For David B, the good Doctor and others who are knowledgable about Creation debate

Sorry, I meant the millions of years=more deaths bit.
I agree completely with your reasoning, Gaud, and I wonder how folks explain the apparent inconsistency.

I read the reasoning differently. I got a sense that “Cruelism” derived from the whole “survival of the fittest” misunderstanding. You see, if God set up a plan where life evolves by having the fit survive, than He is being cruel to those species and individuals who are less fit. Surely God, in his wisdom, would have a better plan than that.

Or sumpin to that effect.


Livin’ on Tums, Vitamin E and Rogaine

[quote]
Cruelism, or Theistic Evolution: The theory that God used evolution
to bring everything into existence. This requires death so that life
could evolve. God, therefore did not create everything “good” or
perfect as Genesis 1 says, and therefore Theistic Evolution involves
a cruel God who would use death of innocents to bring about our
current state of being.

[quote]

From a poster named Saved in '73.

Nope, haven’t pissed 'em off yet, but I haven’t said anything untrue either. I’m walking a fine line. :slight_smile: So far, nobody’s figured out the anagram or the hints in the profile (I might add “fishing” to my interests :slight_smile: ).

This thread apparently deals with the whole cruelist thing: http://www.leftbehind.com/cgi-bbs/Forum8/HTML/000832.html

I haven’t had time to read it all, and doubt I ever will. :slight_smile:

I made a joke about it being a “parade of the Flanderses” earlier (mostly insipred by the “Pet Rapture” thread), but I agree that there are some very intelligent, rational, moderate Christian (al right, so I’m biased) posters over there.

As far as “Cruelism” goes, I wonder what ‘Thomas’ and ‘Saved in 73’ have to say about the book of Joshua.

I made a joke about it being a “parade of the Flanderses” earlier (mostly insipred by the “Pet Rapture” thread), but I agree that there are some very intelligent, rational, moderate Christian (all right, so I’m biased) posters over there.

As far as “Cruelism” goes, I wonder what ‘Thomas’ and ‘Saved in 73’ have to say about the book of Joshua.

Now SoulFrost jumped in and Thomas is gonna try to trap him. The first question (which they are already berating SF for not answering) was: Why did God create the universe?

If I’m asked, maybe I’ll say it beats the heck outta me! :slight_smile:

Well, I haven’t really seen too many rational moderate Christians there. I mean, just because they don’t want prayer in school – it’s because they are more “Christian” than their brethren and also fear their kids might < gasp > be exposed to other religions. :slight_smile:

Re: Cruelism

What I gathered from Thomas was that millions of years of creatures dying made God out to be cruel. His literal reading shows that Death came into the world after The Fall. Sin first, the Death.

That way, God is not responsible for Death, Death is a consequence of Man’s disobedience. The thought of millions of years of death before any man arrived to sin is unthinkable, and contrary to a clear reading of Scripture.

Anyone gotten any annoying email since joining that board? I’m tempted now. Piscator might want to join the discussions.

I made sure that I didn’t give my e-mail address over there. I took it off here after Phaedrus e-mailed me. And he asked me to keep the contents of his message between the two of us.

I’ll do that.


Fighting my own ignorance since 1957.

This Thomas fellow doesn’t seem like a very nice person.

Thomas is an arrogant poopy-head. What they need over there is a Mundane Pointless Stuff area, and a Moderator willing to try to keep all the cutesy-poo little smiley-faces and “sitting on the couch eating popcorn” posts out of there.

Okay, so they offend my sense of dignity.

::sitting on the couch eating popcorn, gives DrF a ‘thumbs up’::

Sorry, couldn’t resist. I’m glad we don’t have the ability to use all those silly caution signs, question marks, lightbulbs, etc. They just clutter.

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaang.

Nice posts, RTF. You put an awful lot of work and thought into them. I reckon even Thomas might take you seriously. :slight_smile:

-andros-

A thumb up where???

I know what you’re REALLY saying, you little minx. I took at least six credits in psychology and I can tell what you mean even if you don’t say it out loud. Kissy kissy. By my definition…

(SLAP!!)

Sorry, I seem to have been channelling Phaedrus there for a moment…

Thanks, andros. I am questioning my sanity, though. They’re going to respond with far more posts than I could respond to in the rest of my unnatural life…

Great googly. David, did you see what word was ******'ed out?

Dr. F, when were charlatans supposed to have a sense of dignity? :wink:

I fear my attraction has worn off for Phaedrus. ::sob:: His last post to me was rather snippy. Maybe if I keep up the limericks I will achieve David’s exalted status as an “invisible poster”. I thought my post to him was rather clever…how many other people can work the latin name of a hallucinogenic mushroom into a limerick?