Evolution and Time

Christ said that Abraham was an EYE WITNESS to the days of the Messiah in John 8 "Abraham SAW MY DAY and was glad" -- are you discounting that KIND of eye witness? If so -- then you are right Moses was not an Eye Witness.

But God WAS an Eye Witness to what HE DID and according to 2Tim 3:15-16 HE TOLD Moses for "ALL SCRITPURE is given by inspiration from God".

However I do appreciate the point that TP is making here - you have to challenge the Bible ITSELF to swallow the false doctrines of atheist evolutionism.

That is a very good point sir.

In Christ,

Bob

 

UTEOTW responds -

Then after some more rabbit trail obfuscation of the point UTEOTW adds a factual statement that actually applies here --

Thus justifying his true devotee style language defending the speculations of atheist darwinism "At all costs".

In Christ,

Bob

 

That's saying it is hearsay. So do you believe in heresay accounts of a physical impossibility?

What does that mean? Believe half of them, and 'move to strike' the rest of them as inadmissable? Even though this line of questioning may be partly comical, if you believe only what science can explain and throw out the impossible, why do you believe the resurrection? Besides, for eyewitnesses, was Jesus not one? He specifically referred to Noah and the flood as real? Or is this inadmissable because Jesus had to 'relearn' it [unless, of course, he remained all-knowing through his gestation, changings, nursings, et al]?

What was he then?-- A liar or just incompetent? Or if he didn't write Genesis, who are you claiming did? If you don't know, and/or you say it went through many editions and censorships, that's saying it as reliable as the legend of Romulus and Remus, or the Hopi tale of The Boy and the Eagle.

 

Eyewitness accounts are not hearsay.

Remove the red herrings. Eyewitness accounts are not hearsay.

No, it isn't saying that at all.

 

TP

Show some of that love . . .

:1_grouphug:

 

Then do you have doubt about Paul's explanation of the 'elements' of the Lord's supper? (he wasn't there) Matthew's account of the star and the wise guys? (he wasn't there) Or whoever wrote that Moses died and was buried by God himself somewhere in the Moab valley? Of course, if you do believe in the resurrection of anyone you may believe Moses himself still wrote that; or perhaps was given a reprieve, as maybe God woke him up and said, "Okay, you got a half hour to write you're dead and in the grave; so write it and jump back in-- and I'll cover for you." Regardless, if that is true, it was not written by an eyewitness otherwise, unless Moses wrote it and threw it out when he still had one hand above the dirt.

As to Genesis not being comparable to Romulus & Remus or the Hopi tale of the Boy and the Eagle-- how it is not comparable?

 

I don't think I ever saw an answer to this -

 

Declaring victory without ever having addressed the objectionsmade, eh?

It ws pointed out, as has been before, that your OP is a strawman. Far more genetic diversity has been developed by all those prokaryotes, while remaining single celled, than has been developed by eukaryotes while going from singled celled to oaks and elephants and humans. Your argument about the number of generations was nothing but a strawman that ignores what science really claims happened.

It was suggested, based on the current understanding of science, that what took so look, instead, was how long it took for the eukaryotic cell to form by symbiosis of prokaryotes. You could only say that there is no evidence for this, a naked assertion, and then hand waved and ignored the evidence, such as from molecular phylogeny, that shows that the eukaryote organells really are the remains of symbiotic prokaryotes.

It is strange to simply declare victory when you have never really dealt with any of the arguments presented.

 

This just seems appropriate at this point --

Thus justifying his true devotee style language defending the speculations of atheist darwinism "At all costs" and ignoring the "inconvenient details" where it has been pointed out time after time that UTEOTW is over inflating the claims and case for atheist darwinism.

 

Here is UTEOTW's quote again

The careful, objective, critical thinking-mind will instantly note that the only actual fact provided in UTEOTW's quote is that we have had "Advances" in the sciences listed -- but "offered insight" is merely propaganda language for "have been used in our story telling" but it does not mean "have SHOWN the evolution of endosymbionts into contemporary organelles in the lab"

Everybody KNOWS this.

UTEOTW simply hopes that his frantic handwaiving will encourage some to "overlook it"

(sorry UTEOTW - this just never get's old)

 

No, I have no doubt at all, because, as I said, the writings of Paul and Matthew were contemporary with the generation of eyewitnesses to these events.

This is a tougher one, because there's no way to know where the account originated. I lean toward the idea that someone who was a participant in the events having written something, which was later redacted into the Penteteuch. I argue for these books existing much earlier than Kings and Chronicles, which appear to have been compiled following the return of the Jews from exile.

In any case, it harms my faith not at all to accept the account of Moses' burial as factual.

The short answer is that the Genesis creation accounts are theological narratives. True, they have the form of explanatory fables, but there is more to Genesis 1-3 than "How the Elephant Got His Trunk." Not being familiar with Hopi mythology, I can't comment on it, but I can say that the legend of Romulus and Remus concerns itself simply with the origins of Rome, and not with theological matters.

 

A blind friend was in a hurry to get across campus, and I volunteered to lead him.

We came up to the door, and I pushed it. He said, "Doesn't the door say 'pull'?"

When we got to the other side of the building, I pulled the door. He said, "Doesn't this door say 'push'?"

A degreed expert can miss all the signs in the world - if his (her) prejudice tells him to not acknowledge the obvious.

God has been explicit. He has revealed things that until recently NNE knew to be true. And you ask me to trust someone because they have a degree in the field AND choose to not believe God . . .

 

Further,

I am a professional theologian - school trained.

And from a theological perspective - GOD created. That is clear and unequivocal.

NNE has EVER proven what God revealed in Genesis WRONG. NNE.

And almost EVERYONE that has tried - died trying . . .

I would rather die trying to serve God then to die trying to prove HIM wrong.