once again evolution which was the product of darwins lunacy tries to worm its way in to our minds, of course god didnt use evolution, he created from nothing and can as he is all powerful with no limits, i believe, dt
__________________
A product of a pentecostal raisin, I am a hard man, just ask my children
once again evolution which was the product of darwins lunacy tries to worm its way in to our minds, of course god didnt use evolution, he created from nothing and can as he is all powerful with no limits, i believe, dt
The biblical expression is demon possessed.
Quote:
Sir George Pickering wrote, 'The symptoms of psychoneurosis are the patient's own answer to his otherwise intolerable conflict
Here is Darwin's own description of his symptoms:
‘Age 56-57. - For twenty-five years extreme spasmodic daily & nightly flatulence: occasional vomiting, on two occasions prolonged during months. Vomiting preceded by shivering, hysterical crying[,] dying sensations or half-faint. & copious and very palid urine. Now vomiting & every passage of flatulence preceded by ringing of ears, treading on air & vision. focus & black dots[,] Air fatigues, specially risky, brings on the Head symptoms[,] nervousness when E[mma]. leaves me...'. From late 1863 to April 1864 he was ‘spreadeagled every day on a sofa, steadily going downhill, wishing he were dead one day, wanting to live and do a little more work on the next.'
Quote:
Colp: When I first began in 1959, I noticed that the many biographies of him had little to say about the causes and nature of the illness that dominated his life. In To Be an Invalid, I published the first comprehensive account of his illness. I showed that as a youth he suffered brief psychosomatic symptoms from transient mental stresses, and as an adult he suffered protracted psychosomatic illness 'altered sensations, cardiac palpitations, headaches, and trembling' mainly from working on his controversial theory of evolution. He had told a friend that to abandon Church teachings on the immutability of species was 'like confessing a murder.' He delayed writing the Origin of Species for more than twenty years, until a younger naturalist, Alfred Russel Wallace, forced his hand. His endless agonizing, guilt, and self-flagellation over writing and publishing could be described as obsessive. When his theory was accepted and he stopped working on it, his health improved
His minions still adore him.
When you mentioned "Darwins lunacy" you didn't know it was real and obvious to the people around him. Darwin was mad at God. He married his first cousin and had children with birth defects. One died young as I recall. And 2 died as infants. In the last decade, he couldn't speak in public or go out.
How was Jason "formed?" From the biological contributions of others.
The Biblical account is true - it just was never intended to be understood as a literal account like God making things from an Easy Bake Oven kit.
Well, if God didn't put the first man to sleep and remove one of his ribs and turn that rib into the first woman, I don't see how that story can be true, in any meaningful sense. Metaphors can only stretch so far before they snap. What would the intended meaning of this one be, if not literal?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Get an evolutionist wound up and they start making false witness.
I have fun with the darwiniacs. I don't name my schools and they have nothing to attack. Just hand waving.
Now can you settle down and ponder how the bird flow thru lungs came from reptile lungs without a spontaneous pneumo thorax and asphyxiation?
You lied when you said that you had studied genetics at the graduate level at an Ivy League University. You simply lied. You've already demonstrated that you have less than a high school level of understanding when it comes to science and your "writing" wouldn't even get you a janitorial position at a trade school.
A babbling nut case like yourself with a long history of hysterical rants isn't likely to get me riled. Your imaginations about this are more amusing than anything else.
What school? Who were your instructors? What were the courses? What texts were you required to use? Prove it.
Really dude, you come across like such a hick fraud that it's no wonder you have trouble keeping from being banned on the boards where you post. Answer the questions, back up your assertions (above) and then we can move on.
coadie and BroGary... I am still waiting for either of you to actually engage in a dialog here. Please address the questions.
But you can't can you? Neither of you has ever studied this issue. And, I don't just mean "studied" from a real academic view point, neither of you even understands the Young Earth arguments as well.
Clouds without rain. Answer the questions.
Gary, did God create donkeys AND horses on the sixth day (according to Genesis chapter 1, before man - but after man in Genesis chapter 2)? Either way, just what did God create with regard to donkeys and horses?
And, why can donkeys and horses breed and produce offspring, but the offspring are invariably sterile?
If that means what I am understanding it to mean, that is the most ridiculous statement I've ever read from christian.
Are you saying (hopefully I'm misunderstanding) that the slime, the monkeys, or whatever eventually BECAME man (called Adam) is how God created man?
(sorry for not being more involved in this thread, been busy on another one, and I cant keep up with yours and coadies back & forth)
Don't apologize for not "being more involved." Lately, you've been at your "best" when you haven't been involved. Did you ever come to terms with the way you had "vomited" in error over the John MacArthur thing? Did you read Galatians 1, and get up to speed? I see that you've added a quote by him to your sig line. I guess you listened to me for once and repented of "stupid."
Also, please work on your own poor language skills if you wish to use them to taunt me. You do end up looking very foolish.
Really, the three of you guys just need to keep babbling away here and more and more Apostolic people will abandon your pseudo-science and Scripture wrangling.
If this were some sort of real debate, coadie, BroGary and Jason Badejo would have been relegated to the Monkey House at the Zoo by now. C'mon guys! Get up to speed and engage the material.
I see our whole existence as one big chain of events. Every small thing that happens has a reason, and is necessary for the outcome that God ultimately intends. We can only see and understand one piece of the puzzle at a time, it is impossible for us to put every single piece together and see the bigger picture.
God knows all the variables and he knows exactly the outcome of what one small, seemingly insignificant change can have on the bigger picture. He manipulates events for the greater good of ALL.
If God created the world through evolution, he would still have been involved in the process every small step of the way. Every slight change in DNA that yielded a new species would have been perfectly guided by his hand. I do not see evolution as an enemy of the Bible in any way.
The fact of the matter is, we have found evidence that dates our existence and the earth a lot older than what we thought. You can't ignore that. One can only come to the conclusion that what we previously thought to be true was wrong.
We did not know about things like cells and dna until very recently. If God was going to explain to us how he created the world, would he take the time to tell us in scientific terms? Would he try to explain how he fused atoms together? What holds them together? Or would he merely just say "I created you from the earth"? Most people these days don't understand things like that, much less our ancestors.
That's a very wise and intelligent approach to the issue.
once again evolution which was the product of darwins lunacy tries to worm its way in to our minds, of course god didnt use evolution, he created from nothing and can as he is all powerful with no limits, i believe, dt
I was listening to Todd Friel today and a moment of old earth vs. young earth came up. One of the Presbyterian denominations entertained the argument in their magazine.
Todd said a couple of things that made pretty good sense to me. Something along the line of when science sets up it's throne over God it's time to get rid of the science. I was a little embarrassed that he took that position until he said let science explain being raised from the dead after three days.
once again evolution which was the product of darwins lunacy tries to worm its way in to our minds, of course god didnt use evolution, he created from nothing and can as he is all powerful with no limits, i believe, dt
Of course God "can do" whatever He wants to do. But that is not the question. The question is, "What did God do?"
The evidence simply doesn't fit the "Young Earth Creationist" model. For example, just look at how hard it is to get the "Young Earth Creationist" "experts" on AFF to even discuss the evidence.
You folks just keep falling back and saying essentially that the world outside your door step isn't real and that you don't even want to talk about. You will however throw out oneliners and "profess to be wise" about the things of God.
No wonder so many millions reject the Apostolic Faith. We're so weighted down with so much of our own nonsense that thinking people reject our entire message long before we've ever gotten to the Gospel part of it.
Of course, there are plenty of other groups with the same problem.
I was listening to Todd Friel today and a moment of old earth vs. young earth came up. One of the Presbyterian denominations entertained the argument in their magazine.
Todd said a couple of things that made pretty good sense to me. Something along the line of when science sets up it's throne over God it's time to get rid of the science. I was a little embarrassed that he took that position until he said let science explain being raised from the dead after three days.
DT you're right on. I too believe.
The question here is not, "Did Jesus rise from the dead?"
The question here involves whether or not biological evolution has occurred. You've ignored the question under discussion without even engaging the issue. What "science" has "erected a throne over God?" Go to MedPub or one of the other online search engines for scientific journals and search for that phrase. See if you can even find any sort of discussion along those lines.
The problem your Presbyterians are wrestling with is that one group thinks their own brand of theology exists as a "throne over God." They need to first submit themselves to the things of God and realize that God created us - and not the other way around. The same problem seems to exist here.
Linear Mode
