Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Religion and evolution [View all]spin
(17,493 posts)62. I agree...
as I said in my post:
The more I study the Bible the more contradictions I find. I view it as more of an assembly of stories authored by different people over many years and finally gathered into one book rather than the literal written word of God.
My question is how the churches that insist that the Bible is the literal word of God and creation happened in 7 days of 24 hours can explain the difference in the two creation stories in Genesis. The poster I replied to went to such a church and was having a difficult time with literalism.
Surely some in the congregation or Sunday school classes must raise the question of the two stories.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
98 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Anthropic fallacy: "Isn't it amazing that we are here, to be amazed that we are here?"
immoderate
Jan 2012
#42
I find it easier. No RW Cristian has been able to refute me, yet. There is always a yet.
Festivito
Jan 2012
#5
These questions are raised thousands of times every week all across the globe.
Thats my opinion
Jan 2012
#77
God lit the fuse, crouched down in a hole, butt facing the bomb, arms over his head...
hunter
Jan 2012
#17
As a null hypothesis, atheism is the only legitimate position unless...
Humanist_Activist
Jan 2012
#54
Stated very well: "unscientific bias that cannot be reconciled with his profession"
MarkCharles
Jan 2012
#55