|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted July 17, 2011 04:24 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 16:24, 17 Jul 2011.
|
Quote:
Elodin, what you present here is material from sites of fools who may be everything, but no experts on the matter they are talking about.
Yes, everyone who is not an anti-theist is a fool, eh?
Quote:
The guys blather some stuff without giving any sources or reasons - they just claim something, anything that they like.
I find it rather hypocritical that you complain that my sources don't provide their sources (although some do) when your side of the debate has provided NO sources after repeatedly being asked to provide them.
If falls back to the old atheist standby of "Atheists don't have to prove anything no matter what we say. Theists have to prove everything they say and they are still wrong even if they do."
I already proved your side in the debate wrong on a number of things. Judaism already had most of the Old Testament written before the Babylonian captivity. That makes anyone claiming that they learned monotheism and most of their other religious beliefs from Zoroastrian is deliberately lying or willfully ignorant of history.
Pretty much my experience in debating with people who love to attack Christianity is that that they are pretty ignorant of Christian teachings, the Bible, history, and science. That means they are soon to get pretty frustrated in the debate because they are constantly proven wrong. My advice to those people is "do your homework" before you throw your attacks on Christianity on the table so you'll have a clue about what you're discussing.
____________
Revelation
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 17, 2011 04:48 PM |
|
|
Elodin: Still waiting....
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 17, 2011 08:06 PM |
|
|
|
tsar-ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted July 17, 2011 09:48 PM |
|
|
Well a simple answer to your question is that god is perfect in everyway, faith is really believing that he really does know best since we are imperfect. Really I have come to the perfect conclusion that there is no such thing as 'bad' under the sun.
In these imperfect worlds filled with imperfect beings we must attain perfection (the only true goal really), but perfection cannot manifest in this world because the world is imperfect (thats why you go to heaven). Heaven isn't a reward nor hell a punishment their home to those who belong there.
(hell is the lowest planet and paradise the highest, heaven is a spiritual world that does not manifest in this imperfect universe)
Also when i refer to heaven i refer to the spiritual world (perfection) and not paradise where Adam & Eve were (paradise though still imperfect it is the highest planet).
Oh and also to explain the tree business... When Adam was alone he could do as he wishes (like god), but when Eve appeared (created ext...) there had to restrictions for a harmonious relationship, this restriction was symbolised by an apple tree which they were promted not to eat off of. (it was a lesson in self restraint, somethign were still struggling to grasp)
Due respect to all for your own opinions on religion and i'll gladly welcome any questions (just know that I know what i'm required to know, to serve and that you don't need to know what i do to do the same, for god provides that which you need, all you have to do is use it).
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 17, 2011 10:48 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 22:51, 17 Jul 2011.
|
Quote:
Elodin, your sources are ridiculous.
A good start is, as always, wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah
The part about religion summarizes the current state of research, the footnotes cite a lot of sources.
Lol!!!!! Wiki is the worst place in the world to do research.
Some liberals claim that because inscriptions of Yahweh and Asherah were found together Israel worshiped multiple gods. The freaks are evidently completely ignorant of the Bible and the many references to the idolatry that cropped up in Israel among various groups from time to time, which the prophets condemned, and such condemnation of it is recorded in the Old Testament. Here is an actual scholarly article that discusses the idolatry to give you a clue, as if you want one.
Oh, the article also addresses the ignorant claim that none of the Old Testament was written until the Babylonian captivity or afterwards. It shows the change of language nuances for those books that were written during the time of the captivity by Daniel and Ezra for instance.
Sinai YHWH Artifacts Resurface In Egypt
from the March 22, 2011 eNews issue
The Egyptian revolution has provided more than just the impetus for the Libyans to oust Gaddafi. It has brought to light Hebrew artifacts from the Sinai, hidden away by the Egyptians for more than thirty years.
Israel took advantage of the time it held control of the Sinai to excavate important archeological sites. Tel Aviv University archeologist Ze'ev Meshel unearthed artifacts bearing the name of YHWH from the ruins of Kuntillet Ajrud, an ancient way station in the northern part of the peninsula. Then came heartbreak for the Israeli archeologists; the1979 peace agreement included terms that required Israel to hand over the finds from the Sinai, and these important pieces of the past were hidden away in Egypt.
Ancient Writing:
After the children of Israel were taken captive into Babylon, they began to take on the writing and vocabulary of the Babylonians. The change in the Hebrew text of the Bible is quite distinct. The first month of the Hebrew calendar is called "Abib" during the time of Moses (Exd 34:18; Deu 16:1), but after the Babylonian captivity, it is called "Nisan" (Neh 2:1; Est 3:7). The actual lettering used by the Hebrews was changed to the Babylonian form. This is important to appreciate. A popular scholastic position contends that the Torah was not written down until the exile. Yet, when the pre-exile Scriptures contain only the older vocabulary and none of the new, it presents evidence that the writing was indeed done prior to the Babylonian captivity.
Several of the artifacts from Kuntillet Ajrud bear on them inscriptions in paleo-Hebrew, the pre-Babylonian form of Hebrew. They also include references to YHWH, the name of the God of Moses. One of the finds Ze'ev Meshel discovered in the 1970s was a 400-pound stone bowl on which was written in paleo-Hebrew, "(Belonging) to Ovadiah, son of Adnah, may he be blessed by Yahwe[h]."
Other inscriptions demonstrate the syncretism that the prophets so constantly spoke against. Ze'ev Meshel also had excavated two tall storage vessels with one inscription that refers to "Yahweh of Samaria and his Asherah." Another inscription refers to "Yahweh of Teman and his Asherah." Still other inscriptions refer to Ba'al.
Yahweh v. Asherah
Francesca Stavrakopoulou, a senior lecturer in the department of Theology and Religion at the University of Exeter, focuses on Israel's preoccupation with the asherah poles and the Canaanite fertility religions. She goes on to make the case that these sorts of inscriptions show that Yahweh had a wife.
"Here was evidence that presented Yahweh and Asherah as a divine pair. And now a handful of similar inscriptions have since been found, all of which help to strengthen the case that the God of the Bible once had a wife," says Stavrakopoulou.
Edward Wright, president of both The Arizona Center for Judaic Studies and The Albright Institute for Archaeological Research believes that the fact of God's wife was kicked out by male chauvinism.
"Asherah was not entirely edited out of the Bible by its male editors," he added. "Traces of her remain, and based on those traces, archaeological evidence and references to her in texts from nations bordering Israel and Judah, we can reconstruct her role in the religions of the Southern Levant."
Asherah was not edited out of the Bible at all, contrary to what Wright argues. The fertilty goddess is mentioned 40 times in the Hebrew, and Yahweh made clear from Exodus that the Israelites were to get rid of the Canaanites' asherah poles. (The Hebrew word "asherah" is translated "grove" in the King James.) Apparently Yahweh didn't want Asherah for His wife.
"But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves. For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice;" (Exd 34:13-15).
Archeologists often note that there was a mixture of religious traditions in ancient Israel, and that's no surprise; the Bible tells us just that. The LORD told the Israelites to cut down the asherah of the Canaanites, and yet the Israelites did not fully do so. In fact, many began to worship the very gods of the people God had sent them to destroy. During the time of the Judges, Yahweh told Gideon to cut down his father's asherah and to throw down his altar of Baal.
"But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire." (Deut 7:5)
"And it came to pass the same night, that the LORD said unto him [Gideon], Take thy father's young bullock, even the second bullock of seven years old, and throw down the altar of Baal that thy father hath, and cut down the grove, that is by it: (Judges 6:25)
Sadly, the Israelites were still provoking Yahweh to anger by worshiping the "queen of heaven" during the time of Jeremiah (Jer 7:18; 44:17-25).
Troubling as they are theologically, syncretistic inscriptions like those on the storage vessels confirm the Bible's account of the nation's poor spiritual condition before the captivity, and even before the monarchy. Yet, the artifacts have been stuck in an Egyptian storage facility for over 30 years.
After the 1979 peace agreement, the artifacts from Kuntillet Ajrud were handed over to Egypt and then not seen again. After the archeological stores at Qantara on the eastern side of the Suez were looted recently, it was feared these items would be sold cheaply to the far corners of the globe. It turned out, however, that 30 truckloads of items, including the Sinai artifacts, had been moved from Qantara to the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. They may still not be displayed, but at least we know where they are.
Israeli epigraphers will publish on the inscriptions, with the contribution of Ze'ev Meshel, the original excavator. It may be 35 years after the excavation that the publication finally comes out, but, in these sorts of cases, it's better late than never.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 17, 2011 11:46 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 23:51, 17 Jul 2011.
|
The writer of your wiki article is a completely ignorant of the Old Covenant scripture and Hebrew language or a liar.
"El" is not a different God than Yahweh, and they did not "merge." "El" is a generic word for that just means "god", generically. Any deity. Some places where El is referring to a false god as in Psalms 44.20;81.9 , in Deuteronomy 32.12 and in Malachi 2.11.
Psa 44:20 If we have forgotten the nameH of our God,H430 or stretched out our hands to a strangeH2114 god;H410
H410 is the Strong's reference for the last word translate "god" in the above verse. H410 is "el", a generic word for deity.
Yahweh is the COVENANT name of God in the Old Covenant. The New Covenant name of God is Jesus.
Exo 6:2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD:
Exo 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
LORD in verse 2 and JEHOVAH in verse 3 is Yahweh. Yahweh is God relating to the people in a new manner. He is making the Old Covenant with them. The called on name of Yahweh in the Old Covenant (Mosaic Covenant.)
In the New Covenant we call on the Name of Jesus. Jesus is the New Covenant name of God.
Peter refers to that in Acts 2 where he says the New Covenant is beginning and to be saved we call on the Name of Jesus Christ. That is why the early church all baptized in Jesus' Name.
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Act 7:59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
Jesus is LORD.
____________
Revelation
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 18, 2011 12:32 AM |
|
|
Poor Elodin, who fails to realize his likeminded are also editing the wikipedia, creating the same snow.
____________
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 18, 2011 12:57 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 00:59, 18 Jul 2011.
|
Ah,I found another related article, that answers the charges of the Jews being polytheistic. This one is from the website of Dr Craig, who has trounced many an atheist in debates and whom Richard Dawkins is too afraid to debate. Craig referred the question to another noted sholar, "Dr. Richard Hess, who is the Earl S. Kalland Professor of Old Testament and Semitic Languages at Denver Seminary and is an expert in ancient Israelite religion." I shall not post the question and shall post only a portion of the answer. I recommend reading both the question and the answer.
Subject: Ancient Israelite Polytheism?
Quote:
Please distinguish between a personal name of a deity, a title of a deity, and an epithet.
In the Bible “Yahweh” is a personal name, revealed as such in Exodus 6:2-8. “Yahweh” appears in a number of early Israelite poems (Exodus15, Deuteronomy 33, Judges 5) where he is associated with the southern desert and with a warrior deity. A god named “Yahweh” may well have been known in this area, as suggested by one early inscription and by the connection of Moses’ father-in-law Jethro and his clan with the God of Israel (Exodus 3:1; 18:1, 12). The manner in which Moses accepts Jethro and takes him into his confidence would seem to violate laws about intolerance toward other deities unless the god whom Jethro worshiped and served as a priest was the same deity that Moses served. However, Jethro’s understanding of this deity was not the same as the revelation of Yahweh to Israel through his historic act of redemption from Egypt (Exodus 20:2) and through making an unprecedented covenant with that nation. The Bible makes clear that Yahweh is not known merely by his name but by the divinely enacted covenant (in both act and word) with which God binds Israel to himself. In a similar manner as the third century Roman emperor who placed a statue of Jesus among the images of the many deities he worshiped, so Jethro might have had only an inkling of the true nature of Israel’s God. The identity of Yahweh is not found merely in a distinctive name, but much more in his acts of love and mercy for his people. (By the way, the comments about massacres and pillaging carried on by this God are a misreading of the actual text of Joshua and elsewhere which I would be happy to discuss in a different context than what I am presenting here.)
“El” appears as a title in the Bible. Like the much more frequent “Elohim,” it derives from ancient Semitic words for “god/God.” It is true that “El” appears as the name of the chief god in the myths of Ugarit, a West Semitic (Hebrew is also a West Semitic language) city from the 13th century B.C. However, the word also appears there to refer to any deity or even a spirit. Therefore, it need not refer to the God of Israel. You discuss Psalm 82 at some length. It is possible that this text refers to the allotment of responsibilities for the management of different nations of the earth to members of the heavenly council, whom we would call angels. As a result of their failing to act with justice, God terminates their rule. Nevertheless, Yahweh is frequently identified with El (Numbers 23:22-23; 2 Samuel 23:5; Psalm 118:27; Isaiah 40:18; 43:12; 45:22; etc.). However, the Bible also recognizes El as a separate god in texts such as Ezekiel 28:2 where the leader of Tyre claims that he is El (but this is probably also another use of “El” as a title, “god”). Note that the term “sons of El” need not refer to physical sons of a god. It may refer merely to those who share the characteristics of the divine (in terms of authority and rule, for example). Compare the “sons of Belial,” in Deuteronomy 13:14; Judges 19:22; 20:13; 1 Samuel 2:12; 10:27; 25:17; 1 Kings 21:10, 13; etc. This expression does not mean that all these people had the same physical parent by the name of Belial. No, it refers to a common characteristic of all these people. There are other such examples, both within the Bible and in contemporary extra-biblical literature.
.....
As for the statement that the God of the Hebrews had many names, I would encourage you to distinguish once more between the personal name “Yahweh,” various titles of “god” such as “Elohim” and “El,” and epithets such as “Shaddai” (perhaps related to the divine council or hosts of heaven). “Elohim” does, indeed, appear by itself to be a plural form (with the -im ending). However, whenever it refers to the God of Israel, it always takes singular verbs and so is treated as a singular noun.
I conclude with the observation that ancient Israel appropriated the Hebrew language and many other cultural features, often transforming them in the Bible so as to conform to its distinctive theology. The same is true of various religious practices. So the name “El” may refer to the chief god in Ugarit of the 13th century B.C. However, this does not mean it must be the name of a god separate from Yahweh in the Bible. As a title for various gods inside and outside the Bible, it can be applied to Yahweh without proving anything about early Israelite beliefs.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted July 18, 2011 04:01 AM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 04:07, 18 Jul 2011.
|
Elodin,stop posting wall of texts,ok?
If you want to make a point,make it by your own words.I dont mind linking them in your points,just dfont post a wall of text.
Whether Yahweh stated 1000 years ago or it was copied from a persian religion or vice versa does not matter.The fact is that every religion borrowed from each other something.
Also,when a dude tries to defend religion with science,then a huge load of crap comes out of it.
Which is the result of this thread.A religious flame war...
One thing religous does not teach is that the truth mostly falls in the middle,and that middle is not 120% on your side of thought.
Also,if god is perfect,why did he create imperfect humans?An imperfect world and an imperfect universe?
read this Elodin it is said by a Christian
"
First of all, let me say the evidence for Darwin's theory of descent from a common ancestor by gradual change over long periods of time operated on by natural selection is absolutely overwhelming. It is not possible, I think, to look at that evidence accumulated, especially in the last few years on the basis of the study of DNA, and not come to the conclusion that Darwin was right -- right in ways that Darwin himself probably never could have imagined, not knowing about DNA, not knowing that we'd have a digital record of these events to study."
Here is the link Elodin
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1259/can-science-and-faith-be-reconciled
Note,you will hate this guy at the beginning but you will like him later.He starts to speak about higher purpose and creation later on...
This guy talks about how he is a christian and how christianity could work together with science.Now even he says that evolution is a fact which means that he is not a true Christian.
The reason why he is not a true Christian is that the bible talks about the genesis.The creation of the first humans and their original sin. Evolution teaches that there was never a distinct couple that could be called the "first two humans," since it was a continuous evolution of creatures that eventually converged on homo sapiens.This means that the concept of the first two humans that existed is nonsensical,as you could never tell when "homo something" stopped and "homo sapiens" began.
Well, that negates the idea of original sin in the garden, which negates the need for salvation, negating the need for Jesus. Thus Christianity falls apart. A similar thing happens for any other religion that believes in Adam and Eve, like Judaism/Islam.
That means that religion is torn appart by evolution.
But that covers only the part for religion,not for God.
The problem with the almighty god is,if the almighty god exists,then what created the almighty god...and the cycle continues ad infinitum.
You cant say enything here because it is simple belief that he is not created,only the creator...,which means that he does not exist since he was never created.
It seems reasonable to consider that the universe was created ... but that does not mean a god was the creator. There is simply no evidence of a god creating anything,except the issues science does not have an answer.
I "Belive" that god was created by the human mind to explain the unexplainable.
It is also a belief that sounds very reasonable.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 18, 2011 12:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Ah,I found another related article, that answers the charges of the Jews being polytheistic. This one is from the website of Dr Craig, who has trounced many an atheist in debates and whom Richard Dawkins is too afraid to debate. Craig referred the question to another noted sholar, "Dr. Richard Hess, who is the Earl S. Kalland Professor of Old Testament and Semitic Languages at Denver Seminary and is an expert in ancient Israelite religion." I shall not post the question and shall post only a portion of the answer. I recommend reading both the question and the answer.
You did not write neither, so this post is just pointless spam.
You even make bold and silly claims too.
____________
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 01:18 AM |
|
|
God has no beggining (not created), ergo no end and neither do we, god created humans but he didn't create us, he is bound by his nature (when i refer to god i think of him as a male passively regardless of facts, apologies if it offends, for he is neither).
God may shape the world as he wishes (as i said he completely abides his nature), our nature is our own and we all have spark of the devine and like our lord we are eternal for we too have no beggining.
Though this took a great deal of time and learning to fully understand, so I don't blame you if you don't understand or accept this, but as always it makes me feel better to voice my point of view rather then remain silent  . (For in silence lies the devil...)
Also this world is imperfect, ergo so are the contents. (this is nature) God did not create anything to clarify it further, he simply reshaped what he has (though he has infinate building bocks at his disposal, imperfection cannot yield perfection regardless of the amount, that is in this world where those who are imperfect belong ) (this only refers to our world, it would be pointless to explain the nature of other worlds)
When I say imperfect i refer to the fact that everything in this world has a share of perfect & imperfect, but the % does vary and believe me it does make a difference.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 09:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Elodin,stop posting wall of texts,ok?
If you want to make a point,make it by your own words.I dont mind linking them in your points,just dfont post a wall of text.
This post I am responding to is kid of a long post. I asked you in my very first post in their thread to please limit your posts to one or two questions at a time but you insist on putting multiple questions and comments about multiple things in a single post. That means when I reply to answer your questions or counterpoint your points my post will be long. So modify your own posting behavior and my posts will automatically become shorter. But I will quote whatever I deem necessary to counter your false claims or to answer the questions you asked.
Quote:
Whether Yahweh stated 1000 years ago or it was copied from a persian religion or vice versa does not matter.The fact is that every religion borrowed from each other something.
It does matter. Your claim that the Bible teaches a 1000 year old earth showed your utter ignorance of the Bible AND I have refuted every claim of the Jews copying the theology of another people. You are making unproven claims in saying every religion copies other religions.
Quote:
Also,when a dude tries to defend religion with science,then a huge load of crap comes out of it.
When atheist attack a religion they typically just pull crap out of their *** and start slinging, which is pretty much the way I view what you are doing. Which is one reason it is so easy to refute the claims of the vast majority of atheists. I do my homework and actually have a working knowledge of the things I put on the table.
Quote:
Which is the result of this thread.A religious flame war...
Your first post and subsequent posts made it quite apparent you were not intent on seeking knowledge or understanding with your "questions." Atheist on this site seldom honestly seek any understanding of a religious viewpoint in a thread.
Quote:
One thing religous does not teach is that the truth mostly falls in the middle,and that middle is not 120% on your side of thought.
You appear to be an anti-theist. In a subset of atheists for who belief that God does not exist is not enough. Such atheists are driven to attack religion and religious people.
Truth is truth. 2+3=5. Always. Every day of the week. 4 is not a correct to the equation, neither is 6.
Quote:
Also,if god is perfect,why did he create imperfect humans?An imperfect world and an imperfect universe?
I think I already answered that in this thread. God created people as innocent free moral agents, not as perfect beings who were incapable of sin.
God created a good world where man was to be his co-laborer in making it an even better world. Man was to take dominion over the earth and subdue it. To bring it into alignment with God's purpose, as well as for his own usage. Man has a purpose in God without God man has no purpose and his life is meaningless.
Quote:
The problem with the almighty god is,if the almighty god exists,then what created the almighty god...and the cycle continues ad infinitum.
It is impossible that the universe produced itself out of a steady state of absolute nothing. The first cause had to be self-existent, spaceless, timeless, immaterial, powerful, intelligent, and wise. The being theists call God.
God is a Spirit. Unlike the material world, he needs no cause for he is not subject to the laws of thermodynamics.
No, the cycle only continues on and on if there is no God. There can be no infinite regression of causes. God is the only answer for the first cause of the universe.
Quote:
I "Belive" that god was created by the human mind to explain the unexplainable.
It is also a belief that sounds very reasonable.
You are entitled to your religion of atheism, as irrational as atheism is.
I'll address your false claim that a Christian can't believe in evolution in another post.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 09:48 AM |
|
|
The article you referenced is by a scientist who was formerly an atheist before he discovered scientific facts point to God. He is a fairly well known scientist, in fact that I have some passing knowledge of through my research into evolutionary creationism/theistic evolution.
Clicky
Quote:
Francis Sellers Collins (born April 14, 1950), is an American physician-geneticist, noted for his landmark discoveries of disease genes and his leadership of the Human Genome Project (HGP) and described by the Endocrine Society as "one of the most accomplished scientists of our time".[1][2] He currently serves as Director of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. Collins has written a book about his Christian faith. He founded and was president of the BioLogos Foundation before accepting the nomination to lead the NIH. On October 14, 2009, Pope Benedict XVI appointed Francis Collins to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.[3]
Dr. Francis Collins is a member of the USA Science & Engineering Festival's Nifty Fifty, a collection of the most influential scientists and engineers in the United States that are dedicated to reinvigorating the interest of young people in science and engineering.[4]
Quote:
This guy talks about how he is a christian and how christianity could work together with science.Now even he says that evolution is a fact which means that he is not a true Christian.
You have already proven your complete ignorance of the Bible, Christian theology, the writings of Christian theologians/philosophers, and now you, an avowed atheist who is hostile to religion, dare to call the man a liar and say he is not a Christian? Many Christians down through the ages have believed in evolution. I already posted a link to a discussion about Augustine who lived 1400 years before Darwin who proposed evolution.
You are probably ignorant that there are several different models of evolution held by different theistic evolutionists/evolutionary creationists/progressive creationists. In fact I am certain of it since you asked the question about what theistic evolution is in an earlier post. You need to do some research beyond reading the rhetoric on some anti-theist site. Oh and you ignorantly claim a believer in theistic evolution can't believe in a literal Adam and Eve? Lolllllzzzzzzz. You are too ignorant of the theories to even discuss this with.
There are different models, like I said before. Let's say that God produced the singularity which produced the Big Bang, and the space time continuum thus came into being. Eventually planets formed around what became our star.
1) God created the heavens and the earth
2) The earth was without form and void until the Spirit of God began to move.
So there reached a point where God intervened directly into the affairs of earth and did whatever he did to shape it as he willed and to cause it to be suitable for life and produced life on it so it was no longer void. Over the course of whatever time frame God created things slowly or just caused a natural process that kicked things off. God allowed nature to do its work and at times intervened directly when the time was just right or causing new life forms to come into being or die out to keep life appropriate for the changing environment of the earth and for what he eventually wanted it to become.
Eventually hominoids were formed. Human-like, but not human. Let's say at some point God, when they had advanced to some point where they would advance no further or maybe one particular hominoid had made an extraordinary evolutionary leap that left him "above" his peers; God took him from his group, placed it in a specially prepared garden which he named Eden and imparted a spiritual dimension to him so that now he had something mere animals don't have. He could be called "homo-divinus" as a "divine spark" had been added to him. God took of the man's genetic make up and made a mate for him. Adam and Eve. They sinned, the divine spark dimmed in man. We now have the Fall of Man in the garden of Eden.
Yes, a Christian can believe in evolution in a number of different forms. You were wrong for saying Dr Collins can't believe in evolution and be a Christian.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 03:31 PM |
|
|
Again: I thought you didn't care about credentials. If I should ever even come close to saying what my own credentials are, you spit fire and brimstone about how credentials don't matter. And yet here you are, trying justify your point of view simply by quoting someone's credentials.
Trying to have your cake and eat it, too, eh?
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 04:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Eventually hominoids were formed. Human-like, but not human. Let's say at some point God, when they had advanced to some point where they would advance no further or maybe one particular hominoid had made an extraordinary evolutionary leap that left him "above" his peers; God took him from his group, placed it in a specially prepared garden which he named Eden and imparted a spiritual dimension to him so that now he had something mere animals don't have.
No, that was Marvel comics. The Bible says man was created from the dust of the ground and then the breath of life was breathed into his nostrils.
|
|
tsar-ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 08:04 PM |
|
|
Well that's odd, I always thought that the bible says god made 'man' in his own image and not cherry-pick random creatures who seem evolved, or did I read it wrong?.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 08:26 PM |
|
|
God resembles Ardipithecus ramidus? Well, that would explain some things.
Nah, you can cherry-pick from the Bible what you like and leave out what you don't. It's thermodynamics when it suits you, magic when it doesn't. 
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 08:28 PM |
|
|
I wonder why our arms got shorter. Having such long ones actually is good, you can reach stuff easier  Like those damn books at the highest shelf. Argh.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
tsar-ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 08:32 PM |
|
|
Mmm only a human is capable of constructing a shelf that is taller then it's reach, just for the sake of inconvenience. (aye you could argue that it's for convenience, but i beg to differ )
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 19, 2011 10:08 PM |
|
|
Of course the Bible says God is a Spirit. Add to that the fact that Genesis says male and female are in the image of God and that pretty much rules out man being made in a physical image of God. Of course I'm not surprised atheists claim it is the physical nature of man that the Bible teaches is in the image of God since most atheists tend to be fairly ignorant of the book that that they attack. Many atheists also seem to have difficulty grasping abstract concepts and understanding figures of speech. I can see how an atheist would not be able to grasp the possibility of the "dust of the earth" meaning anything other than dust blown about by the wind.
____________
Revelation
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
