Jesus would believe in Evolution?

[Forsakenone]

You say the KJV is right in it's translation and yet the following 5 major modern translations don't agree with you..
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lev%2011%3A20&version=NRSV;NET;ISV;NASB;HCSB

Let me as you this brother Stan, while on the road one time, three unit of the County Sherriffs department once pulled up at to my truck parked at a truck stop in response to three separate 911 calls in which each caller had described as apparently drunk driver operating a semi had run them off the road and one reported might have struck their vehicle. Would you believe me if I told you it wasn't me? Well, when I told the sheriff it wasn't me , the Sheriff asked if I expected him to believe that I was telling the truth ,a me person who had just admitted to having several drinks, or believe those three eyewitnesses who all reported that they gave the same location I was parked at, gave the same vehicle description as my truck along with the same license plate number as my truck.

Let me ask you brother Stan, would you believe me if I told you I was that I telling the truth that it wasn't me or my vehicle or you would the three 911 callers that gave the evidence that lead the cops to me? Who would you believe brother Stan? Who? Could I say anything or show you anything to convince you that the witnesses were false in their testimony?

 

[StanJ]

Looks like the top of the one you posted the underneath of, but none the less the named flying insect has six legs.

Apparently some have 4

 

[StanJ]

Let me as you this brother Stan, while on the road one time, three unit of the County Sherriffs department once pulled up at to my truck parked at a truck stop in response to three separate 911 calls in which each caller had described as apparently drunk driver operating a semi had run them off the road and one reported might have struck their vehicle. Would you believe me if I told you it wasn't me? Well, when I told the sheriff it wasn't me , the Sheriff asked if I expected him to believe that I was telling the truth ,a me person who had just admitted to having several drinks, or believe those three eyewitnesses who all reported that they gave the same location I was parked at, gave the same vehicle description as my truck along with the same license plate number as my truck.

Let me ask you brother Stan, would you believe me if I told you I was that I telling the truth that it wasn't me or my vehicle or you would the three 911 callers that gave the evidence that lead the cops to me? Who would you believe brother Stan? Who? Could I say anything or show you anything to convince you that the witnesses were false in their testimony?

Fairy tales and the Bible? I'll choose the Bible thanks.

IF you do drink and drives you should be OFF the road.

 

[Forsakenone]

You say the KJV is right in it's translation and yet the following 5 major modern translations don't agree with you.

I would simply tell you the same thing that I told the Sheriff.

Fairy tales and the Bible? I'll choose the Bible thanks.

Well it is a true story. The first thing that came to my mind when the Sheriff asked if I expected him to believe that I was telling the truth and that the three witnesses who called 911 were all lying was that poor S.O who had three eyewitnesses call in on him must have been guilty, after all it is written, "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." [Deut 19:15]

Since you believe you Bible above all, then it would be fair to say that you would not have believed me since there were three witnesses.

After the Holy Ghost reminded me of his handy work, which I still am thankful for ever more, I responded to the Sheriff that "No, I did not expect him to believe me, nor them but hoped he would believe the truth." Now that must have been something he didn't hear from very many drunks because it immediately drew a peculiar look from the Sheriff. So it gave me the opportunity to ask him if those three witnesses who had said in there 911 call that they had just followed me into this truck stop where I was parked, then wouldn't my engine still be hot, or at least warm since it hasn't been that long since the 911 calls were made?"

Would that prove to you brother Stan that the three witnesses were not telling the truth, or does the fact a man has a couple of drinks on a Saturday night since he can't get a load until Monday morning anyways just prove his isn't a Christian and ought to be in jail anyways.

Thankfully, the Sheriff consider that to be a legitimate question and order the two other officer to go up to the front of the vehicle and check the engine to see if it my truck had been operated any time recently.. After pulling the hood open and checking the engine they signaled back in the negative to the Sargent.

IF you do drink and drives you should be OFF the road.

Shouldn't anyone?

 

[Forsakenone]

Apparently some have 4

Are you serious? While we might have different opinions regarding this issue, I don't view you as dishonest or ignorant but I hope you really don't
believe that I doctored the photo which shows were the legs had been attached. It appears you found another way to shut me up.

 

[[email protected]]

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/10/my-take-jesus-would-believe-in-evolution-and-so-should-you/

Found this interesting (and distrubing!) article and thought it might make for some lively discussion.

Here's a snippet of which we should all take notice:
"But when it comes to the truth of evolution, many Christians feel compelled to look the other way. They hold on to a particular interpretation of an ancient story in Genesis that they have fashioned into a modern account of origins..."

Totally untrue! And it's a shame that the world would see Christians as ignorant and obstinate. God created us with intricate well-developed brains that He intends for us to use. I don't know what Christians actually "look the other way" when it comes to science... I do know plenty who follow whatever leader tickles their own mindset without investigating scientific issues themselves.

But then the article says this:
"While Genesis contains wonderful insights into the relationship between God and the creation, it simply does not contain scientific ideas about the origin of the universe, the age of the earth or the development of life."

Now THAT I can agree with! The book of Genesis does not describe the beginning of the universe. It describes the beginning of God's relationship with man. Both Christians and atheists have mistakenly assumed that the first chapter is about the creation of the universe, and therein lies the problem with talking to macro-evolutionists.

Your thoughts???

To accept Darwinian evolutionary theory is to accept the racist argument that the white race is superior to all others. In addition it should be noted that Darwinian evolutionary theory is also about as sexist as you can get. Consider the following....

Recently, in Louisiana, African American State Representative Sharon Weston Broome charged that, "Darwin's ideas on how humans evolved are racist and the key reason for race problems [and] provide the main rationale for racism." As Broome logically concluded, "If evolution has provided the main rationale for racism, and we are teaching our children evolution in schools, then correspondingly we are teaching them racist principles."
---------
Darwinís primary racist viewpoints summed up:

1. Humans are divided into sub-species
2. The strongest live and the weakest die, which is good (Hitler and Marx agreed)
3. The sub-species are not simply variants
4. A "race war" would be beneficial to mankind
5. Blacks and Aborigines occupy a sub-species between Apes and Caucasians
6. The extinction of blacks and gorillas to advance the white "race" is good
7. Sub-species are also known as races
8. Different sub-species have different characteristics, such as mental capabilities
9. Irish are also non-Aryan and should be extinct
10. Europe doesnít owe any ancestry to the Greeks
11. It would be good if a wealthy nation replaces a less privileged race
12. Christianity is a damnable doctrine, and Hitler agreed saying it is a rebellion against nature
13. Social Darwinism includes imperialism, racial extermination and sexual inequality and Darwinism was intended to explain society as a whole
14. "lower class" races should not normally be cared for; they should not multiply and should become extinct

Also sexist:
------------

"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman--whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands...We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on 'Hereditary Genius,' that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman."


It's only in outstanding achievements - either for good OR for ill - that men tend to dominate. One way of seeing this is that the curve of women's achievements fits inside the curve of men's achievements, either way.

----------------------------------------------------------
Is this what Christians should accept as truth?

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

 

[DogLady19]

To accept Darwinian evolutionary theory is to accept the racist argument that the white race is superior to all others. ...

"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman--whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands...We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on 'Hereditary Genius,' that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman."


It's only in outstanding achievements - either for good OR for ill - that men tend to dominate. One way of seeing this is that the curve of women's achievements fits inside the curve of men's achievements, either way.

...

Hmm, not sure if I accept your entire premise here, but I see your point. And I totally agree with you that Darwin is debunked...

And Mr. Galton is spewing Victorian-era sexism, whereby they began to presume women dull in the head in order to keep them from winning the right to vote! (Context is everything.)

But that 2nd quote is not really that far off from the truth...

God's image of the sexes and Darwin's image share these similarities:

The male human is naturally predisposed to dominate. This comes from God giving Adam dominion over everything, including Eve.

The female was made by God to be the male's helper. So her achievements do fit inside his. Of course, there are women who have no husband, so God is their provider and protector, and their achievements are curved into God's...

 

[StanJ]

Well it is a true story. The first thing that came to my mind when the Sheriff asked if I expected him to believe that I was telling the truth and that the three witnesses who called 911 were all lying was that poor S.O who had three eyewitnesses call in on him must have been guilty, after all it is written, "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." [Deut 19:15]

Since you believe you Bible above all, then it would be fair to say that you would not have believed me since there were three witnesses.

After the Holy Ghost reminded me of his handy work, which I still am thankful for ever more, I responded to the Sheriff that "No, I did not expect him to believe me, nor them but hoped he would believe the truth." Now that must have been something he didn't hear from very many drunks because it immediately drew a peculiar look from the Sheriff. So it gave me the opportunity to ask him if those three witnesses who had said in there 911 call that they had just followed me into this truck stop where I was parked, then wouldn't my engine still be hot, or at least warm since it hasn't been that long since the 911 calls were made?"

Would that prove to you brother Stan that the three witnesses were not telling the truth, or does the fact a man has a couple of drinks on a Saturday night since he can't get a load until Monday morning anyways just prove his isn't a Christian and ought to be in jail anyways.

Thankfully, the Sheriff consider that to be a legitimate question and order the two other officer to go up to the front of the vehicle and check the engine to see if it my truck had been operated any time recently.. After pulling the hood open and checking the engine they signaled back in the negative to the Sargent.

Regardless if it is true or not, and yes I assumed it was not, comparing your story to the Bible carries no weight with me at all.

Eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable as many police will attest to but they have procedures to follow so in the end the truth would have probably won out, but who knows when MAN is concerned. With God however ALL things are true.

 

[River Jordan]

To accept Darwinian evolutionary theory is to accept the racist argument that the white race is superior to all others. In addition it should be noted that Darwinian evolutionary theory is also about as sexist as you can get. Consider the following....

Recently, in Louisiana, African American State Representative Sharon Weston Broome charged that, "Darwin's ideas on how humans evolved are racist and the key reason for race problems [and] provide the main rationale for racism." As Broome logically concluded, "If evolution has provided the main rationale for racism, and we are teaching our children evolution in schools, then correspondingly we are teaching them racist principles."
---------
Darwinís primary racist viewpoints summed up:

1. Humans are divided into sub-species
2. The strongest live and the weakest die, which is good (Hitler and Marx agreed)
3. The sub-species are not simply variants
4. A "race war" would be beneficial to mankind
5. Blacks and Aborigines occupy a sub-species between Apes and Caucasians
6. The extinction of blacks and gorillas to advance the white "race" is good
7. Sub-species are also known as races
8. Different sub-species have different characteristics, such as mental capabilities
9. Irish are also non-Aryan and should be extinct
10. Europe doesnít owe any ancestry to the Greeks
11. It would be good if a wealthy nation replaces a less privileged race
12. Christianity is a damnable doctrine, and Hitler agreed saying it is a rebellion against nature
13. Social Darwinism includes imperialism, racial extermination and sexual inequality and Darwinism was intended to explain society as a whole
14. "lower class" races should not normally be cared for; they should not multiply and should become extinct

Also sexist:
------------

"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman--whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands...We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on 'Hereditary Genius,' that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman."


It's only in outstanding achievements - either for good OR for ill - that men tend to dominate. One way of seeing this is that the curve of women's achievements fits inside the curve of men's achievements, either way.

----------------------------------------------------------
Is this what Christians should accept as truth?

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

Oh brother...So if you were shown examples of Christian creationists justifying racist views through scripture, does that mean the Bible and Christianity are racist?

 

[pom2014]

Yes.

Yes. No.

Have no idea what you are referring to.

Non sequitur

Non sequitur

Non sequitur

Is this what you seek? Liberation from God's word?

No I seek liberation from tiresome literal translation and willful ignorance.

And trolling of course.

 

[StanJ]

No I seek liberation from tiresome literal translation and willful ignorance.

And trolling of course.

You mean like you do and are doing?

 

[aspen]

Trying to guess what Jesus would believe today is kind of a waste of time.

Jesus spoke the language of his audience in order to make a greater point and people hated it because they always wanted him to side with them. If he was talking to scientists today, he would speak the language of science in order to communicate the glory of God and it would probably upset all of you. Just another form of rendering unto Caesar

 

[StanJ]

Trying to guess what Jesus would believe today is kind of a waste of time.

Jesus spoke the language of his audience in order to make a greater point and people hated it because they always wanted him to side with them. If he was talking to scientists today, he would speak the language of science in order to communicate the glory of God and it would probably upset all of you. Just another form of rendering unto Caesar

Heb 13:8 (NIV)

 

[aspen]

What is your point, Stan?

 

[StanJ]

What is your point, Stan?

Not my point, it's what the scripture says.

 

[aspen]

Thanks for being so difficult. Why did you post the verse, Stan?

 

[StanJ]

Thanks for being so difficult. Why did you post the verse, Stan?

Really? You don't get how Heb 13:8 relates to the post you made?

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

 

[aspen]

Really? You don't get how Heb 13:8 relates to the post you made?


Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

That is an obvious statement.

But it doesn't clarify a thing

He could be the same yesterday and today AND reveal characteristics about himself that we haven't seen yet (in fact, he could do it for the rest of eternity and still be the same)

He could be the same yesterday and today AND we may not realize a specific characteristic even though he has already revealed Himself in that manner in the past.

He could be the same yesterday and today AND change his mind Like he did with Lot and Moses.

So what is your point?

 

[StanJ]

That is an obvious statement.

But it doesn't clarify a thing

He could be the same yesterday and today AND reveal characteristics about himself that we haven't seen yet (in fact, he could do it for the rest of eternity and still be the same)

He could be the same yesterday and today AND we may not realize a specific characteristic even though he has already revealed Himself in that manner in the past.

He could be the same yesterday and today AND change his mind Like he did with Lot and Moses.

So what is your point?

Yes, I thought it was, but apparently you didn't?

Well as the scripture would refer to what we do see of Him IN scripture, that would be a contradiction.

The scriptures may not reveal ALL Jesus di, but it reveals who He was and is so I doubt that as well.

I have no idea what you mean by Lot and Moses. Jesus didn't deal with Lot and Moses.

My point was In the scripture I quoted.

 

[Forsakenone]

I have no idea what you mean by Lot and Moses. Jesus didn't deal with Lot and Moses.

Of course he didn't, he wasn't born yet right?