Science, Creation & EvolutionNon young creation astronomy failedTO: Aineo, addendum I will let readers examine the quotes I hightlighed and make up their own mind. Here are two of them but I would encourage readers to examine the initial post more closely if they feel they need a review:
I also believe I gave addition relevant information at this board showing that the evidence clearly supports Scripture and not currently popular ideas among scientists. So the more important question should be, "Are the ideas currently popular with scientists in agreement with Scripture" and not "Is the Scripture in agreement with the currently popular ideas among scientists?" I suppose you could get into Biblical interpretation issues and here is a resource on this matter: "Was Origen's very non-literal interpretation of Scripture/prophecy invalid?" at: http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38125 Lastly, as far as the oxymoron post, I will just say that I believe there are scientists who believe in a young earth and that God supernaturally created "things" (stars, planets, plants, animals, man, etc ) in 7 days and there are scientists who do not believe this. I believe the evidence supports the former scientists and not the latter and I will let readers examine the evidence and make up their own minds. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame