You are an idiot

Selaphiel

Well-known member
Stripe said:
And therefore, evolution.

I won't even bother to reply to any of the other comments you made. As I've made abundantly clear before, I think you are one big waste of time.

But I will reply to that one comment: No, the Bible does not talk about evolution, claiming that evolution can be found in Genesis is as idiotic as creationism is. Evolution is true because it is an extremely well founded scientific theory.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Yes, because orthodox Christianity originated 1500 years after Augustine.
And the bible predates the lot.

It trumps all your appeals to authority.

Your biblicism never existed until modern times.
The bible said and meant "Six days" when it was written.

And if a literal reading of Genesis is the only way to read the Bible, then the scriptures would be nonsense that should be rejected by any thinking person.
Genesis is historical narrative and your incoherent nonsense puts us at 16. :banana:
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I won't even bother to reply to any of the other comments you made.
Evolutions struggle with simple challenges to their faith.

As I've made abundantly clear before, I think you are one big waste of time.
Feel free to not talk to me. :thumb:

But I will reply to that one comment: No, the Bible does not talk about evolution, claiming that evolution can be found in Genesis is as idiotic as creationism is. Evolution is true because it is an extremely well founded scientific theory.
:darwinsm:

You should tell this to all the evolutionists, including yourself, who try to justify evolutionism by carefully ignoring everything surrounding a couple of phrases in the bible.
 

Selaphiel

Well-known member
You should tell this to all the evolutionists, including yourself, who try to justify evolutionism by carefully ignoring everything surrounding a couple of phrases in the bible.

I don't justify my acceptance of a scientific theory with a biblical text, I do that based on scientific evidence.

I don't have to ignore any phrases in the Bible, I just don't have to understand them as part of a historical or descriptive account. As I've stated a million times before, I don't dispute that it says six days (just as I don't dispute that the biblical worldview is that of flat earth standing on pillars that go into the sea or that Genesis 1 probably does not teach creatio ex nihilo when read literally), I just don't see it as relevant. The relevance of Genesis 1 and 2 for me is not based on it being a descriptive account at all.

Feel free to not talk to me.

I should probably take my own advise on that one. Carry on.
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
Why couldn't God have created us with the design to evolve? Can't we all just get along!
As I have said elsewhere, there is Evolutuon, and then there is Evolution out of nothing.

Atheists believes in Evolution out of nothing because they do not believe there is a God. That's ridiculous.

But Evolution is okay. Even the Popes accept the premise of Evolution.

Atheists' Evolution out of nothing belief and the Fundie's 10,000 year old earth (young earth) belief are two sides of the coin of stupidity.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I don't dispute that it says six days (just as I don't dispute that the biblical worldview is that of flat earth standing on pillars that go into the sea or that Genesis 1 probably does not teach creatio ex nihilo when read literally)
Genesis is historical narrative. It's descriptions are of real things. The bible does not teach a flat Earth, it teaches six days of creation.

However, you don't see it as relevant.
The relevance of Genesis 1 and 2 for me is not based on it being a descriptive account at all.
Its relevance to you is whatever you want to invent that fits into your precious evolutionism.
 

Silent Hunter

Well-known member
Genesis is historical narrative.
. . . only if you believe such nonsense . . . but you've always been a couple of french fries short of a happy meal . . . :sigh:

It's descriptions are of real things.
:rotfl:

The bible does not teach a flat Earth, it teaches six days of creation.
Genesis 1 follows no lesson plan, therefore, it "teaches" nothing.

Its relevance to you is whatever you want to invent that fits into your precious evolutionism.
:rolleyes:
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
Genesis is historical narrative. It's descriptions are of real things...........

In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating current at the time. The fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression.

Consider "Revelation". It is obviously a far different literary style than the Gospels, just as Psalms is a far different literary style than Exodus or Leviticus.

Much of Genesis is a literary style that uses allegory and imagery to convey the truth. But was there really a talking snake and a tree bearing fruits with mystical powers? Not likely.

Genisis is true, but the truth it is meant to convey is not in a literary style we are use to. In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way.

The fact is, Genisis 1 is meant to teach one thing and one thing only: That God created everything out of nothing, that he created man in his own image, that man seperated himself from God through disobedience, and that God immediately set about the long - or at least it seems long to us - process of healing that rift, a process which culminated with the death and resurrection of Christ. That is ALL it teaches.

Everything in Genesis is meant to convey that truth, but it is done in the ancient Semitic style of writing, using allegories, fantastic imagery, and all based on traditions that were handed down for centuries. I do not believe there was a serpent, or a tree, or a garden, etc. These are all images & allegories, in a certain style of writing, meant to convey the fundamental truth I stated above.

. . . only if you believe such nonsense . . .

That too is an ignorant uninformed thing to say.

As I said in my previous post:

........there is Evolutuon, and then there is Evolution out of nothing.

Atheists believes in Evolution out of nothing because they do not believe there is a God. That's ridiculous.

But Evolution is okay. Even the Popes accept the premise of Evolution.

Atheists' Evolution out of nothing belief and the Fundie's 10,000 year old earth (young earth) belief are two sides of the coin of stupidity.
 

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating current at the time. The fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression.
Yeah, we get the Romanist you "quoted" :AMR: above:
http://www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/...ages/Teaching-Scripture-in-the-Classroom.aspx

The issue is that the context is defined by Rome rather than letting the text speak for itself, including consideration of genre, historical context, etc.

Point me to even the smallest snippet of exegesis by the seat in Rome. No, what exists is but assertion and the blind acceptance of the Romanist of what has been asserted sans what could even be scarcely called exegesis.

AMR
 

noguru

Well-known member
Good post!
Augustine was a hack, that loved Plato more than the God of the Bible!

You are a hack. I think Augustine is head and shoulders above you in regard to courage and understanding. Neither one of you beat God though.
 

Zeke

Well-known member
Short answer is they don't, and plenty accept evolution as part of the process. It's only fundamentalist literalists like Stripe who get so bothered about it. Heck, it's not as though seeing allegory in Genesis is anything new as it is.

Why is this in the politics section anyway?

I am no fundy or YE proponent, but man didn't evolve from some ape man, evolution or a better term adaptation does happen, but it has limits that evolutionist leap over like they don't exist.

Dust mites don't turn into eagles.
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
That's Augustine's word. The bible is supposed to be God's word...
Surely to a Christian one must trump the other.
So your authority that God was being poetic is Augustine.
Good post! Augustine was a hack, that loved Plato more than the God of the Bible!
Agree with you both :cheers:

BOOO to all three of you!!

Saint Augustine is a great Saint and a great Doctor of the Church.
 

resurrected

BANNED
Banned
You are an idiot



I-Can-Count-To-Potato.jpg
 
Top