By believing in the demonic psyop we call evolution, you have already given the atheists ground to argue against you. You are letting them define reality. The Christian story of creation is the story of a fall from grace whereas the evolution narrative is the exact opposite, showing mankind's "rise" to being enlightened from the animal state to the human one. Of course your religion will not be very convincing when you try to mix it up with a contradictory narrative.
You've highlighted the only problem I still have with the theory if evolution yes. I don't think there's going to be a resolution to this problem any time near in the future yeah. Doesn't mean I'm going to completely dismiss it, but it means it's not completely likely either. James White defended this point well.
Yeah exactly, that's why they chimp out when I tell them to imagine I'm from a different culture somewhere in the world they've never heard off and that actually thinks that there is bravery and strenght in the domination of others by killing, and that thus killing is good, and ask them why should I be wrong in saying that.
I think the same about humans and thus do not apologize for any of you "whites" our Germany killed
You think you cant be opposed to randomly killing people if you lack the petty waste products of hebrew philosophy contained in the old testament and all its garbage it brought upon the world? Read a book sweaty
Marge what is that website?soyjak
soyjak.download
Well the Germany of your parents and mine lost in the end, you would've had a point if they had won, matter of fact if they had won nobody would question their actions and they'd prove themselves to be right. If the predator loses to the prey and gets eaten instead, the roles are reversed.
Why exactly? Young earth creationism is the position that pretty much every church father of the patristic age believed in. The Ecumenical Councils also directly refer to the age of the earth. Theistic evolution has no leg to stand on, whether from a rational or traditional perspective. You just believe in it because it's le current thing.
That's the equivalent of saying paganistic christianity. Judeo-Christianity doesn't exist. Kikes are heretics.
Yeah but they didn't exactly believe in young earth creationism as modern protestants did. For example, Augustine said that the account of genesis was allegorical and not to take literally, and in his mind God didn't create everything in seven days but instantly, in the blink of an eye. So to him the seven days teached something else than the historical precise way everything took place.
So basically, you do think that the earth is gazillions of years old or whatever. That contradicts the Ecumenical Councils directly.
Well tell me where in the 7 eucumenical councils is it stated the earth has to have been created in 7 days of 24 hours
You are taking the argument some place else. I said believing the idea that the earth is billions of years old or some other fairy tale contradicts the ecumenical councils. Address that and we'll get to your question after it.
ok but I still don't see where, like literally I'm trying to do my research and find nothing, all I see online on EO theology is people saying the Church officially doesn't take a stance
Canon 3 of the Council of Trullo mentions the age of the earth at that time : 6109. That is, 6109 years old at 692 AD. Don't pay attention to random Amerimutts pretending they know shit about our theology.
That's a lot of words to state you can't cope with the fact that you're wrong. But I'll address it regardless.
Doesn't matter, Eastern Orthodoxy accepts it and that's all that matters. The rest are heretics and their opinions are invalid.
This part displays your utter ignorance regarding the context the council took place. 6109 was the year in the Byzantine Era Calendar, which was the calendar used by all Orthodox until the 1700's or so. 6109 is referring to the years that have passed since the creation of the world. The current year would be 7532 in that calendar. With 5509 BC being the date of creation. Some numbers may not precisely add up at times and this is because the fathers were not concerned with precision when it came to determining the age of the universe, but they all agreed that it was more or less 5500 years old by the time of Christ's birth.
Retarded argument because you're assuming there was anything before the literal date of creation, kek.
Yes, I am fully willing and ready to reject a theory founded by a papist priest. Next question?
Did my research, the Byzantine Era callendar is not binding theology, it was merely used at the time to set the date at which the canons would be applicable for christendom. So you using this as a proof for young earth creationism as the only legitimate interpretation is dumb.
Catbox clone soot made long long ago, IIRC that’s the only part of the soyosphere he still controls
Some site soot made back in the day, pdf rel is an example of retarded jew "morals"
Are you slow? The year in the canon doesn't refer to years that have passed since Adam and Eve. It refers to the time that has passed since the creation itself. You can't just make a wild claim like that, because you are just re-interpreting what is directly written to suit your agenda.
Even the all too often quoted Blessed Augustine agrees with me.
You cannot argue against the fact that pretty much all of them would find the idea of the world being billions of years old to be anathema. Whether they thought the creation days were literal or in a single moment is irrelevant. The fact is that they didn't believe it happened within billions of years.
Then don't assume you know the theology of my own church more than I do. Believe in whatever you want, you are free to destroy yourself and your church with your wicked ideologies. But don't attempt to subvert mine.
It isn't because I don't agree with a certain theology that I don't know about it. I know what Jehovah's witnesses believe in and I understand parts of their theology, doesn't mean I agree with it, what is this kind of reasoning ?
