Why do you deny God's word?
You call yourself Christian, but don't believe the scripture? Earth is young.
>>617203
>Answers in Genesis
usually their material is a lot funnier than this, especially there founder, even watched Ken Ham give a presentation? fucking hilarious.
Christian exegesis of the OT would completely fall apart of everything were literal.
>>617203
It's not about believing in scripture it's about a public system being impartial and educating everyone equally even if they happen to be of a different faith. To do this it has to be secular and not affiliated with any one belief system in particular otherwise we would inevitably be leaving someone out and depriving them of their right to the public education they're enrolled in.
Science is just the middle least offensive least alienating road because the alternative forcefully has to alienate someone and what's more possibly indoctrinate them into believing they're bad and going to some religions hell.
Your mom is young
>>617254
Relatively, yeah. She had me at 19.
Because there's little to no evidence for its veracity
Funny thing, this Creationism is not only almost exclusively American, it's a pretty young concept as well.
>>617271
What better evidence is there than God's word?
>>617274
The evidence you get when you actually define the terms you use and test your claims?
>>617284
*tips science hat*
>>617291
*Ignoring science hat*
>Jesus uses metaphorical stories fucking constantly
>somehow God isn't allowed to
>>617580
>Bible literally says God speaks through prophets by sending them visions which they describe to the people in parables (Hosea 12:10)
>it's meant to be historicist documentation, guise!
>why is the bible true?
>because it says so in the bible
Is this really the kind of critical thinking and argument forming children should he taught?
Personally I just really like the devil. I think Earth belongs to him.
>>617628
Yeah, he's intelligent, nihilistic and with a wicked sense of humor.
I like this ironic christposting by self-hating atheists in desperate need of attention and validation, in the sense that I don't
fuck you
>>617203
Hey man, God made the universe, and Man assembled the Bible.
I know who I trust more.
Hint: It's God.
>>617203
why is there always so much bait on this board
>>617203
>sola scriptura
And let me guess, you use a protestant version of the script based on King James Bible? The one that was banned by pope(as an authority, obviously it was studied by theologians first) for having more than 400 errors?
>>617203
Only few christians are creationist (and they're mostly murricans).
>>617727
practicaly no christians anywhere are seriously creationist other than american protestants
theres some catholics that are sort of hard line but even they arent openly creationist, maybe a few orthodox mainly in places like serbia, but they are all marginal and rarely get any publick space
the entire evolution vs creation debate is endemicaly american, it couldnt even have happened anywhere else, in some place like europe, russia or asia it couldnt occur, technicaly, just couldnt, people claiming young earth and creationism would simply be seen as disqualifying themselves, and anyone asking for it to be taught in school would get pointed towards proffesional help
Because Baptists, Methodists and most Protestants are damnable heretics.
>>617777
quads confirm
>>617792
Catholic until death and eternal life.
Deus Vult.
>>617203
>Christians
>Believing scripture.
I've never once met a Christian who would admit that Isahiah 7:14 isn't talking about Jesus, what with the third person masculine past tense verb used to describe the conception of our prophetic figure.
>>617274
>God's word
I always wonder what believers mean when they say that.
Surely you don’t mean that God did the actual writing? You must know that ultimately a man wrote down the words for the first time. Of course he could claim “divine” inspiration. But the only proof of that divine intervention is in the writing itself. Making it circular.
Isn’t it infinitely more likely that anyone who claims to write the word of God is just nuts?
>>617765
It's fairly popular among Korean christian communities, from what I understand.
>>617869
They mean God's logia.
>>617869
Whatever events led to the current Bible were God's will.
>>617877
giving it a label is not an explanation
>>617891
Which current bible?
>>617891
You’re not even trying are you?
No matter what the question before you, you close your eyes, slightly nod your head and in a serene voice say to yourself: ’Tis Gods will
>>617203
To deny would imply validity.
I reject the claim of gods, since they hold no substance
>>617894
Logia means oracles obtained, mainly by interpretation of God's messages. In the case of the prophets who wrote the OT, it's explicitly by visions (probably dreams, though also possibly visions from meditation), and related by those prophets in parables (Hosea 12:10).
>>617917
I know what it means, but you're not explaining anything with that. You just say "the bible is divine, cos the bible says so"
Any man can write down shit and say it is divine. BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW?
>>617905
>’Tis Gods will
I don't use such fedora-tipping grammar.
>>617261
What a whore.
>>618029
Uh, how is that a bad age to have kids?
>>617607
Yes. There's two options.
1. Be stupid; live life with less stress and a not happier overall.
2. Put things together, lose faith/ motivation, alienate yourself from religious society.
Number two isn't a great choice when every establishment is based and you get seen as "one of those guys" for the rest of your life because you actually think with the brain in your head.
Also, fuck this world?
Not as in, "this world sucks, I refuse to participate", but more as, "I wish there was something that could be done, but mathematically, it seems futile the idea that people will, or even want to, 'wake up', because this would just make you sad."
>>617580
>Jesus is CHRYSTAL clear when he is talking in parables
>God who is the same entity somehow can be as vague to the point you are not able to tell when he is speaking literally
>>618032
How is it not?
Remember to avoid things like the natural fallacy. Just because the body is "mature enough", doesn't make it " right".
>>618072
Because putting off marriage until thirty doesn't generally imply waiting to have sex.
>>618087
Never supposed to start a sentence with "because".
Are you one of these new-age thiests that will reword anything they say to vilify your horrid learning's?
Are there any left that don't do mental gymnastics to get around their own rules?
>>618072
Wait, what's bad about it?
>>618102
I think they vilification of early marriage ultimately stems from kids conflicting with youthful hedonism, desu. It's seen as irresponsible, because it is assumed you will still be going through your hedonism until about thirty. As opposed to ending your hedonist phase by twenty.
>>618112
Ah, in lies the problem.
The assumption of wrongdoing and of further continuances.
Can anything, done in moderation, be seen in a non-hedonist view?
Maybe we don't do these things just for the pleasure, but because it's all we know. Taught if it feels good, keep doing it.
>>618105
The age itself.
I really don't mind to factor in financial stability at all because mental stability isn't there at that age. It's not there at 21 either, you should be at least 24 before you consider it.
>>618190
Your child-rearing instincts don't kick in until 24?
>>618174
>Maybe we don't do these things just for the pleasure
>if it feels good
