Evolutionary Timeline

[Edwardo Piet]

You prefer to believe the literalist nonsense Retorth. What can I say? Dealing with the actual logic is a lost cause for you, so I quite understand why you'd do that.

@ Evie: Yeah sure some Christians believe evolution is false. As explained on these boards, and by atheists too, this thinking is misguided. So their understanding is mistaken in our opinion. You must address their misunderstanding with them and not wrongly claim this to be correct & universally Christian thought when it clearly is not.

I said some Christians disagree with you. Creationists interpret the Bible and think they are Christians, they read the Bible literally. Are you to say that just because you and your comrades think they interpret it incorrectly, then that means they aren't Christians? Is it part of the definition of Christianity to believe in Evolution, and to not interpret the Bible literally? Wouldn't that mean then you have to interpret the Bible just your way, otherwise it's not Christian? Because that's exactly the NTS fallacy if that's the case.

For them to not be Christians simply because they reject evolution and take the OT creation story literally, wouldn't that mean Christ would have had to state how Creationism is wrong and how Evolution is true? On what basis can you dismiss all Creationists as non-Christians?

I said some Christians disagree with you, and they are Creationists. Where does part of the definition of Christianity=Believing in evolution.

*Smells some really serious NTS*.

EvF

[fr0d0]

No, Christians are free to interpret within reason. ID/ Creationism is minority/ marginal AND incorrect interpretation BY christians. their interpretation doesn't affect their Christian status.

[solarwave]

Well there is mention of Dragons, Satyrs, Fiery Dragons and Unicorns to name a few. However, I agree with you, my brother fr0d0, that some of these christians are seriously misguided.

Do you mean those are in the bible? I've seen Unicorn once in a bad translation, but it saying it in a bad translation doesn't make the whole thing wrong.

[Retorth]

Well there is mention of Dragons, Satyrs, Fiery Dragons and Unicorns to name a few. However, I agree with you, my brother fr0d0, that some of these christians are seriously misguided.

Do you mean those are in the bible? I've seen Unicorn once in a bad translation, but it saying it in a bad translation doesn't make the whole thing wrong.

So you've seen "unicorn" mentioned in the bible, but in "bad translation"? How do you mean exactly?

[leo-rcc]

Those who mention dragons in the bible refer to them out of context. In most verses they are used as poetry and others as a metaphor. It's really a bad argument to use to argue against the bible. Like the "Bats are birds" argument, which is not correct either.

[Retorth]

That doesn't help the accuracy of the bible though. =\

[solarwave]

The Kind James Verson, cant remember where. I mean if you look at the original word it means an Ox type animal.

[Rhizomorph13]

So God is skillful enough to implant thoughts into the minds (Or just talk to them to impart those thoughts) of the original writers and get them to write down a bulletproof accurate original draft of the bible, but He fails to have the same effect on others that translate those works?

So why couldn't it be the other way around?

Why couldn't the original writing be flawed and the translations be more accurate?

Rhizo

[Violet]

Why doesn't he just let us all know what is true, and stop relying on imperfect humans to interpret his perfection?

[Tiberius]

Why doesn't he just let us all know what is true, and stop relying on imperfect humans to interpret his perfection?

Now then Saerules...methinks that would be a little too easy.