Making waves (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Sunday, June 16, 2013, 06:43 (4179 days ago) @ dhw


> 
> DHW: You are determined to "cherry-pick" the reference to time, which I'm happy to accept as being made to fit in with the time scale of evolution. But you continue to dodge what you yourself consider to be the goal of evolution, which is the emergence of humans. This has always been the greatest source of controversy between creationists and evolutionists: the bible gives an account of how God created man (and woman) separately; evolution claims that man and chimps descended from a common ancestor. If you really and truly think this is merely the result of a "weak translation", or an "artistic way", I'm sorry, but until God gives us the "correct" translation or personally edits the text to fit in with your beliefs, I still see no choice but to say that the bible is anti-evolution. If we can't judge by the text we have, what else are we supposed to judge by?-0And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.-21And God created great sea creatures, and every living thing that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after its kind: and God saw that it was good.-....
24And God said, Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kinds, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kinds: and it was so-...
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.-It does NOT say he created the Tucan and the cockatoo. it says he created the winged fowl after its kind. It certainly allows for change, simply not changing between species. No common descent. Further, evolutionist tend to change the definition based on who they are arguing. If debating a christian, they will claim that evolution only asserts 'change' not common decent. The bible is not anti-change, nor is it anti-common decent as long as the common decent is limited to families of creatures. Divergence from one species to another has never been observed, and the bible is against that particular train of thought.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.