Quantcast

Got Homework?

Connect with other students for help. It's a free community.

  • across
    MIT Grad Student
    Online now
  • laura*
    Helped 1,000 students
    Online now
  • Hero
    College Math Guru
    Online now

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

SnuggieLad Group Title

.....................CLICK HERE NINCOMPOOP

  • one year ago
  • one year ago

  • This Question is Closed
  1. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    @nincompoop

    • one year ago
  2. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    hold on

    • one year ago
  3. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Creationism has problems Biblically using the description in Gen 1-2 as completely literal. For example, the evening and morning were the first, second and third day, but the sun and moon aren’t shown as created until the fourth so how can evening and morning cannot be taken as literal 24-hour days. It is important to know that this was pointed out by St. Augustine over 1600 years ago. There are other ‘issues’ in Genesis (as well as other places) that require personal interpretation to decide for yourself what you THINK things mean. These types of things have no overall bearing on salvation…they just allow understanding things that the individual may desire to understand at a level that is not detailed in the Bible. DO NOT “check your brains in at the door” (or when you study the Bible). The first major thing that has to be understood is that Genesis was written for the people during Moses (generally considered between 2500-3000 years ago). Any ‘scientific’ details would not have been understood by the people during that time (early bronze age). So it had to be written in a simplified manner to be understood. How God made it simple for THEM to understand made problems thousands of years later in trying to discern in what way God MADE it simple for them to understand. Our understanding is MUCH broader and cannot be correlated one-to-one with the creation account in Genesis. Although some still wish to take the account in Gen. 1-2 as literal (young earth or part of ‘gap’ creation), most take it anywhere from a template of creation to that of an allegory (a fictional story to show basic truths). Note that atheists take it as a pure myth (and the Bible as a whole being a complete work of fiction with only a few minor historical facts). MOST Christian theologians agree that the Biblical account of creation in Gen. 1-2 CANNOT be taken as an absolutely literal account and the earth is more than 6000 to 8000 years old. There are SCORES of possible solutions that have been proposed. This has created a HUGE debate for well over 1600 years and our peon brains can’t understand it and will NEVER understand it! Read 1 Cor. 13 – we can only see the Spiritual world as through very fogged glass and God only provides what we have in His Word (Bible) and the special gifts He provided (as those listed in 1 Cor. 12) to give help give SOME insight into Spiritual things that we NEED to know to function as Christians. He does not include – and never will – the details of exactly how He actually DID create everything and exactly what He meant in Gen. 1-2. So what we know is only through the ‘fogged glass’ in the Spiritual realm and through what we can find for ourselves in the scientific realm and how, as Christians, we can meld the two together. The only time we will KNOW is when ‘perfect’ is come (perfect in the general sense and specifically when we have ‘perfect love’) which is only when we are in a new Spiritual body. When we are in that Spiritual PERFECT body, we will no longer need the Bible and will no longer need any of the Spiritual Gifts as we will have complete Spiritual understanding (1 Cor. 13). Now, understanding that, the HUGE debate has no bearing on God’s plan and His gift of Salvation through Christ which was PREORDAINED before we were created. So, theologically, there is everything from the ‘young earth’ to ‘gap creation’ to ‘intelligent design’ and the list goes on and more and more theological propositions (GUESSES) come out all the time. Some of MANY examples (note that although Wikipedia is not always perfectly accurate, in this case its descriptions are as accurate as the theological propositions themselves): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-age_creationism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_creationism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution Remember what I said before: If you are going to debate Mormonism with a Mormon (LDS) you had better understand what Mormonism is; If you are going to debate Islam or Hinduism with a Muslim [Islamic person] or a Hindu you had better know what Islam and Hinduism is. So – likewise – if you are going to have any credible debate on evolution with an atheistic evolutionist, you’d better know the basics of evolution. It does not mean you have to believe the base ‘no-God’ atheistic thing that comes along with the details of evolution, but some Christians find some parts of it credible where it does not hinder their faith in God as THE [ultimate and only] Creator. This is a case where you have to work it out for yourself to find that point that is most comfortable for YOU between the Spiritual world and Scientific world. It could be one of the theological propositions or a combination of them – or something entirely different. It doesn’t really matter as long as you know THE CREATOR.

    • one year ago
  4. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Dont get me wrong the bible is a perfect book. Without blemish but there are detales left out

    • one year ago
  5. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    sorry, I wouldn't base evolution on an ancient inscriptions with full of discrepancies.

    • one year ago
  6. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    lul

    • one year ago
  7. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Again, perfect book.

    • one year ago
  8. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    when I talk about evolution, I mean FACTS and hypothesis that are being tested.

    • one year ago
  9. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Yes, but as a christian I believe in the LAWS of evolution but not the Theory as proposed by charles darwin

    • one year ago
  10. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    You have to be able to tell what you firmly believe as the truth without being racially, Moraly, ethically, and religiously intolerant.

    • one year ago
  11. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    while it may be true that evolution from the first time its mechanism was fully written in context with supported data is not the same as now, much of it still stands. darwin and like any scientific study, go through a process of editions and revisions to be as true as possible

    • one year ago
  12. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Yes but Darwin gave a basically unstable hypothesis

    • one year ago
  13. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    That was supposed to say Un-testable but I like the other way too

    • one year ago
  14. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Darwin got a lot of things wrong too, but that's because of the time he was in. If he were to study evolution again as now, I think he'd still make a very fine evolutionary biologist. he was the first along side with mendel that provided rigorous data about this descent with modification

    • one year ago
  15. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I dont believe in evolution from fish. I do believe in evolution amoung creatures or at least keep an open mind to it as the bible doesnt deny it. But each species in the bible was created unto their kind meaning reptiles to reptiles mammals to mammals.

    • one year ago
  16. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    snug, what part of natural selection is not testable?

    • one year ago
  17. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    No, I believe in natural selection. Just not MACRO evolution.

    • one year ago
  18. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Nat sel is testable

    • one year ago
  19. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    you don't believe in macroevolution? speciation, hybridization, and all?

    • one year ago
  20. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    so you only believe in the evolution within a population?

    • one year ago
  21. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    You have stumped me...Well done...I believe different types of FISH can breed and create more types but I do not believe fish can reproduce and evolve outside the realm of fish. I believe new fish can spread and thrive if this happens all over the world but creating a cow from a fish I do not believe. I do NOT believe in MUTATIVE evolution

    • one year ago
  22. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Same goes with mammals and reptiles etc...but only to their OWN KIND

    • one year ago
  23. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    it is simply incomprehensible to do a one step speciation from one to another. this process can take a very very very long time. I would refer it to be akin to the morphology that takes place from an embryo to an adult. it didn't take one time or it didn't change in 2 weeks or so. but there are evidence that macroevolution exists in other species

    • one year ago
  24. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    one common example is platypus, but outside of the animal kingdom there exists much more

    • one year ago
  25. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Ok. Scientifically evolution has NEVER gone past the bounds of creationism. There has never been any fish that has evolved to EVER become a human. No matter the length of time. My belief is that Macro evolution is wrong. I am not being intolerant at all dont get me wrong. I am just saying until you can show me proof of every animal that evolved into another animal to become an human and be able to no matter over how long be able to re create it I will stand by my belief.

    • one year ago
  26. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    can you comprehend 10 million years?

    • one year ago
  27. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    let us push a little bit more, 100 years

    • one year ago
  28. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Yes. Dont get me wrong...I have factored in the fact of how long is a day to God when there was no sun or moon to direct the day from night.

    • one year ago
  29. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I am not a 6000 yearite

    • one year ago
  30. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I wasn't even alluding that you were a young earth creationist. but it is simply difficult for the mind to grasp 100 million years, you can imagine it all you want but to carefully back track from your current state to even 6K years ago would be difficult.

    • one year ago
  31. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I understand. I hear what you say I just believe the way I believe. Things have happened in my life man that have gone past the even possibility of denying the existence of God. I have experienced him in a way that goes beyond the realm of science or psychological study.

    • one year ago
  32. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I really need to change my owl. Sponge bob talking about psychology or science just doesn't seem right when he lives in a pineapple and lights fires underwater.

    • one year ago
  33. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    you can keep your faith all you want even after understanding the whole theory. I am not about crushing your belief system, I am just about raising consciousness.

    • one year ago
  34. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    "Any book on evolutionary biology is necessarily a collaboration, for the field enfolds areas as diverse as paleontology, molecular biology, population genetics, and biogeography" - COYNE

    • one year ago
  35. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I hope after all this you don't find me maudlin but I thank you for your explanation. I will keep my faith and I hope you have learned something new from the bible and a new way of viewing creationists. We are not anti-evolution atheist haters. Though some Christians I am sure you can vouch act like it. Most of them haven't even taken the time to really study what they are defending or really study what they are denying the existence of. I am not denying the existence of evolution just some of the more radical (trying not to step on any toes) theories of it. I will say in advanced sorry for the radical actions of my fellow brothers and sisters. The ones that are in-tolerant to other religions and beliefs because as you well know you run into them all the time whenever you bring up something like this. I am actually in the ministry and called to be a pastor, I hope you see what I feel to be the proper way for a christian to handle things. I hope you see in all of this that following the biblical principals of ministry and backing your faith using theology and basic theological principals doesn't have to be pushy and defensive like many Christians make it sometimes. Thank you for not being as many atheists are, whether you are atheist or agnostic I dont know but you have been very kind in sharing your thoughts not just trying to beat a belief into someone. I pray that nobody tries to do that to you.

    • one year ago
  36. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    logging off for now

    • one year ago
  37. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    eh maybe not logging off yet

    • one year ago
  38. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I know the bible more than most people who claim to be religious.

    • one year ago
  39. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Precisely my point.

    • one year ago
  40. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I really do want to see who I've been talking to though...

    • one year ago
  41. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I say study the bible under the tutelage of Bart Ehrman.

    • one year ago
  42. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Never read any of his stuff...

    • one year ago
  43. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Do post a picture of yourself though...so I can put a face with the profile

    • one year ago
  44. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    By he way you can call me Joel if you'de like

    • one year ago
  45. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    not read, but study under him. he's one of the few true renowned new testament bible scholar

    • one year ago
  46. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Here I am, don't be to surprised. I prefer to keep the mystery.

    • one year ago
  47. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    no not that dude, I don't like that dude at all. He's a charlatan from what I've gathered in his talks.

    • one year ago
  48. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Why thanks for that. Very kind of you to say of me. Sorry you feel that way about my speaking.

    • one year ago
  49. nincompoop Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    that's not you, snug.

    • one year ago
  50. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I know...

    • one year ago
  51. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Kidding

    • one year ago
  52. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    You have seen me before

    • one year ago
  53. SnuggieLad Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I would very much like to put a picture with the profile though nin. Please post one here so I can see you.

    • one year ago
    • Attachments:

See more questions >>>

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.