You tossed out all evolution, or just human evolution?
Well, i'm seeing that there are scientific problems with it evidence-wise, for both i guess? I'm still pretty doubtful about '6000 years' for earth; but most everyone has prolly at this point seen how dogs 'evolved,' which makes sense; so i'd say i've kind of tossed Darwin's model anyway.
__________________ As for me, may I never boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because of that cross, my interest in this world has been crucified, and the world’s interest in me has also died.- Gal. 6:14
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
I don't like all the religion vs. science stuff. I think "creationists" often discredit the DOCTRINE of creation by trying to use science to validate it. If God created all things, it is indeed a miracle. What is believed to be a miracle cannot be examined scientifically. Why? Because by nature a miracle violates known scientific laws. Might God have created the world in 6 days? Sure. However, since one cannot repeat the process and analyze it, it has to be relegated to an issue of faith.
Linear Mode
