it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.
below i will show these reasons.. .
the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).
But why are atheists still following the Golden Rule and Galatians 3:28?
Why haven't you invented a better moral system than those two Scriptures?
How did uneducated fishermen 2,000 years ago teach the two greatest moral ideas, which you still abide by now?
Also, why was it Christians who abolished slavery and segregation instead of atheists?
it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.
below i will show these reasons.. .
the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).
Let's go one hypothetical step farther:
For the sake of argument, let's say Jesus never actually existed, but First-Century Jews invented Him and used His story as a parable.
It's been 2,000 years, and atheists are STILL using the moral principles and values espoused in this "mythological parable."
Atheists still haven't come up with a better moral system than the Golden Rule or the total equality found in Galatians 3:28.
it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.
below i will show these reasons.. .
the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).
Doltologist,
I'll check out Richard Carrier.
There's still that nagging question about WHY 99% of historians BEFORE this totally atheist blogger and author said Jesus was a real person.
What did all of those historians screw up on that caused them to believe Jesus existed? What did they get wrong?
And if we can't believe Jesus was a real person, why should we believe ANYONE from the history books was a real person?
it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.
below i will show these reasons.. .
the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).
Doltologist,
Well, we can start with this: Are there any professional historians who say Jesus and Paul were not real people who existed?
Even highly skeptical Bart Ehrman, and the very skeptical Jesus Seminar people said that Jesus was a real person who existed.
I've never heard any scholar, expert, historian, or even atheist, doubt the existence of Paul.
it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.
below i will show these reasons.. .
the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).
opusdei1972,
How do we know Jesus or the disciples viewed Adam as a literal person who actually existed?
Jesus always spoke in parables. A parable is a fictional story with fictional characters and is used to teach deeper moral truths.
Since Jesus was so accustomed to speaking about fictional characters, why should we assume that when it came to Adam, He must have viewed him as literal?
Plus, in Galatians, Paul says Sarah and Hagar are allegorical characters foreshadowing the two groups in his day:
1. Early Christians.
2. Jews who opposed Christians.
It was common for First-Century Christians to interpret the Old Testament as allegory.
the revised nwt has a footnote on john 1:1 showing that "a god" means "divine.".
also, their other publications are now much more boldly referring to jesus as divine:.
jesus--the way, the life, the truth (2015), page 306-307:.
The Revised NWT has a footnote on John 1:1 showing that "a god" means "divine."
Also, their other publications are now much more boldly referring to Jesus as divine:
Jesus--The Way, The Life, The Truth (2015), Page 306-307:
"Thomas exclaims:'My Lord and my God!' (John 20:26-28) Yes, he now has no doubts that Jesus is alive as a divine being who is Jehovah God’s representative."
---------------
Awake, April 22, 2005, Page 9:
Jesus is a god in the sense of being divine
if any are willing, share your fact based reasons for viewing faith as dangerous.
viewing faith as dangerous is the reason for almost all of my posts recently.
what seems constant is that theists are too focused on there own little world to realize how and why faith is so damaging to society.
The only point I would add is that whether something is dangerous has nothing to do with whether something is true, at least not necessarily.
Take, for example, the atomic bomb:
The science behind the atomic bomb is the truth, yet, it is the most dangerous thing ever invented in all of history.
whether you are a christian, jew, undecided, agnostic, or atheist, isn't having the attitude that only ***your*** interpretation of the bible could be correct, or only ***you*** know what the bible means, -- .
isn't this a form of closed-mindedness, arrogance, and a superiority complex?.
in addition, isn't trying to force someone to conform to ***your*** interpretation of the bible the opposite of "freethinking?
Nicolaou,
Depends what you mean by that?
Do you mean child rape and the Holocaust are not really wrong, it's just subjective opinions of some people that says those things are wrong?
In any case, if you are correct, then there's no way an atheist or a Christian can claim to have "the truth" for anyone beyond yourself.
whether you are a christian, jew, undecided, agnostic, or atheist, isn't having the attitude that only ***your*** interpretation of the bible could be correct, or only ***you*** know what the bible means, -- .
isn't this a form of closed-mindedness, arrogance, and a superiority complex?.
in addition, isn't trying to force someone to conform to ***your*** interpretation of the bible the opposite of "freethinking?
Whether you are a Christian, Jew, undecided, agnostic, or atheist, isn't having the attitude that ONLY ***your*** interpretation of the Bible could be correct, or ONLY ***you*** know what the Bible means, --
Isn't this a form of closed-mindedness, arrogance, and a superiority complex?
In addition, isn't trying to force someone to conform to ***YOUR*** interpretation of the Bible the opposite of "freethinking?"
god's view of gays and lesbians.
why should anyone care what i have to say on this topic?
i am not a priest.
Freemindfade,
But isn't your belief that people cannot legitimately view the Bible in a way different from the way you view it -- isn't that a form of close-mindedness and also trying to make people conform to your way of thinking instead of actually thinking for themselves, and having different views than you do?
