1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderWhether you think i have proved it to your satisfaction or otherwise really is irrelevant, the fact is that Jesus taught others that human beings were created from their inception through a direct act of God, it really is that straightforward. The animals are an entirely different creation as Genesis points out. If you wish to hypothesis and speculate that God used the evolutionary process to do this then please cite an example of it from scripture, for Genesis mentions no such idea.
Actually, I don’t think you have proved this claim as yet.
You claimed that Mathew 19:4 demonstrated that Jesus denies the possibility that evolution was the process by which humankind came into existence.
You focused on the word ‘created’. You posted:
[quote]"Did you not read that he [b]who created them from [the] beginning made them mal ...[text shortened]... n.
So, as yet, nothing you have cited means that evolution and Christianity are incompatible.[/b]
Stating that created can mean different things in different contexts does not negate the fact that humans from their inception were a distinct creation from animals, from their inception as Genesis points out, thus, the ideas of evolution and Biblical creation are mutually exclusive from this mere fact alone.
That God has used other agencies, agencies that are actually mentioned does not necessitate that he has used the hypothesised evolutionary process, the only other agencies that are mentioned in scripture are the Holy spirit and Jesus Christ, when you have evidence of any others, let me know.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou made the claim that evolution and Christianity are incompatible. So yes the burden is on you to substantiate this claim, which you haven't done.
Whether you think i have proved it to your satisfaction or otherwise really is irrelevant, the fact is that Jesus taught others that human beings were created from their inception through a direct act of God, it really is that straightforward. The animals are an entirely different creation as Genesis points out. If you wish to hypothesis and specul ...[text shortened]... ripture are the Holy spirit and Jesus Christ, when you have evidence of any others, let me know.
In order for your claim to be true, you have to demonstrate that any alternative interpretation of the Bible which allows for the existence of evolution is clearly and undeniably incorrect. Otherwise you are not saying these things are incompatible, you just are saying that your alternative view is the preferred one.
I have offered an alternative explanation and you haven't explained why it is not a possible interpretation. Hence your claim has not been substantiated.
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSpeculation. You have added the words 'a direct act' which are not mentioned in the Bible, and I have shown that the word 'created' can mean something other than a direct act of God.
the fact is that Jesus taught others that human beings were created from their inception through a direct act of God
Why should I believe your speculation over my speculation?
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI have substantiated it, that you do not accept the substantiating evidence is not my fault. The Biblical account of creation and the evolutionary hypothesis are mutually exclusive because humans were created, according to the account in the book of Genesis directly by God, in a distinct act of creation, complete and whole.
You made the claim that evolution and Christianity are incompatible. So yes the burden is on you to substantiate this claim, which you haven't done.
In order for your claim to be true, you have to demonstrate that any alternative interpretation of the Bible which allows for the existence of evolution is clearly and undeniably incorrect. Otherwise ...[text shortened]... explained why it is not a possible interpretation. Hence your claim has not been substantiated.
Originally posted by Rank outsideryou don’t need to believe anything i say, simply give credence to what seems more plausible to you.
Speculation. You have added the words 'a direct act' which are not mentioned in the Bible, and I have shown that the word 'created' can mean something other than a direct act of God.
Why should I believe your speculation over my speculation?