359
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 25:
Line 25: +
Debate: Can you be a true Christian and believe in evolution? (view source)
Revision as of 01:55, October 10, 2008
, 01:55, October 10, 2008no edit summary
::That's a defeatist attitude (don't take it personally!). Today you are a "passive evolutionists", tomorrow a "passive liberal". When will you be a "passive atheist"? Sorry for kidding, but think about it. If you don't take Creation literally, everything else in the Bible can be an "allegory". There are many allegories, metaphors, parables in the Bible, but the account of Creation is not. Nowhere it mentions that it shouldn't be taken literally. I'm sure Mr.Rayment will explain it better. --[[User:AdamE|AdamE]] 11:18, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
::That's a defeatist attitude (don't take it personally!). Today you are a "passive evolutionists", tomorrow a "passive liberal". When will you be a "passive atheist"? Sorry for kidding, but think about it. If you don't take Creation literally, everything else in the Bible can be an "allegory". There are many allegories, metaphors, parables in the Bible, but the account of Creation is not. Nowhere it mentions that it shouldn't be taken literally. I'm sure Mr.Rayment will explain it better. --[[User:AdamE|AdamE]] 11:18, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
::: On the type of text of the creation account, see [[Creation week]]. If there was no Adam and Eve, there was no original sin. If there is no original sin, then we don't need a Saviour to save us from it. Therefore we don't need Jesus. If there was no first Adam, there is no need of a last Adam. You're right; it's not central at all! [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:34, 1 September 2008 (EDT)
::: On the type of text of the creation account, see [[Creation week]]. If there was no Adam and Eve, there was no original sin. If there is no original sin, then we don't need a Saviour to save us from it. Therefore we don't need Jesus. If there was no first Adam, there is no need of a last Adam. You're right; it's not central at all! [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:34, 1 September 2008 (EDT)
As for this argument using the Adam and Eve story, this and the Theory of Evolution are not related. They are not alternatives of each other. The account of creation in the Bible is just that. It refers only to how things were created in the beginning. The Theory of Evolution concerns how life on earth has changed over time. If one is not satisfied with that argument, then perhaps this one: the Bible does not explain the means by which most forms of life were created by God. Is it not possible that God used evolution to further the variance of Earth's life forms? This idea is reminiscent of the ancient ways of explaining the universe: the apple falls from the tree because God wills it so. While this is still true, it has since been discovered that God created gravity, and this law of nature is most directly the cause of the apple's fall. It is most probable that God created evolution in the same way, to govern nature's life forms and the way that they change over time.--[[User:JArneal|JArneal]] 21:55, 9 October 2008 (EDT)