How is good for non-believing children to be baptized? We are definitely to teach our children and to grow in the “nurture and admonition of the Lord” — but does that mean we are to baptize non-believers?

The only time Jesus broke a rule in the bible by healing someone on the Sabbath was for the good of mankind. I sincerely believe baptising children is for their own good also. We want to teach them and let them grow in the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Are as christians saying like the Pharisees He should not have healed on the Sabbath

Glad that most of the dialog is respectful.

Oh, this is SUCH a good quote!

You use the word “maybe” a lot.

Basically, we have a bunch of stuff in the ground with no history (other than the Bible, which you discount) to tell us how it got there. Every explanation about what happened in the past without eye witnesses is a guess — it may be correct or incorrect; it may be a very good guess, but it is still a guess.

All of the arguments from evolution about evolution insist on the fossil record showing ages of the earth. They got their long ages from looking at layers of the earth, and assuming that one layer equaled one year. They still more or less use that same assumption, although they add to it circular reasoning — they “know” what age a fossil is by what layer of rock it’s buried in, and they “know” the age of the rock by seeing which fossils it contains. More recently, they’ve added in radiometric dating, which we’ve already discussed, which has its own assumptions and problems.

But, back to the original issue — that of the origin of the human races. The other day, my children were watching 101 Dalmatians, and that made me think about the different breeds of dogs. There are huge dogs like Great Danes, and tiny dogs like teacup poodles. There are dogs with sharp, pointed muzzles (like Collies), and dogs with short, squatty muzzles (like pugs). There are dogs of all different colors, fur length (or even hairless), curly or straight fur, as well as spotted and single-colored dogs. Then there are the wild dogs, like wolves, coyotes, and dingoes. Creationists and evolutionists alike agree that these were all originally the same species, which diversified into the several species (although they would disagree about the time line involved). If this huge genetic diversity could arise in canines, why could not a much lesser degree of diversity (skin color, hair color and texture, eye color, nose hole, femur length, etc.) arise in humans, without the need for multiple human ancestors? Check out pictures of dog skulls to see a little bit of the intra-species variety that exists in dogs.

Also I do agree with what you are saying about women feeling they deserve to be paid to stay home for a certain length of time with their children. Many years ago when we were in a lawyer’s office signing papers to buy our farm my husband remembers seeing a sign on the lawyer’s desk that said something like this: “Everytime someone gets something he doesn’t pay for, someone else pays for something he doesn’t get”. Now isn’t that the truth!

Marilyn