Posted on 03/26/2009 7:20:22 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
‘But the New Testament does not make a big deal out of the Age of the Earth…’
by Peter Milford
...
The issue of the age of the earth parallels circumcision. In my experience, the first response from Christians who do not accept the age of the earth that the Scriptures indicate, is to say something like “The New Testament does not make a big deal out of the age of the earth” or “It is not the purpose of the Bible to give the age of the earth”. Their point is that (1) the issue of the age of the earth is a non-essential, and (2) therefore not something we should argue about. They believe we are free to hold whatever view our conscience permits. They are right in the first part. In and of itself, the age of the earth is not a central focus of Scripture. But the distortions a long-age view brings to the gospel message make them wrong on the second part...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Atheisim is the end of the road. Theistic Evolutionists are merely traveling on the slippery slope to Godless atheism. Maybe not all of them will end up there, but IMHO they are all on that road.
And yes, there is plenty of observational evidence for evolution.
You are confusing circumstantial evidence for observational evidence.
Name one person who was actually present at the creation or evolution of man and we will ask him whether or not man evolved or was specially created on the 6th day of a creation week.
Keep on squirming!
You’re your own worst enemy in debate.
You tell me.
I gathered from your posts that you did not believe that God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days?
Am I misinformed?
Cute, but irrelevent to the question.
Now that you’ve read the results of your search, and found no avenue of further attack, what next?
Based on your Christian scorecard, I guess I failed the Christian test.
And I am confusing nothing.
It could be more enjoyable if you would join me.
My kids had a Wack-a-Mole game.
I found it depressing to watch.
If you’re offering to switch to Doin’ the Dozens, I’m not good at it.
The offer of continued discussion and debate is still open, however.
We all backslide my FRiend. We all need Christ to keep us on the narrow road.
And I am confusing nothing.
Do you understand the difference between circumstantial evidence and observed (eyewitness) evidence?
Here, I try again, to illustrate.
What in evolutionary theory do you see as a violation of kind reproducing with kind?
Other than artificially I’m not aware of any kind not mating with kind - in fact it doesn’t work if their not kind enough. (double entendre intended).
Trying to parse a word like ‘kind’ just doesn’t rise to the level of debate. If that’s debate, then greasing a wheel bearing with a power ram is a grand global conversation.
You made a specific assertion and yet cannot not support it with a single citation, much less the “more that 100” that you claim.
There is no attack - you made a wild claim and got called on it.
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God,
begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven:
[bow during the next two lines:]
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Yea, right - After their own kind is a perfect fit with evolution
That is a good start.
Now do you believe that he made it the way Moses wrote that he made it? Remember, Jesus said that you can't be expected to believe His words if you don't believe the words of Moses.
salvation directed to you through a proxy, eh?
I’m glad that I got mine direct!
I think “after their own kind” more than supports the theory of evolution, since reproduction necessarily involves variance, occasional random chance (with both good and bad outcomes) and adaptation.
Thank you for pointing this out to me.
It's agreement of terms. If I came to you as a surveyor and said survey that land over there a ways...
You use "kind" as a variable descriptor; evolutionary sciences uses taxonomy. You get nowhere in any worthwhile discussion until you map terminology and agree on terms.
If you want to do science, you have to use science.
You refer to “circumstantial evidence” as though it is invalid and uncorroborated.
And my scorecard comment was meant to be sarcastic.
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.