In fact, unlike other public utterances, he doesn’t even indicate that it is a parable. What if it really happened just that way?
1 Like
Sure you do. You’re the one making the claim about how much science is wrong, so the burden of proof is on you. Otherwise you can’t expect to be taken seriously.
But you can’t even prove your interpretation of Scripture is true. You just make wild claims without presenting any evidence. Why should I believe you and not believe the Mormons, when you both use the same approach?
1 Like
It occurs to me that our friend Wookin is operating within the presuppositionalist framework which references the Bible as the authority. Therefore, since the Bible is the ultimate authority, no further argument or proof is necessary. If I am correct, further engagement with Wookin is unnecessary and a waste of time.
2 Likes
Further, Wookin appears to view his understanding, expectations regarding the Bible as completely correct. His system appears to be self-contained.
1 Like
The problem is that by defining animal death and disease as “against God’s character and nature,” you cause more problems than you solve. Because the undeniable facts are, we currently live in a world filled with animal death and disease. So you must argue that the world as it is is something God would never be responsible for. You are stuck with a definition of God that doesn’t match reality, because animals die and diseases flourish, and if God created everything he must be ultimately responsible. This conflict is entirely because you thought yourself capable of judging good and evil for everybody else.
What does the Bible have to say about that?
2 Likes
What is impossible about the genealogies in Gen. 5 and 11?
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.