On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 10:28:34 +0000 (UTC),
Jerzy Jakubowski <branchofjesse@hotmail.com> wrote:
> fnci@comcast.net (Frank J) wrote in message news:<38c5d0dd.0402141003.510da09e@posting.google.com>...
>> "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message news:<c0jm8c$jgr$0@pita.alt.net>...
>> > news:c0jjk0$k96$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>> > > Uncle Davey wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>I read Phillip Johnson's book Darwin on Trial.
>> > > >>He mentioned that US's Jewish community is not interested to
>> > > >>fight against neodarwinism/evolution.
>> > > >>It seems embarrashment to creationists ?
>> > > >>Jewish people know perhaps better the original hebrew version of Genesis
>> > > >
>> > > > ;)
>> > > >
>> > > >>In fact I remember only one Jewish creationist :Spetner.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>--
>> > > >> A marvelous jeweler told me rumors about gray mold in US theater.
>> > > >> A marvellous jeweller told me rumours about grey mould in UK theatre.
>> > > >> How come ? Well, the farther from Darwin the more corrupted language ;)
>> > > >> - http://www.student.oulu.fi/~ktikkane
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > It's a good question, and I believe I have worked out the answer to it.
>> > > >
>> > > > There are a number of Christians who believe in a theistic evolution, as
>> > > > most Jewish believers seem to do, but for those who take seriously the
>> > > > central Christian doctrine of the Resurrection, and, what goes hand in
>> hand
>> > > > with that, a new heavens and a new earth, all resurrected, so, in other
>> > > > words, a new creation, a problem occurs which doesn't occur for the
>> Jewish
>> > > > believer, for whom the resurrected form of the afterlife is not a
>> central
>> > > > doctrine. This problem is, if we say that God was unable to create the
>> old
>> > > > world directly, and miraculously, without waiting for billions of years,
>> > > > then what of the new creation?
>> > >
>> > > So, how do you get from "God created the world in billions of years" to
>> > > "therefore God is unable to create to create a new world directly"?
>> > >
>> >
>> > If we are to believe that God will create the new world immediately, by a
>> > miracle,
>> > then what's the problem with believing the first was also a rapid,
>> > miraculous, direct Creation?
>>
>> Two reasons: (1) The evidence of the past supports a different
>> account, and (2) The Bible commands us not to bear false witness.
>>
>
> The evidence of the past supports either account. There are things
> which neither account can fully explain, and some things appear better
> explained by one or other of the two accounts.
>
>> >
>> > Especially when the new world promise comes from the same Bible as the old
>> > world creation account.
>>
>> And the same Bible that says "the letter killeth but the spirit giveth
>> life."
>> >
>> > Uncle Davey
>
> That pasage refers to the letter of the law, not the literality of the
> resurrection.
>
> Please don't bear false witness yourself, about what the Bible is
> saying.
>
> Please don't use glib interpretations out of context to make the Bible
> look like an unworkable document.
You mean out of context quoting is wrong, Davey? Hmmm...
--
Aaron Clausen
tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @)
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 |
| 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 |
|