Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 53:
Line 53: + + +
→Evolution: I choose logic any day and urge others to do likewise. Logic never fails.
Nate, Roman Catholics are still free to be young earth creationist and still hold to Roman Catholicism since no Pope has spoken ex-cathedra on evolutionism. Andy Schafly and [[Since33AD]] are both Catholic creationist. Correct me if I am wrong, but to my knowledge, neither has been ex-communicated nor has the Roman Catholic Church threatened ex-communication! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:34, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
Nate, Roman Catholics are still free to be young earth creationist and still hold to Roman Catholicism since no Pope has spoken ex-cathedra on evolutionism. Andy Schafly and [[Since33AD]] are both Catholic creationist. Correct me if I am wrong, but to my knowledge, neither has been ex-communicated nor has the Roman Catholic Church threatened ex-communication! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:34, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:Indeed. As far as I gather Sam Brownback is a creationist (although I'm not sure if young earth or old earth) and he hasn't been excommunicated or anything. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 19:21, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
:Indeed. As far as I gather Sam Brownback is a creationist (although I'm not sure if young earth or old earth) and he hasn't been excommunicated or anything. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 19:21, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
::Nate, "stepwise considerations to make" is just another way of saying that the Roman Catholic Church does not have fully confidence in evolutionism and have not spoken ex-cathedra. You are not fully confident in evolutionism. If you were, you would have challenged the creationist university biology student [[VivaYehshua]] by now. And [[Kenneth Miller]] has yet to respond to GregG's inquiry about the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] for evolutionists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:24, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
The [[Humani Generis]] is clear, [[Jesus]] was clear, and the logic is clear. There is no logical objection to one Adam, or to the [[Great Flood]]. But once one denies one Adam or the Great Flood, then numerous logical problems arise in explaining what Jesus said and did. Why choose illogic over logic? Well, one reason is because liberals push anti-Jesus theories, and evolution is one of them, and perhaps some would rather be accepted by liberals than ridiculed by them. I choose logic any day and urge others to do likewise. Logic never fails.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:15, 15 June 2013 (EDT)