toldailytopic: Theistic evolution: best arguments for, or against.
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
I know the word he was using. It's not a 'bad' word, the editor thingy on here just reads it like so.
genuineoriginal
New member
Got it, thanks
noguru
Well-known member
Right.
If I said "The gulf stream can either be a tiger or a pussycat." I think you would still understand my meaning, right?
noguru
Well-known member
:rotfl:
I fixed it. I left a space before the "cat" part the first time. Then I went back and edited it not realizing that I had to type over the stars to make it all OK.
Yowm can also mean a day from morning till evening - as the days in Genesis 1 are explicitly defined.
The sun causes the Northern Lights.
We don't call the moonrise "morning" either. Because we have an appropriate source of light by which to determine morning. Just as there is an appropriate source of light mentioned by God for the first three days. A light defined as "day". A light separated from the darkness. Add to this the assumption that the Earth was rotating and we have the bible clearly stating that the days of creation were in fact days of creation. Add to that the fact that Deuteronomy and Exodus also teach six days of creation and we have repetition. Add to that the fact that nowhere in the bible does it say the creation week was not six days and we have an uncontradicted account.
Six days of creation explicitly denies evolution.
:darwinsm: Didn't take long for A4T to peg noguru.Uh hello, you want to talk about intellectual capacity, or clairvoyance ? (youre not doing well in the intellect department and your mind reading gift has dried up so don't quit your day job)
I said nothing you attributed to me or even implied with my post therefore your wasted effort to pigeonhole me into your little box of a mind has failed and now you must be punished.
Yowm can also mean a day from morning till evening - as the days in Genesis 1 are explicitly defined.
The sun causes the Northern Lights.
Specifically, the Sun. Nothing else can produce a morning. That's how the word is used.
If you have to redefine words and make unscriptural assumptions to make your new religion work, that's a pretty good tip-off that it's faulty.
I'd be open to your evidence that an allegory mention in those two books changes it to a literal history. Show us.
If you redefine words, and assume that "yom" means only what you want it to mean. Otherwise, the whole story falls apart.
Only if we redefine words and accept your unorthodox re-interpretation.
The sun causes the Northern Lights.
Specifically, the Sun. Nothing else can produce a morning. That's how the word is used.
If you have to redefine words and make unscriptural assumptions to make your new religion work, that's a pretty good tip-off that it's faulty.
I'd be open to your evidence that an allegory mention in those two books changes it to a literal history. Show us.
If you redefine words, and assume that "yom" means only what you want it to mean. Otherwise, the whole story falls apart.
Only if we redefine words and accept your unorthodox re-interpretation.
Except for before the sun was created. There were evenings and mornings then, too. Must have been caused by the light God created before He created the sun.
Or at least, that's what the bible plainly teaches.
Nobody is redefining anything. That's just you being incredibly arrogant and ungracious.
I don't have any. That's what happens when you attack a straw man. The guy you're pretending to attack doesn't have a comeback. That makes it look like you've won. It's a cheap and dishonest way of trying to earn yourself points.
But if you were interested in honest debate you would present your reasons for believing the law was only allegorical in nature and show why it could not also be historical.
That would be a refreshing change. :thumb:
But, of course, they aren't so explicitly defined. You've merely redefined the word to mean only what you want it to be. That's why it's so easy to counter your argument.
More "must have been", from the Bible improver.
You redefined "morning and evening." Do you think no one noticed?
Barbarian suggests:
I'd be open to your evidence that an allegory mention in those two books changes it to a literal history. Show us.
So an allegory in Genesis is still an allegory in Exodus. And your argument falls apart.
So your argument is that real laws can't cite an allegory? Show us that.
Fortunately that is something we can all read for ourselves. :thumb:
Fortunately we can all look up the law in Exodus and Deuteronomy for ourselves.
All three passages explicitly inform of six days with evenings and mornings.
And the stupidity of your "argument" is easily exposed when we note that the sun did exist for the three days when all the animals were created. Kinda eliminates all pretense for your precious evolution being left as an option in the bible. :chuckle:
Barbarian observes:
But, of course, they aren't so explicitly defined. You've merely redefined the word to mean only what you want it to be. That's why it's so easy to counter your argument.More "must have been", from the Bible improver.You redefined "morning and evening." Do you think no one noticed?
Hardly anyone is unclear as to what happens in the morning or the evening. Which is why you want so badly to redefine those words.
Barbarian observes::
I'd be open to your evidence that an allegory mention in those two books changes it to a literal history. Show us.
(Stipe declines to do it)
Barbarian chuckles:
So your argument is that real laws can't cite an allegory? Show us that.
And as you might know, it doesn't say that, does it?
Stipe tries a bunny trail:
So you're now conceding that the first couple of days were allegorical and the rest weren't? Seems unlikely, given that you have presented no reason for anyone to think so.
And Stipe, having failed to put together a cogent argument, tries a simple unsupported assertion.
Which is all he had to begin with. Nice try, Stipe.
But, of course, they aren't so explicitly defined. You've merely redefined the word to mean only what you want it to be. That's why it's so easy to counter your argument.More "must have been", from the Bible improver.You redefined "morning and evening." Do you think no one noticed?
Hardly anyone is unclear as to what happens in the morning or the evening. Which is why you want so badly to redefine those words.
Barbarian observes::
I'd be open to your evidence that an allegory mention in those two books changes it to a literal history. Show us.
(Stipe declines to do it)
Barbarian chuckles:
So your argument is that real laws can't cite an allegory? Show us that.
And as you might know, it doesn't say that, does it?
Stipe tries a bunny trail:
So you're now conceding that the first couple of days were allegorical and the rest weren't? Seems unlikely, given that you have presented no reason for anyone to think so.
And Stipe, having failed to put together a cogent argument, tries a simple unsupported assertion.
Which is all he had to begin with. Nice try, Stipe.
genuineoriginal
New member
No one disputes what happens in the morning or the evening after God created the sun, moon, and stars on the fourth day.
You are the one disputing what happened prior to the fourth day, despite the clear words of the Bible which state there was morning and evening prior to the creation of the sun.
Either you believe God, or you need to be honest with yourself and declare yourself an agnostic.
Which only points out the silliness of your belief in the oral tradition of shepherds as a basis to run your life.
genuineoriginal
New member
Have you looked at what those shepherds were able to accomplish?
Until you are able to do the same, you wont be able to provide any justifiable basis for me to believe you over them.
No, am unaware of shepherd accomplishments. Please enlighten me.
genuineoriginal
New member
You should start in Genesis and read the Bible through to the end to find out.
One highlight is that the shepherds were able to walk out of Egypt with a lot of expensive gifts without the Egyptians being able to stop them.
Another highlight is that they established peace in the Middle East and were sought out for their wisdom.
Another highlight is that they migrated into all the nations of the earth and have been able to keep their cultural identity intact.
Another highlight is that they have regained their homeland after 2500 years of exile.
There are many more accomplishments listed in the Bible besides these ones.
If you have anything to match those accomplishments, let me know.
Peace in the Middle East---yuk, yuk, yuk.
The Irish have also migrated to all the nations and kept a cultural identity intact.
The walk out of Egypt is another nice story.
Try again.
genuineoriginal
New member
Have they done it for 2500 years while Ireland has been overrun and fully occupied by other cultures?
No, but their EtOH is a lot better.