Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 31:
Line 31: + + + +
Talk:Essay:Man is not the descendant of monkey (view source)
Revision as of 22:33, March 20, 2009
, 22:33, March 20, 2009raises a good question actually
::::: So the question is not whether it's "too convenient", but whether the Bible is correct or not.
::::: So the question is not whether it's "too convenient", but whether the Bible is correct or not.
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 18:27, 20 March 2009 (EDT)
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 18:27, 20 March 2009 (EDT)
::::::Maybe he meant ''convenient'' as in providing us human beings with an excuse to "lord it" over the rest of creation, without responsibility or concern. If so, then his rejoinder deserves a response.
::::::Contrary to the impression projected by anti-Christians, [[dominion]] requires care and love. We are to cherish God's lesser creatures, and the establishment of the [[SPCA]] is one way we have done this. Animals are better cared for (at least in the West) than they've ever been in world history. As a Christian, though, I draw the line at equating [[animal rights]] with [[human rights]]. People are more valuable than animals. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 18:33, 20 March 2009 (EDT)