| On the 2000 year bible and literal interpretation post... I seriously doubt that you consider the bible to be the authoritative word of God. Therefore, using it to prove or disprove evolution is moot and useless, unless we could both agree upon it's origins. I seriously doubt the poster of this thread believes in it either, and is simply using the concept of creation from a christian perspective to generate a heated argument. On your second post to me... Perhaps you should learn something more about the Bible, if you intend on using it to support evolution. On your third post to me.... You just so happened to stumble into the very point i've been making all along. Tell me... is there ANYTHING you DONT understand? Is there or has there ever been any man or woman who understands everything? (omniscience) Is there any being in the universe more intelligent than man? At what point do you break away from what you know in order to accept what must be accepted by faith? If man is not intelligent enough to understand everything, then logic suggests that there must be SOME intelligent being who does, and is more than likely responsible for the creation of man. It is illogical for anyone to use a book they believe to be written by man to prove the existence of God. It is just as illogical for the same person to use the same book to prove or disprove arguments made by another man. It all boils down to who YOU consider to be the authority on the origins of life. If your authority is Darwin, then don't violate the very charges you bring against me by using incredulous arguments about God. |