the book AND darwin?

Posted by
anyman on Apr 14, 2002 at 05:38


i am moving this one to the looked kind of lost down below...and i know that none of you would want that to happen :-)

from the tail end of this thread evolution

...Don't try to misdirect ... you made a statement you knew wasn't true...



Don't try to misdirect ... you made a statement you knew wasn't true.

And you made the statement that the Bible specifically claims that the universe is only 6,000 years old. We are still waiting for you to give us the chapter and verse where you found this statement. I'm sure, Danny, that your failure to provide the reference was just an oversight and that you won't try to misdirect this request. As you said, "I challenge your statement, your veracity, and your self-avowed claim to be a moral and honest person. Either put up or admit that you made up your statement based on nothing ... again!" ---from the post titled *re: thanks for the reminder*


the response...

we all need reminding...

Posted by anyman on Apr 13, 2002 at 21:50

Re: thanks for the reminder (Dale)

we all need reminding...according to the book and a fella called peter (2 peter 1.12-21; 3.2,5,8, esp 15-16)

the book does not specifically claim it as is however most assuredly IMPLICIT

there is a difference between an implication and a necessary implication

the inference is necessary given the language

just some of the places that make it such are genesis 1; exodus 20.8-11; mark 10.6, romans 5.12; et many al

from one of your own favorites (romans 1.20)...exactly who or what is it that was supposed to be seeing these things so clearly **since the creation of the world**...who or what is it that is supposed to be understanding from what has been made (also since the creation of the world)...does it refer to the bacteria, the fish, the dinosaurs, some other creature, or mankind?

romans 5.12...if sin entered the world through man (adam, v14) and DEATH entered the world through sin (whose sin... the bacteria, the fish, the dinosauria, some other creature, or man?) could there be a **struggle** for survival before man came could nature be **red [bloody, a reference to death] in tooth and claw** before man came along and sinned

if death did not enter the world until MAN sinned, then there can be no millions and billions of years of DEATH, disease, suffering, and pain prior to **the so-called "evolution" of man**

this is a fundamental, absolutely fundamental tenet of chrisitanity...if death was in the world before the sin of MAN...then the book and all of chrisitianity is a lie, an abominable lie...and there is no point in hoping or waiting for the savior that will give us the victory over DEATH...there would not even be any need for a savior

in the end...chrisitanity is all about LIFE and DEATH

you can go one way or the can believe in evolution or you can believe in the book

but there is no RATIONAL way that one can claim both

it is possible for one or the other to be is not possible for BOTH to be true

the final nail in the coffin is the geneological information included ever so carefully at genesis 5 and 11 et al (taking us without a gap from adam to abraham)...elsewhere (i will be happy to provide more if you are unable to find them) we are given the info for abe to jacob to joseph to moses, etc etc etc...all without gap

if the book is true, there can be no serious doubt about the age of the earth...if the book is wrong about these things, then it cannot be trusted in other is then worthless and should be deposited soonest possible in the circular file...along with the rest of the garbage

if darwin is right, the book is wrong...if darwin is wrong, the book could be right...if the book is right...darwin is wrong

these two diametrically opposed philosophies cannot both be true at the same time

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup



[ Forum ] [ New Message ]