Hyper evolution in the bible

Yup. Lots of misinformation. That is why it is bad science to go by two thousand year old tales and even worse theology. It is a denial of the wonders GOD wrought and the worship of a mere book.Those who take the old tales as truth have lost sight of the Message of GOD and abandoned the path.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

When the only evidence for it is a tale in a ~2000 year old book it is. When its supported by evidence it is. The idea that Homo sapiens came about by evolving from other species is supported by alot of evidence.This message has been edited by DrJones*, 07-03-2005 10:55 PM

---

*not an actual doctor

Physical only based evidence, based on a belief sytem that believes only in that. That is fine.
Since it cannot be used to disprove the known spiritual, however, it's conclusions do not take away from the bible in any way. I have, in fact tried to show how things like fast growing plants would explain how animals ate after the flood, and many things box science has said were impossible. There is no evidence of some first lifeform appearing at all, nor of the universe being speck sized. Only speculations and observations of the present physical only universe under the assumption thats all that ever was exist. If the known spiritual world was working together with that physical then all bets are off. The bible tells us it was. No other way it's observations could have happened.
If you want to say it is a lie, and that all men's experience with the spiritual is also fake, then I welcome that minority opinion, for what it is, a minority belief.

God and His wonders being defined here by physical only science, not by what He says is His word on it, that He gave men. Therefore the god you refer to is not the bible God, and creator, who is a spirit, and them that worship Him must worship Him in spirit, and truth. Your god is a product of physical only observation, and beliefs.
My God wrote the bible, and created the universe, see the difference? Your physical concocted god can not give eternal life, or raise from the dead. In fact, since He does nothing of what the bible tells us, I guess only you know how he or she works, if at all!

What belief system woud that be? There are many christian scientists, and I'm sure Jar can provide you with a list of churches that support the teaching of evolution.

---

*not an actual doctor

Can we get something straight here? The Bible doesn't speak of Nebuchadnezzar becoming a beast, it speaks of him becoming like a beast.

quote:

---

The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar: and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws. (Daniel 4:33)

---

According to the story, he went crazy and acted like an animal. He did not "evolve", hyper or otherwise.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Thats an easy one. The belief system in the physical only, that that is all there ever was or will be. This is why assumptions about billions of years ago are made! Also about the future..'one day the sun will burn out' blah blah. If we believed in the merging of the spiritual, like in heaven, or Jesus new body, and such, why we could not believe the PO conclusions.

Eating grass like an ox for seven years, growing claws, and what looked like feathers, and going out of his mind were big changes. He was out in the pasture for years, with these claws and feathers! Oh yes, and wet from the dew of heaven. So we know it was a result of the spiritual, and not just some physical only process at work here!!!!
The changes happened so fast ("The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar"!) that hyper is a good word. If a bird gets a little longer beak or something they call it evolution. For all these big changes that happened so quickly I did loosly use the term hyper evolution. But like any other possible 'evoluton' it was fast, and under the direction of God!

How does this mesh with the various christian scientists and the churches that support the teaching of evolution?

---

*not an actual doctor

He did not have claws and feathers: These are similes. Reading comprehension, its a good thing.This message has been edited by DrJones*, 07-04-2005 01:21 AM

---

*not an actual doctor

No, it doesn't tell us that. That's your interpretation, as I've shown. There's any number of other interpretations of rapid growth in the Bible that have nothing to do with any merging at all. If God wants it to happen without any merging, then it will. What couldn't you tell them before? How is saying "God did it by merging" any different than simply saying "God did it"? But your answer is still just "God did it." Why wasn't that enough to begin with? What about that answer is so insufficient that you feel you have to add to the Bible in order to have a better answer?

delete--repeated.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 07-04-2005 03:40 PM

I suppose the point of this topic is that the Bible has this subtle coherence.

Back when I was a little more interested in the Bible, I developed an interesting model of my own. Mine explained the drastic shift in narrative and focus between the Old and New Testaments - from the harsh, judgemental, legalistic God of the Old to the redemptive, accepting, tolerant God of the New.I proposed that the Bible was actually the story of two deities - one, the God of the Word, who designed; and another, his servant, the God of the Hand, who implemented that design. In this way I paralleled the two stories of Genesis with the two Testaments. I proposed that the Word had instructed the Hand to create, and the Hand had come to love that creation; when he observed the Word become harsh and unfair to that creation he rebelled and usurped the title of "God." At that point he did the Jesus thing, etc.Interesting, and it does bring a discontinuity of the Bible into coherence, but I would never make the mistake of confusing my daydream for a real reality suggested by the Bible. And, with the availiability of the Argument from Ineffability, I never had to. What I don't understand is why Simple finds it worthwhile to simply push the unexplanability of God back one step. What's the point? Ultimately, you still have a God that can do whatever he likes, in any way that he likes, regardless of what is possible or not. Right?

simple, we've been over this. where? book, chapter, verse?the simple fact of the matter is that the bible talks of the spiritual in very physical terms nearly all of the time, especially in the earlier books. heaven is a physical place. eden was a physical place, on earth. our spirits/souls are the breath of god, a physical gift of air. hell, sheol is a real place: the ground.you have not once provided any biblical evidence of splits, merged states, or any of this other stuff you seem to have made up.

---

אָרַח