noguru
Well-known member
Right. So why are you even trying?
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Right. So why are you even trying?
My faith and trust are in God and not in man's "knowledge".
1 Timothy 6:20 NASB - O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called "knowledge"--
John 17:3
I point people to scripture, just as Paul did with Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:16, 17.
noguru
Well-known member
First thing you need to correct is that you need to stop posting Biblical verses to try an bolster your illogic, OK? It does not work with me. I have read the Bible enough times to know what it says, and you are misusing these verses in the most fundamental of manners.
Man's knowledge, if it is an accurate representation of the reality around us, originates from God. God is not the author of lies. Just because you heard someone use a Biblical verse to undermine science does not mean God approves of that. That is man's word as you say. I have no confidence in any human who is inaccurate/deceitful regarding things I can see, especially when that is taken to things I cannot see. It is best if you try to be accurate in the things you post, if your goal is to gain my confidence.
noguru
Well-known member
As do I.
How many versions of the Bible do you think I own? How many do you think are on my nightstand right now? How many times do you think I have read the Bible for myself?
Which Bible verse do you think undermines science? I don't understand what you are saying.
And with scripture God says His word does not return void, but that it accomplishes the purpose for which it was set forth.
I am confident in Christ, and you should not be confident in me because I will fail you like you have already said that I have.
As for quoting scripture Paul explains the scripture is for Christians to grow in their faith.
I don't know. I'm guessing from your word more than twice.
noguru
Well-known member
I do not think any undermine science. It is you who included that verse and your accompanying words here. Why did you include that (just to be clear you made a distinction between "man's knowledge" and "God's knowledge"), how do you determine which one you are to believe and when they are in conflict?
How is man's knowledge different from God's knowledge if man is accurate based on the empirical evidence?
Do you want us to reject man's knowledge from the empirical evidence if it conflicts with your view of Genesis?
You and I are in agreement here.
Again we are in agreement. Do you think Jesus would have entered this thread posting the things you posted?
And I need to see you posting it, why?
noguru
Well-known member
If you don't know my understanding of the Bible and you don't know much about biology why are you even responding in this thread?
Is this just a platform from which you can broadcast your theological views under the guise of science (though you admittedly know little about the subject) and to engage people like me who may actually also have a better understanding of scripture?
Do you think science should provide that platform for you?
I do believe the Bible is the word of God. I don't see any conflict with science, but I do not believe in macro-evolution. The scriptures help us grow. The verse I quoted talks about how all scripture is profitable for teaching and training in righteousness so that the man of God would be thoroughly equipped for every good purpose. I know I am not Jesus, but I am the servant of Jesus. When I fail, God is still glorified in that. For God never fails. As for empirical evidence or knowledge, you are a man of philosophy... so you may understand that idea that not all knowledge is empirical or not all knowledge can be empirically tested.
One common Eve as the mother of all mankind apart from Adam would agree with the Biblical record.
I know this is not your thread, and I don't think of science providing or not providing a platform for me. I don't think you should relegate what I have said to not be consistent or not be valuable. I'm not sure what you say to that, but if you know the scriptures I don't know why you would tell me to not reference them when I speak to you.
God reveals His truth to me in time, whenever I sense that I do not understand everything. Do you remember what God had to say in the Torah about the things revealed?
Also, I do not believe faith and reason to be at odds with each other.
But actually there are many people from history who are ancestors to all humans alive today.
So, which of all those people alive at the time do you pick to be Adam, and which to be Eve?
Stuart
noguru
Well-known member
Do you think I am stupid?
Because the way you used it is the way many people try to use it, when they want other people to reject the current findings of science and to adopt their views. In fact the words you posted with it are what made me see that. Your logic is faulty, your knowledge is horrendous, and I think you ought to refrain from using poor logic when it is clear you are. Yet, even after all this you will not admit to what you are doing. You will simply slink away mumbling "But I am just trying to point people towards scripture."
noguru
Well-known member
Neither do I.
noguru
Well-known member
You fail miserably in lots of ways. The problem is you are not willing to change that.
Can you tell me what kind of things that you know that are not based on empirical evidence?
You do realize that even the Bible (in its written form and not any specific interpretation of that text) is something we can empirically verify, right?
Which things, that you think we cannot empirically verify, do you think we should accept anyway?
What objective criteria do you use to determine that?
The fact that you use the words "but I do not believe macro-evolution" demonstrates to me that any further discussion with you would be a waste of time and effort. Keep moving on, please. Your subjective acceptance or rejection of any empirical evidence does not change the objective reality of that evidence. You might chose to not accept such evidence, but you cannot simply hide the evidence by claiming "I do not believe". You are a fool if you think that is somehow effective.
Dear Stu,
That would be that last Adam that the Lord God formed, from whom He formed Eve from his rib and the dust of the ground. This Bible we have now is our reference as to who we are descended from. The race before ours was destroyed. So we have no part in being related to them. Read my Post No. 1 on this thread and learn a little more. It only takes a minute or two, but you'd be smarter to look up the scriptures I mention there and really study it a bit.
Praise Jesus!!
Michael
That would be that last Adam that the Lord God formed, from whom He formed Eve from his rib and the dust of the ground. This Bible we have now is our reference as to who we are descended from. The race before ours was destroyed. So we have no part in being related to them. Read my Post No. 1 on this thread and learn a little more. It only takes a minute or two, but you'd be smarter to look up the scriptures I mention there and really study it a bit.
Praise Jesus!!
Michael
Your fantasy world and my fantasy world don't overlap. I like to think my fantasy world is based in what has actually happened in the history of this planet, as far as it can be established.
On what planet is your fantasy world set?
Stuart
Ben Masada
New member
Creation vs. Evolution? First there was Creation and then Evolution. It is like the scientists say with regards to the universe: First there was the big bang then expansion took care of the growth. As man is concerned, first there was only a couple, then the command was given to grow and multiply. (Gen. 1:28)
- Status