Difference between revisions of "User talk:Rocky"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(question re: Theistic Evolution)
(re:Theistic Evolution)
Line 55: Line 55:
  
 
Rocky, does your "theistic evolution" include one Adam and Eve?  Real evolution does not.  But Christian doctrine relies on one Adam and Eve.  The Catholic Church expressly forbids in [[Humani Generis]] teaching anything contrary to that, for obvious reasons:  the meaning of [[Jesus]] depends on Adam.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:21, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
 
Rocky, does your "theistic evolution" include one Adam and Eve?  Real evolution does not.  But Christian doctrine relies on one Adam and Eve.  The Catholic Church expressly forbids in [[Humani Generis]] teaching anything contrary to that, for obvious reasons:  the meaning of [[Jesus]] depends on Adam.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:21, 11 May 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
:Did Adam and Eve really exist? I don't know because I wasn't there. However, I don't care if they really existed because it is more important to link Adam and Eve symbolically than it is to say that they actually existed and that people that don't believe it are wrong. Jesus was the new Adam, symbolically because Jesus was man's next attempt to be sinless (for lack of a better word). Maybe there was a humanlike creature, one male and one female, that came from evolution to be Adam and Eve (again, I wasn't there). However, what I believe is more important than saying that they existed and you shouldn't say anything different than that, is less important than how much, symbolically, Adam and Eve are intertwind. --[[User|Rocky|Rocky]]

Revision as of 16:35, 12 May 2008

Useful links

Welcome!

Hello, Rocky, and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, Rocky!


Please, feel free to talk here.

It stinks, man because nobody talks to me, man. So, why don't you. Man. --Rocky


I was being sarcastic. It seems funny that Conservapedia would use Fox News as a source for science reporting since Fox reports on evolution like it really happened. MAnderson 17:11, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

Essay:Religion

Hi, I hope you don't mind but I did a quick spell check of your essay. I know you requested users did not edit it and instead discussed it on the talk page, but I've made sure that content was not changed beyond a few letters. Happy editing StatsMsn 07:43, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, man. I am terrible at spelling. Really apprechiate (probabily spelt that wrong) the edits. --Rocky

Rocky Horror

I was a bit puzzled by your message, but then I went and checked my edit history. That's actually not my article. I simply redirected an erroneous title to the correct one (which I shouldn't have done since it's against CP's guidelines). Jinxmchue 00:57, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I see. Well, I still changed it, if you want to see it. Yeah. Wow, it is harder to think up something to say now than it was when I had to write that essay for English. Anyway, thanks for telling me. --Rocky

Debates

Rocky,

If you want to start a debate, then please do the following:

I'll leave those pages there for another day or so, but if you don't put your own views there by then, I'll delete those pages.

I realise you're still new to all this, so don't take this as telling you off; just giving you some guidance.

Philip J. Rayment 02:36, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

Philip,

Don't worry, you did not sound like you were telling me off. I put in the debates my own opinion. You can access the one about athisim here and the one about homosexual marrage here. Thank you for telling me that. I was wondering why nobody was responding. Thank you, again. --Rocky

Question of the Week

I believe that Bush is a good president in most aspects. I don't use the e-mail thing. sorry... ~BCSTalk2ME 09:51, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

That's cool with the email thing. What aspects do you think that he is good with? --User:Rocky
Pro-life, same-sex marriages, gun control... ~BCSTalk2ME 17:41, 1 May 2008 (EDT)

Spelling

I would suggest that you use Firefox as your browser and install the spell-checker. It would appear that you are in need of some assistance. (I'm trying to put this as nicely as I can.) BrianCo 18:48, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

The Conservapedia:Manual of Style page has spell-checker downloads under "spelling" if you are interested. FernoKlumpLeave me a death threat!! 20:11, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Matt Shepard

If what you included was real information, then cite it; otherwise, it will be removed as possible libel. Karajou 20:55, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Theistic Evolution

Rocky, does your "theistic evolution" include one Adam and Eve? Real evolution does not. But Christian doctrine relies on one Adam and Eve. The Catholic Church expressly forbids in Humani Generis teaching anything contrary to that, for obvious reasons: the meaning of Jesus depends on Adam.--Aschlafly 19:21, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

Did Adam and Eve really exist? I don't know because I wasn't there. However, I don't care if they really existed because it is more important to link Adam and Eve symbolically than it is to say that they actually existed and that people that don't believe it are wrong. Jesus was the new Adam, symbolically because Jesus was man's next attempt to be sinless (for lack of a better word). Maybe there was a humanlike creature, one male and one female, that came from evolution to be Adam and Eve (again, I wasn't there). However, what I believe is more important than saying that they existed and you shouldn't say anything different than that, is less important than how much, symbolically, Adam and Eve are intertwind. --Rocky|Rocky