Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
6days
New member
It's not what I want it to say... It's what it actually says. The verse is just one on many showing how Jesus referred to scripture as true history... and a source of truth.
In the above verse, Jesus refers to scripture from the beginning to end of the OT.
I refer to the true parts of scripture as true, that doesn't make them written by God. The people who killed Jesus are the same kinds of men who compiled the scriptures which were mainly the writings of others.
Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”[Luke 24]
Jesus never complained about the Scriptures. His life depended on the Scriptures.
Why would you believe any scripture then? You should stick to your Urantia papers caino
gcthomas
New member
My reading of his writing, now some years ago, was that he though that the races had diverged, and 'more evolved' doesn't sound like a phrase he would have used. He did refer to levels of civilisation, but that isn't what you meant, is it?
Could you tell me where Darwin claims that some human races are more evolved than others. please?
Rosenritter
New member
Redfern, you posted the question that 6Days asked you, but what did you answer?
In my experience, people usually believe what they want to believe, what they have chosen for them by their pre-existing team, or what they figure is in their best interests. Even with the best and purest of motives, what constitutes "convincing" varies from person to person, and it's important to know what matters to your audience so you can present something appropriate if asked. So if you ask why the Bible should be believed, and he asks you what your standard of proof is, you don't show yourself to be very serious if you won't answer that type of question.
Rosenritter
New member
You haven't yet shown one instance where Jesus said the Bible was in error. You've been talking for a while now. It's safe to assume you have none.
Dear Stripe,
Thanks a lot for calling me such a nasty thing. I will not call you the same and you should take it back. Jesus said in Matt. 5:22KJV, "But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca' shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say, 'Thou fool' shall be in danger of hell fire." I am hardly an idiot {fool}. You're terrible for saying so and you do not have a valid cause. What does that make you?? Let's work together, not apart. All things shall be made known in the end; that includes Alwight's email address, etc. That is written in the Bible. Jesus said it in Matt. 10:26KJV, "For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and {nothing} hid, that shall not be known."
God Help You To Understand,
Michael
Last edited:
I never said that he did say the Bible was in error. I said that just because Jesus referenced truths within the scripture doesn't mean he said the scripture was without error or that God wrote it. You project your own wishful thinking onto Jesus' intent in quoting truths from scripture.
Hitler was all about the perfection of the Aryan race. His plan was the eradication of all other races eventually, or the colored races in general, starting with Jews. What do you mean 'show me"?
6days
New member
Darwin often referred to*other ethnic groups who didn't have white skin with terms like 'degraded', 'savage' or 'low'. He referred to pygmies as "lower organisms". In Darwins first book he discussed "Favored races" (Discussing animals and plants) and then applied that theory to humanity in 'Descent of Man'. The Nazi's, Japanese and many others applied Darwin's ideas about some savage human groups, and lower organisms as being more apelike, or less highly evolved. In fact, Darwins ideas about savages was used to put a pygmy in a chimpanzee cage in a zoo (Name was Ota Benga) The racist ideas were ingrained into society and when a pastor complained, the New York Times justified the racist display saying that 'evolution is in the textbooks, and is as factual as the multiplication table'.gcthomas said:
It is interesting that science confirms the Biblical account...all humanity is "one blood", yet evolutionists still sometimes inadvertently seem a bit racist. Notice this Smithsonian drawing of ape to man. Why does what almost appears to be a black African man evolve into a white guy?
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Top-Ten-Daily-Consequences-of-Having-Evolved.html
Rosenritter
New member
Yet Jesus used the scripture in ways that you never would. You wouldn't use it like that because you consider it in error, imperfect, that just because it says it doesn't mean that God means it.
Matthew 22:29 KJV
(29) Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Jesus seemed pretty confident that the scriptures were perfect enough to the decree that lack of knowledge resulted in error and fueled denial of the power of God. That's not wishful thinking, that's gospel.
Dear Caino,
That is hardly a solution to our impasse. God didn't create life through the process of any evolution, characterized by 'sudden mutations.' That is you trying to put into words what YOU think happened. God created all of the creatures. If He wanted ANY to ADAPT, He would do so by intervening as a Supreme Chemist and Biologist, to be honest. If he wished to change a genome, RNA, atom, or proton, He would do so. He is the Creator and His Handiwork overflows life with abundance and great variety. If He can form man from the dust of the ground, He must definitely be quite a Chemist and Biologist. Do you know truly how complex man is? And women, it seems to be much more! I'll go into it another time. Am not spending too much time on TOL tonight because I've got to get up early and it is already 2:00 a.m. here.
Ask Jesus To Come Into Your Heart,
Michael
Last edited:
Dear Caino,
You see, even the Lord Jesus, was foretold of in the OT, Psalms 2:7KJV, as well as surrounding verses. And yes, "can" be imperfect, not "will" be imperfect. When Jesus gave the words to be written of in Revelation, they are exactly as dictated by Him to John of Patmos. The very same with the book of Daniel, and thus I would have to include the whole Bible, to be honest.
Praise The Lord!!
Michael
Jesse did on a number of occasions exclaim in effect "haven't you read the scriptures?" But you are assuming only one possibility, that he meant the scriptures were documents of lawyerly like perfection instead of the imperfectly preserved writings of men which culled the faith based spiritual truths of the Jewsish people.
Recalling the post resurrection episode wherein Jesus walked up alongside two men on the road to Emmaus, after he conversed with them he sat down in their home, broke bread with them, then and there they realized who he was then suddenly vanished. They said to themselves "“Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”
This is a lesson in how one can know the scriptures literally but not glean the spiritual content. They saw a dealer meaning that they had not preaveously been aware of. While the scriptures do contain much that is true both historical and spiritual, there is also much that isn't literally true.
If that's what you sincerely believe then keep believing it. The Hebrews creation story is completely inconsistent with the material evidence contained within the earth. God doesn't make mistakes, drown the earth except for an ansestor if the Jews (who concocted that story) then start over only to have the same results.
6days
New member
The creation account is the most scientific and logical explanation to the evidence. Science is continually proving evolutionary beliefs wrong, and at the same time revealing the majesty of our Creator.
Correct. There are things God can not do... He can't and doesn't make mistakes.
gcthomas
New member
Yes, and that relates to their cultural development, as I mentioned in my post. You said "more evolved". And you haven't managed to support your claim, since Darwin never said such a thing as far as I can tell. He did, though, claim that all humans were all the same species, which was not a view universally accepted by Christians of the day.
No, he didn't, if my check of his three books is anything to go by. I this another of your rather over-interpreted or modified non-quotes? You should really stop doing that.
Darwin claimed that all humans were of the same species, and not all Christian authorities agreed. Was he wrong?
Notice this Smithsonian drawing of ape to man. Why does what almost appears to be a black African man evolve into a white guy?
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Top-Ten-Daily-Consequences-of-Having-Evolved.html
Are you really unaware that the first modern humans evolved in East Africa, and that some migrated to Europe, where evolution removed the dark skin to allow for vitamin D synthesis? Ancient 'Black men' evolved into both modern 'black men' and modern Europeans, with much cross breeding between the groups, but not enough to completely suppress the skin colour differences.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Here is my next script project. I believe there is one person on this thread now in England, but possibly from Poland originally, and would like to hear from him. I'm seeking help from people familiar with the period and the south coast.
DESOLATED
Marcus Sanford, October, 2016
ask@interplans.net, 360-460-9473
PO Box 1074, Sequim, WA 98382
Logline: An orator and free-thinker in early 1800s south-coast England murders a coastal shiplightman whom he thinks knows that his girlfriend put their baby in to the waves of a huge storm to get rid of it. The speaker goes on a tirade against Christian faith, and seeks to be published, like Thomas Payne, just as Pastor Peter Holford has perfected his material on the historic event known as the destruction of Jerusalem, in a wide speaking itinerary. Both skeptics are silenced, and leave the country.
Synopsis: The south coast lighting system which once warned London of invasion is now also in use as a lighthouse system to save ships from crashing on reefs, manned by Admiralty shiplightmen. As one storm approaches, Abner Pruitt sees a girl with a basket walking into a receding tide where she leaves the basket. Leaving the light momentarily to check on her, he dashes down the escarpment, and makes contact but she is frightened and disappears, and he returns.
The girl tells the father, progressive orator Fitzwilliam Summers, she has been seen, and Summers becomes obsessed with protecting their plan. He lurks around Hastings long enough to hear of the approach of another storm, and decides to ambush the lightman while on duty once his light is up, not realizing it is another lightman.
Summers then goes on a tirade against the Christian faith, totally absorbed in Payne’s material.
Evangelical pastor Peter Holford has an encounter with a reader of Payne in a pub. The reader is quite sure that Christian belief is doomed because it seeks to be evidence-free, and because it refers to faith as that which is separate from proof. Holford is inspired then to go public with his research on the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-72 AD, and merrily jokes to Payne’s follower that he ‘will visit the pub more often!’
Public debate of Holford and Payne/Summers?
Not only has most of England received Holford overwhelmingly, but Payne and Summers have almost no sales. Payne decides to leave for America.
Since the Admiralty has learned when the girlfriend of Summers was ‘in confinement’ and there is no child, they know the motive for the murder. The interview of the intended target is in the newspapers. Summers now realizes he killed the wrong man, and leaves for Australia.
In a final scene, the Huxley family who slurped up the material of Payne and Summers, discuss how they next plan to assault the church, but now realize they can’t touch Christ and the desolation of Jerusalem, and evangelicals have seriously cut in on their slave-based profits. Instead, they are going after creation, looking for a biologist who is willing to write the scientific paper necessary, to make creation look as silly as possible, and maintain the racial-biological superiority of white races.
DESOLATED
Marcus Sanford, October, 2016
ask@interplans.net, 360-460-9473
PO Box 1074, Sequim, WA 98382
Logline: An orator and free-thinker in early 1800s south-coast England murders a coastal shiplightman whom he thinks knows that his girlfriend put their baby in to the waves of a huge storm to get rid of it. The speaker goes on a tirade against Christian faith, and seeks to be published, like Thomas Payne, just as Pastor Peter Holford has perfected his material on the historic event known as the destruction of Jerusalem, in a wide speaking itinerary. Both skeptics are silenced, and leave the country.
Synopsis: The south coast lighting system which once warned London of invasion is now also in use as a lighthouse system to save ships from crashing on reefs, manned by Admiralty shiplightmen. As one storm approaches, Abner Pruitt sees a girl with a basket walking into a receding tide where she leaves the basket. Leaving the light momentarily to check on her, he dashes down the escarpment, and makes contact but she is frightened and disappears, and he returns.
The girl tells the father, progressive orator Fitzwilliam Summers, she has been seen, and Summers becomes obsessed with protecting their plan. He lurks around Hastings long enough to hear of the approach of another storm, and decides to ambush the lightman while on duty once his light is up, not realizing it is another lightman.
Summers then goes on a tirade against the Christian faith, totally absorbed in Payne’s material.
Evangelical pastor Peter Holford has an encounter with a reader of Payne in a pub. The reader is quite sure that Christian belief is doomed because it seeks to be evidence-free, and because it refers to faith as that which is separate from proof. Holford is inspired then to go public with his research on the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-72 AD, and merrily jokes to Payne’s follower that he ‘will visit the pub more often!’
Public debate of Holford and Payne/Summers?
Not only has most of England received Holford overwhelmingly, but Payne and Summers have almost no sales. Payne decides to leave for America.
Since the Admiralty has learned when the girlfriend of Summers was ‘in confinement’ and there is no child, they know the motive for the murder. The interview of the intended target is in the newspapers. Summers now realizes he killed the wrong man, and leaves for Australia.
In a final scene, the Huxley family who slurped up the material of Payne and Summers, discuss how they next plan to assault the church, but now realize they can’t touch Christ and the desolation of Jerusalem, and evangelicals have seriously cut in on their slave-based profits. Instead, they are going after creation, looking for a biologist who is willing to write the scientific paper necessary, to make creation look as silly as possible, and maintain the racial-biological superiority of white races.
- Status