voila, man.
In all the various translations and what not, I can see how the mistake could have been made.
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 3:31 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:32 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
In other words, *poof*, Adam appears?
Pretty much.
That being said, the earth is round. Just so you don't think I'm a complete nutjob. Just a partial one.
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:34 pm to SSpaniel
The fact of the matter you have no clue what original texts said.
Ancient Aramaic had like 10% of the words we do today. Which means words could have dozens, and in some cases, hundreds of meanings depending on context and other clues that may have been lost.
You take that, and you take how these texts were written down and copied 100s of times, by hand, by many different men, with many different religious and personal agendas, and then translated by men who translated it as they thought fit, and then written down by hand and copied by hand by thousands of different men, with different religious and political agendas...
Well you get the drift.
Believing in the "literal Bible" is just dumb and completely ignorant of human reality. I can understand believing in the "spirit" of it, though.
Ancient Aramaic had like 10% of the words we do today. Which means words could have dozens, and in some cases, hundreds of meanings depending on context and other clues that may have been lost.
You take that, and you take how these texts were written down and copied 100s of times, by hand, by many different men, with many different religious and personal agendas, and then translated by men who translated it as they thought fit, and then written down by hand and copied by hand by thousands of different men, with different religious and political agendas...
Well you get the drift.
Believing in the "literal Bible" is just dumb and completely ignorant of human reality. I can understand believing in the "spirit" of it, though.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:35 pm to SSpaniel
quote:
Pretty much.
How do you explain away the overwhelming evidence that illustrates that "literal Adam and Eve" is just not scientifically possible.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:35 pm to SSpaniel
quote:
You are right. I'm sure in the original Hebrew it said something like..
God was up in the heavens piddling around, and some atoms crashed together, formed a universe. The earth was part of that. Then some stuff clung together and formed a microorganism. That evolved into something bigger and kept evolving until voila, man.
In all the various translations and what not, I can see how the mistake could have been made.
No, I doubt it. But if we are trying to explain the creation of our universe through a few sentences I would think every little nuance matters.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:36 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I don't believe in any of those either
My apologies...I guess I misunderstood.
quote:
Theistic Evolution is an olive branch.
Eh...with this is really disagree. I mean, from a strategic standpoint I get that dealing with a reasonable Catholic that accepts evolution is a huge deal easier than dealing with some fundamentalist that thinks the universe is 6,000 years old...but I think allowing that door to stay open UNCHALLENGED is a problem that ends up just inviting the fundamentalists to stand their ground.
Take Intelligent Design for instance. ID is NOT what many main stream Christians think it is...which is kind of what you described as Theistic Evolution. ID is the EXACT Creationism that was tossed out back in the late 80's based on the LA court case that went to the US Supreme Court just repackaged and renamed. But if you're not paying attention, you can be fooled into thinking it's what you described...and those assclowns are happy with that confusion and will use it all the way to voting people onto local school boards and boards of education in various state house that end up altering science educational standards in really frightening ways.
There needs to be a VERY clear distinction made between ID and what most Catholics would consider Theistic Evolution. they are nearly 100% different, and those differences are very important.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 3:37 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
How do you explain away the overwhelming evidence that illustrates that "literal Adam and Eve" is just not scientifically possible.
Honestly? I don't worry about it. It doesn't affect my salvation one whit.
Page 11 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News