MemberMay 2, 2021 at 8:25 pm
It’s a clever literary and academic manipulation of the laws of logic (called the fallacy of equivocation) to subtly change the meaning of the argument. The debate was never over whether or not God can use naturalistic means to fulfill His will. We’re sorry, we think we’ve said this three or four times before on this site. So for those who have been here listening to this debate before, we apologize for starting to sound like a broken record. The question is not over whether God can or does use naturalistic means to fulfill His will. Usually, He does. However, the Biblical text doesn’t support this explanation for supernatural miracles. So why is there such hostility towards the thought of God using supernatural mechanisms?
Charles Darwin did everything he could to erase God from science. His goal was to explain all science by natural laws alone, and to eradicate the Bible. Professing Christians are supposed to learn from the mistakes of foolish men. So why is there such a willingness for a dog to return to its own vomit (2 Peter 2:22) and do the same thing with history? By taking this position, one is not fighting against the armies of Israel, but against the God of Israel.