11
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 337:
Line 337: + +
Debate:Should the first story of creation be read allegorically or literally? (view source)
Revision as of 21:43, March 17, 2013
, 21:43, March 17, 2013→My thoughts in favor of a literal reading
:Personally, I think those who deny the Genesis accounts do so out of mistaken belief Evolution is true, not having looked into the matter fully for themselves. I think Macroevolution specifically is incompatible with Genesis 1, and is more speculative than its adherents would like others to believe. --[[User:Jzy|Jzy]] 03:08, 4 June 2012 (EDT)
:Personally, I think those who deny the Genesis accounts do so out of mistaken belief Evolution is true, not having looked into the matter fully for themselves. I think Macroevolution specifically is incompatible with Genesis 1, and is more speculative than its adherents would like others to believe. --[[User:Jzy|Jzy]] 03:08, 4 June 2012 (EDT)
::Hmm yes. I also want to add that when some people say the believe the Bible is correct in spiritual matters, but not on history and science, that is ridiculous since there would be no evidence then that the Bible was inspired. But since history and science support the Bible, we can be sure that the whole book is true and good. We can be sure of it in spiritual matters as well as historical and scientific matters. [[User:JasperTech|JasperTech]] 17:43, 17 March 2013 (EDT)