... in the topic again and not following the thread. For years I taken the middle position by saying that: science enquires into When and How of our phenomenal world, whereas the Bible tells us Who and Why (i.e. ethics or relationships). Perhaps I'll hold onto that a little longer until I feel brave enough to venture into the topic again. ...

... interest in the topic again and not following the thread. For years I taken the middle position by saying that: science enquires into When and How of our phenomenal world, whereas the Bible tells us Who and Why (i.e. ethics or relationships). Perhaps I'll hold onto that a little longer until I feel brave enough to venture into the topic again. There's no ...

... in the topic again and not following the thread. For years I taken the middle position by saying that: science enquires into When and How of our phenomenal world, whereas the Bible tells us Who and Why (i.e. ethics or relationships). Perhaps I'll hold onto that a little longer until I feel brave enough to venture into the topic again. There's no ...

...'m loosing interest in the topic again and not following the thread. For years I taken the middle position by saying that: science enquires into When and How of our phenomenal world, whereas the Bible tells us Who and Why (i.e. ethics or relationships). Perhaps I'll hold onto that a little longer until I feel brave enough to venture into the topic again. There's no need ...

... and ID folks who deny evolution are either liars or followers of liars. For years I taken the middle position by saying that: science enquires into When and How of our phenomenal world, whereas the Bible tells us Who and Why (i.e. ethics or relationships). Perhaps I'll hold onto that a little longer until I feel brave enough to venture into the topic again. Cheers. No need ...

...Therefore I'm loosing interest in the topic again and not following the thread. For years I taken the middle position by saying that: science enquires into When and How of our phenomenal world, whereas the Bible tells us Who and Why (i.e. ethics or relationships). Perhaps I'll hold onto that a little longer until I feel brave enough to venture into the topic again. Cheers. ...

...chain! And this means that those who claim to believe the Bible, do not believe it, which should be obvious anyway, but the point is, that man is not the last step and so, the Bible isn't true, since it says that it is man that God ...'t exist stop them, right?  And why let the fact that the Bible says the opposite of evolution stop one from claiming to be a...

...> all of the millions and billions of steps in between the two, which means they proved it!" Funny - isn't that th same type of "proof" use by Creationists? "It's the Bible!" “Archaeopteryx was clearly a well developed bird, with true feathers.” - Alan Feduccia Again, cite please. Why is it that Creationists so rarely ever provide cites for their quotes? Could it be because ...

...a chain! And this means that those who claim to believe the Bible, do not believe it, which should be obvious anyway, but the point is, that man is not the last step and so, the Bible isn't true, since it says that it is man that God came...doesn't exist stop them, right? And why let the fact that the Bible says the opposite of evolution stop one from claiming to be a ...

... of a chain! And this means that those who claim to believe the Bible, do not believe it, which should be obvious anyway, but the point is, that man is not the last step and so, the Bible isn't true, since it says that it is man that God came to ...'t exist stop them, right? And why let the fact that the Bible says the opposite of evolution stop one from claiming to be a good ...