X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Theistic Evolution: the bane of creation science

    It should come as no surprise that creation scientists are loosing ground to theistic evolutionists all over the place. These guys are actual scientist who believe in an active creator, and some of them even believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis 1. It's just disgusting that these creation scientists who are showing their true colours by switching to evolution pretend that they can actually still believe the Bible. They're duping our young into trusting in the study of GOD's creation rather than trusting in GOD.

    The worst of all is that Gerald Schroeder guy who continually uses science to show GOD's fingerprint in evolution and the Big Bang.

    Error 404 (Not Found)!!1
    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=7143844201875642538&ei=8QlBSsnbHIH0qwOQrviVBQ&q=gerald+schroeder+science+of+god&client=firefox-a



    If I am not answering you, try these simple steps:

    Use a word processor to type your reply. Spell check your work. Grammar check your work. Stupid check (if available) your work. Press "Ctrl + A" then "Ctrl + C". Go to the reply box and press "Ctrl + V" and send.
    Tags: big bang, evolution: darwin spits on god, false christians, jews and their lies, science verses faith
  • #2
    Re: Theistic Evolution: the bane of creation science

    Originally posted by TimothyFavelle View Post
    It should come as no surprise that creation scientists are loosing ground to theistic evolutionists all over the place.
    What does 'loosing ground' mean?

    Does it involve catapults?

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Theistic Evolution: the bane of creation science

      (That's how loosers spell, these days).
      May you be a blessing to every life you touch.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Theistic Evolution: the bane of creation science

        Gerald Schroeder tries to be both a scientist and a Bible scholar and becomes neither. You can't start with an opinion, reconciled or otherwise, and then try to shoehorn the evidence and scripture to match. You have have to start with the facts and draw your conclusions from that, AFTERWARDS.

        For Biblical Scholars, facts are the Bible. We start with an open mind, read the facts in the Bible, then come to our conclusion AFTER reading the facts.

        Reality does not reconcile people's opinions. Reality doesn't care what you or anybody thinks. If you decide that jumping off a cliff doesn't hurt, God will not try to reconcile your opinion of gravity with His. If you jump off a cliff God will break your legs and/or kill you.

        More about Gerald Schroeder:
        He professes Orthodox Judaism, and his works frequently cite Talmudic, Midrashic and medieval commentaries on Biblical creation accounts, such as commentaries written by the Jewish philosopher Nachmanides. Among other things, Schroeder attempts to reconcile a young earth creationism Biblical view with the scientific model of a world that is billions of years old using the idea that the perceived flow of time for a given event in an expanding universe varies with the observer’s perspective of that event
        Sounds like cultural relativism for time:

        "Hey, I got here on time, you just say I'm an hour late because the of the way you percieve time!"

        "Your honor, you have to let my client go! Though you percieve that he has served a few minutes of his 50-year sentence, his perceived flow of time is that he's already served a lifetime..."

        "Sure, according to your perception he hasn't breathed in a while, but I'm not calling an ambulance because according to my perception of time he's just between breaths..."

        "You're underage? Only according to someone else's perception of time. Now take off those diapers...."

        And if all this sciencey gibberish about big bangs and DNA and bacteria and viruses which we conveniently can't see, or dinosaurs that conveniently died before anybody could see them....If any of this was relevant, it would be in the Bible. Not hinted at in passing, if you interpret the scripture just right. I mean if God wanted us to behave according to the Germ Theory of disease (for just one example) He would tell us to. Yet Jesus and his disciples didn't even wash his hands before eating:
        Then came together unto him the Pharisees...when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. Mark 7:1-2
        Disagree? By failing to register and debate me, you prove that liberals are factless frauds who only persuade through intimidation. To prove otherwise, debate me!
        Got Questions? See Frequently Asked Questions, or use Forum Search, tag system, or our guides on Geography, History, Science, Comparative Religion, Civics, and Current Events.
        Did I use a new word you've never heard? Definitions here. | Vote! Everything you need to vote here!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Theistic Evolution: the bane of creation science

          A joo taking about the Bible? What next? A Hindoo Muslin? What's the man know? The video bangs on tediously with twisted explanation after corruption after wild speculation. What is he worried about? After struggling all scientist eventually admit that God the Creator is the answer and it all happened 6,000 years ago.

          Meh! He's making a living and his riches will weigh him down in death.
          sigpic


          “We must reassert that the essence of Christianity is the love of obedience to God’s Laws and that how that complete obedience is used or implemented does not concern us.”

          Author of such illuminating essays as,
          Map of the Known World; Periodic Table of Elements; The History of Linguistics; The Errors of Wicca; Dolphins and Evolution; The History of Landover (The Apology); Landover and the Civil War; 2000 Racial Slurs.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Theistic Evolution: the bane of creation science

            Originally posted by Jeb Thurmond View Post
            Gerald Schroeder tries to be both a scientist and a Bible scholar and becomes neither. You can't start with an opinion, reconciled or otherwise, and then try to shoehorn the evidence and scripture to match.
            No, you can't. God doesn't want half-hearted efforts to glorify Him:

            Rev. 3:15-16: I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

            Theistic evil-utionists are headed, not for glory, but for a celestial airline-discomfort bag.
            This church is dedicated to preaching True Christianity™ and the King James Bible exactly as they are, with no alterations to make them more politically correct for modern liberals. If you think that we've misquoted or twisted Scripture or quoted any verse out of context, please explain in detail how we've done so. Otherwise, if what you read on this site offends you, then you're offended by Almighty God and His Word, not by us.

            Questions to ask liberal "Christians" ✞ Things that the Bible doesn't say ✞ Tolerance

            sigpic

            Comment

            Previous template Next
            Working...
            X