How do Creationists Explain Black Shale?

[Dale]

The animal sacrifice was in place of Jesus until he could come and be the sacrifice, the Passover lamb.
The fact that Christ died for us shows how much God loves us. He also didn't stay dead.
Acts 2:24
“But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.”

If God thought death was nice in any way shape or form he would not be calling it his enemy and throwing it into the same lake of fire as the devil, the beast and false prophet

Revelation 20
10 And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown.
14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.

1 Corinthians 15
26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.



Death was because of sin and only because of sin. Outside the garden there was no sin and the animals had been given plants to eat, all of them.
Genesis 1
30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

Why do you think everyone will be resurrected to life and that the lion will eat straw and lie with the lamb and that God says there will be no more death after he remakes the heavens and the earth?
Because immortal life was always the plan. It started with immortal life and it will end with immortal life, a full circle. The garden was a sample to mankind of how it could and will be.
This is why there were two trees, one was Gods way the other was the way of Self. Man had a choice. God created the earth and man in perfection so that he had understood exactly what he was choosing to give up when he took the fruit.

The new earth has two trees of life but just like in the garden they are not there to stop man from dying.
Rev 21
There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.

When man chose the way of knowledge he died spiritually and physically. Because you did this said God, from ash you were made and to ash you will return. Not because this is how I designed it, but because you disobeyed. For the wages of sin is death.

Psalm 104 recounts the creation and God’s role as Creator with no mention of Eden, a Fall of man, or an Expulsion from Eden.

It also has the following line:

The lions roar for their prey and seek their food from God. --Psalm 104:21 NIV


Psalm 104 treats predators as simply behaving the way God created them.

You close your post with “The wages of sin is death.” That is certainly true but it doesn’t refer to physical death but to spiritual death.

 

[Dale]

The animal sacrifice was in place of Jesus until he could come and be the sacrifice, the Passover lamb.
The fact that Christ died for us shows how much God loves us. He also didn't stay dead.
Acts 2:24
“But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.”

If God thought death was nice in any way shape or form he would not be calling it his enemy and throwing it into the same lake of fire as the devil, the beast and false prophet

Revelation 20
10 And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown.
14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.

1 Corinthians 15
26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.



Death was because of sin and only because of sin. Outside the garden there was no sin and the animals had been given plants to eat, all of them.
Genesis 1
30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

Why do you think everyone will be resurrected to life and that the lion will eat straw and lie with the lamb and that God says there will be no more death after he remakes the heavens and the earth?
Because immortal life was always the plan. It started with immortal life and it will end with immortal life, a full circle. The garden was a sample to mankind of how it could and will be.
This is why there were two trees, one was Gods way the other was the way of Self. Man had a choice. God created the earth and man in perfection so that he had understood exactly what he was choosing to give up when he took the fruit.

The new earth has two trees of life but just like in the garden they are not there to stop man from dying.
Rev 21
There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.

When man chose the way of knowledge he died spiritually and physically. Because you did this said God, from ash you were made and to ash you will return. Not because this is how I designed it, but because you disobeyed. For the wages of sin is death.

Coffee,

You point to Genesis 1:30: “I give every green plant for food.”

In many cases, an animal eating a plant kills the plant. This isn’t true of eating an apple or an orange, but when you eat a potato or a carrot, you kill the plant. You are concerned about animals dying but you don’t take any account of plants dying.


Coffee: “Death was because of sin and only because of sin.”

Animals can’t sin because they don’t know right from wrong. I don’t understand why animals suffer the penalty of death for the sin of Adam and Eve. It makes much more sense to believe that animals were never immortal in the first place.

God tells fish and birds to multiply and increase in number in Genesis 1:22. This implies that they are not immortal because if they live forever, and also multiply, this would lead to overcrowding.

 

[coffee4u]

Here is the issue. You are tossing your own ideas against facts. Why would you make an "idea" about biology just instantaneously? It is just showing you are biased. You are saying "some may have been instant some have been gradual" and to me, you are wrestling what you don't want to admit which is deep down evolution makes sense.

Lets put aside the carnivores, but even with herbivores. What is the use of eating in general? Teeth alone is a useless feature because they don't need to eat, they can't verbally communicate like we do either. Even nostrils would be useless because why need oxygen or the sense of smell?

It doesn't matter if you think it's corruption, because at the end God had to redesign and shape us to adapt to a changing planet and that is what evolution is.

You asked already knowing that we don't have details, so obviously you were bating.
Biology is man's study of nature. Scripture is revealed truth. God said he gave plants to all the animals for food, then that is what he did, including animals that are now carnivores.

And yes the world and everything on it is corrupted. It is groaning. Again this is what scripture says.

That is not what evolution is. Evolution is the theory that life began as a one cell organism that evolved into everything that we see today. Gradually, slowly over millions of years. Including mankind evolving from some type of ape like ancestor and along with all of that is millions of years of death. It doesn't fit into scripture, it isn't suggested in scripture. It is 100% man made wisdom.
James 3:15
This wisdom is not that which comes down from above, but is earthly, natural, demonic.

 

[coffee4u]

Psalm 104 recounts the creation and God’s role as Creator with no mention of Eden, a Fall of man, or an Expulsion from Eden.

It also has the following line:

The lions roar for their prey and seek their food from God. --Psalm 104:21 NIV


Psalm 104 treats predators as simply behaving the way God created them.

You close your post with “The wages of sin is death.” That is certainly true but it doesn’t refer to physical death but to spiritual death.

Psalms are poems and songs, they take liberty with language, they are not meant as literal history but as mind pictures.
Psalm 19
“You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands.”
Was written to suggest that leaves waving in the breeze are hands clapping and that mountains with spring flowers are bursting into song. Not that trees literally have hands or that hills have vocal cords to sing with.
While they can be back up verses to doctrine they themselves can't be the backbone of one. They are meant to be taken as was intended -as poetry.

Psalm 104
The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment;
he stretches out the heavens like a tent
3 and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters.
He makes the clouds his chariot
and rides on the wings of the wind.
4 He makes winds his messengers,
flames of fire his servants.
And so on... using a great amount of poetic language.

The Psalms were mostly written by David so of course he said "The lions roar for their prey and seek their food" because that is what he saw, he was a shepherded who protected the flock from wild animals.
You do realize that David was born a longtime after the fall don't you? Lions only ate plants after creation and before the fall.

30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
This was before the fall. There was no one else there but Adam and Eve. It probably only lasted a few days or weeks since Eve did not become pregnant until they left the garden.

“The wages of sin is death.” refers to both spiritual and physical death.
Because Adam disobeyed he would now return to dust.

Their spiritual death occurred as soon as they ate.
She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
Spiritual death.

Their physical death began at the curse.
To Adam he said,
“Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’
“Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.”
This was God punishment for Adam and for mankind.
God gave down this punishment because he disobeyed and for no other reason. The wages of sin is death. Spiritual and physical.

 

[coffee4u]

Coffee,

You point to Genesis 1:30: “I give every green plant for food.”

In many cases, an animal eating a plant kills the plant. This isn’t true of eating an apple or an orange, but when you eat a potato or a carrot, you kill the plant. You are concerned about animals dying but you don’t take any account of plants dying.


Coffee: “Death was because of sin and only because of sin.”

Animals can’t sin because they don’t know right from wrong. I don’t understand why animals suffer the penalty of death for the sin of Adam and Eve. It makes much more sense to believe that animals were never immortal in the first place.

God tells fish and birds to multiply and increase in number in Genesis 1:22. This implies that they are not immortal because if they live forever, and also multiply, this would lead to overcrowding.

You know Dale its utterly pointless talking to you because you have never listened to a single word I have ever said to you. On at least 2-3 occasions now I have explained that in ancient Hebrew culture that plants don't die. Scripture only ever equates death to creatures with the breath of life and to nothing else. Plants were said to wither and fade not die. This time I am not digging out the Hebrew.

Jeremiah 5:21
Hear this, you foolish and senseless people, who have eyes but do not see, who have ears but do not hear:

 

[Cis.jd]

You asked already knowing that we don't have details, so obviously you were bating.
Biology is man's study of nature. Scripture is revealed truth. God said he gave plants to all the animals for food, then that is what he did, including animals that are now carnivores.

And yes the world and everything on it is corrupted. It is groaning. Again this is what scripture says.

That is not what evolution is. Evolution is the theory that life began as a one cell organism that evolved into everything that we see today. Gradually, slowly over millions of years. Including mankind evolving from some type of ape like ancestor and along with all of that is millions of years of death. It doesn't fit into scripture, it isn't suggested in scripture. It is 100% man made wisdom.
James 3:15
This wisdom is not that which comes down from above, but is earthly, natural, demonic.

You implied that it was "instantaneous" which was just your idea. Scripture is purely spiritual, God never revealed himself for the purpose of explaining or teaching man science so you should not make the Bible to be the answer for such.

You are seeing the Bible for something it was not meant for and you can't reject evidence because it goes against what you want to believe because you are degrading the Bible with a negative reputation of being fiction. Your own common sense has been telling you that there is no way any of the current animals or anything we know out of biology was the same before the fall.

The beginning was highly different than what we can imagine through reading Genesis, it could have been a different universe that wasn't like this with all life being spirits.

 

[coffee4u]

You implied that it was "instantaneous" which was just your idea. Scripture is purely spiritual, God never revealed himself for the purpose of explaining or teaching man science so you should not make the Bible to be the answer for such.

You are seeing the Bible for something it was not meant for and you can't reject evidence because it goes against what you want to believe because you are degrading the Bible with a negative reputation of being fiction. Your own common sense has been telling you that there is no way any of the current animals or anything we know out of biology was the same before the fall.

The beginning was highly different than what we can imagine through reading Genesis, it could have been a different universe that wasn't like this with all life being spirits.

And why can't the beginning be exactly as outlined in scripture Cis.jd? Why do you feel that is impossible? I will tell you why, its because you have more trust in fallen humanity than in scripture. You see this 'evidence' and jump.

I can easily reject 'evidence' claimed by sinful fallen human beings because mankind is not God, nor is he trustworthy at all plus he has no access to a world that he has never seen, or experienced. Scripture never indicates anything but creation and it fits from the first word until the last word. When God clearly says something that goes against what a sinful human being says you can bet I will always go with what God has said not some man who talks a good talk.

God says:
Genesis 2:7
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Man says:
"Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years."
And they are vastly different.
Apparently they are more reliable to you than scripture. That's your choice. I also have a choice and I reject what mankind has come up with.

All the animals were created to eat plants because that is what scripture says. It can't be tested because that world where things worked that way is gone as I have said many times before. Of course they weren't the same before the fall, who said they were? Also they were kinds not specific animals.

Maybe the change was all instantaneous maybe it wasn't. If God changed everything in 5 seconds or if some changes were instantaneous and some happened over a few years I don't know, don't care about and is of no importance.

Do you also have issues with Jesus changing water into wine instantaneously? How about the storm stopping? The blind seeing? Miracles were often instantaneous.

Scripture is not purely spiritual. It is both real/earthly and spiritual.
John 3:12
I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?
People need to first believe in the earthly before they can grasp the spiritual.

Do you think Jesus came as a spiritual baby who died a purely spiritual death? Was that water he changed into wine only spiritual?
No, his body was flesh and he died a physical death and real people drank real wine.

 

[Dale]

And why can't the beginning be exactly as outlined in scripture Cis.jd? Why do you feel that is impossible? I will tell you why, its because you have more trust in fallen humanity than in scripture. You see this 'evidence' and jump.

I can easily reject 'evidence' claimed by sinful fallen human beings because mankind is not God, nor is he trustworthy at all plus he has no access to a world that he has never seen, or experienced. Scripture never indicates anything but creation and it fits from the first word until the last word. When God clearly says something that goes against what a sinful human being says you can bet I will always go with what God has said not some man who talks a good talk.

God says:
Genesis 2:7
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Man says:
"Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years."
And they are vastly different.
Apparently they are more reliable to you than scripture. That's your choice. I also have a choice and I reject what mankind has come up with.

All the animals were created to eat plants because that is what scripture says. It can't be tested because that world where things worked that way is gone as I have said many times before. Of course they weren't the same before the fall, who said they were? Also they were kinds not specific animals.

Maybe the change was all instantaneous maybe it wasn't. If God changed everything in 5 seconds or if some changes were instantaneous and some happened over a few years I don't know, don't care about and is of no importance.

Do you also have issues with Jesus changing water into wine instantaneously? How about the storm stopping? The blind seeing? Miracles were often instantaneous.

Scripture is not purely spiritual. It is both real/earthly and spiritual.
John 3:12
I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?
People need to first believe in the earthly before they can grasp the spiritual.

Do you think Jesus came as a spiritual baby who died a purely spiritual death? Was that water he changed into wine only spiritual?
No, his body was flesh and he died a physical death and real people drank real wine.

Coffee: “And why can't the beginning be exactly as outlined in scripture Cis.jd?”

The simple answer is not always the correct answer. The Bible doesn’t say how old the earth is.

How do you know that scripture was ever intended to be taken literally? Genesis was composed for people who lived thousands of years ago. It isn’t easy for us to understand how the world looked to them. Creationists haven’t tried to understand what Genesis meant to the original target audience. They just assume it was written for them.

I have seen no sign that creationists understand the Bible. There are clearly two creation stories in the first chapters of Genesis but no creationist will admit this.

 

[coffee4u]

Coffee: “And why can't the beginning be exactly as outlined in scripture Cis.jd?”

The simple answer is not always the correct answer. The Bible doesn’t say how old the earth is.

No it doesn't which is why I am not a pure 6000 year creationist, which is also why I don't follow James Ussher.
I am open to 6 to 20 thousand. What I am not open to is millions of years which is only for evolution.

And sometimes the simple answer is the correct answer.

How do you know that scripture was ever intended to be taken literally?

How do you know it isn't?

Parts of scripture are literal other parts are not. But if scripture is all only spiritual then Jesus -not a real man, who died a real death who was raised back to actual life.
Do you believe those 3 points were real?
If you say real then why? What if a non Christian said to you, "How do you know he was real?"

All of scripture agrees and is harmonious with creation. There is no hint of evolution and no way to fit it into the narrative. If Genesis is a parable or prophetic vision or something else why is that never hinted at, anywhere?

God says he created over 6 days in Exodus. Did he lie? If I can't trust God when he says that then how could I trust anything else that he says?

Sin either caused death or it didn't. If evolution occurred then millions of years of death occurred and God was fine with it even though its his enemy. How does that fit in with sin causes death? It's made death nothing more then a side effect of life.

What is it in scripture that would make you say "Genesis is not literal" if the answer to that is nothing, that says it all. In that case be honest and say you trust mankind's investigation and findings more.

There are also plenty of articles outlining why you can take Genesis literally.
Should Genesis be taken literally - creation.com
Bible Authors and a Literal Genesis

Genesis was composed for people who lived thousands of years ago. It isn’t easy for us to understand how the world looked to them. Creationists haven’t tried to understand what Genesis meant to the original target audience. They just assume it was written for them.

Scripture is for everyone across all time until the end.
Those who listened to Jesus preach very much believed in 6 day creation and he preached to them knowing that this was an understood thing.
When he quoted from Genesis he didn't explain what it meant.
Matthew 19:5
and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?
They knew the origin of marriage went back to Genesis.

I have seen no sign that creationists understand the Bible. There are clearly two creation stories in the first chapters of Genesis but no creationist will admit this.

No there is not. All chapter 2 does is focus in on the garden.

There are four gospels, each one takes a slightly different look at the life of Christ, some focus on one thing while another may not. This doesn't mean they are not all real eye whiteness accounts. There are people around who make claims that the Gospels are not to be trusted because they 'contradict'. No they don't, they compliment each other and bring in new perspective due to different authors. People want them to contradict to further there own narrative and this is the same thing happening to Genesis 1 and 2. They are complimentary accounts of the same event each with its own focus.

If you want to make a claim for Genesis being an allegory or a parable it is you who have to prove that -from scripture.

 

[Cis.jd]

And why can't the beginning be exactly as outlined in scripture Cis.jd? Why do you feel that is impossible? I will tell you why, its because you have more trust in fallen humanity than in scripture. You see this 'evidence' and jump.

I can easily reject 'evidence' claimed by sinful fallen human beings because mankind is not God, nor is he trustworthy at all plus he has no access to a world that he has never seen, or experienced. Scripture never indicates anything but creation and it fits from the first word until the last word. When God clearly says something that goes against what a sinful human being says you can bet I will always go with what God has said not some man who talks a good talk.

God says:
Genesis 2:7
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Man says:
"Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years."
And they are vastly different.
Apparently they are more reliable to you than scripture. That's your choice. I also have a choice and I reject what mankind has come up with.

All the animals were created to eat plants because that is what scripture says. It can't be tested because that world where things worked that way is gone as I have said many times before. Of course they weren't the same before the fall, who said they were? Also they were kinds not specific animals.

Maybe the change was all instantaneous maybe it wasn't. If God changed everything in 5 seconds or if some changes were instantaneous and some happened over a few years I don't know, don't care about and is of no importance.

Do you also have issues with Jesus changing water into wine instantaneously? How about the storm stopping? The blind seeing? Miracles were often instantaneous.

Scripture is not purely spiritual. It is both real/earthly and spiritual.
John 3:12
I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?
People need to first believe in the earthly before they can grasp the spiritual.

Do you think Jesus came as a spiritual baby who died a purely spiritual death? Was that water he changed into wine only spiritual?
No, his body was flesh and he died a physical death and real people drank real wine.

Several reasons why the beginning is not scientifically outlined or explained in scripture.
1. It's not important, everything that in this world is meant for our own discovery. The Bible is meant for man's relationship with God. That is the focus, purpose and intent of the written word. There is over 1,200 pages in the Bible, why would God waste the space to talk about things that offer nothing to our salvation?
2. There is no way people from BC to the early 20th century would understand it anyway because humanity did not develop this kind of knowledge yet. People today need to spend years to understand things we've already learned in basic science class, what more for the people back then who had not even a concept of the water cycle, electricity, or didn't know other continents in this planet existed?

It's not because I have "trust in fallen humanity over scripture" it's because I stopped classifying the Bible for what it is not - which is a book about the natural universe. You should not make your own understanding of things to be considered "following scripture" because the reality is you are making scripture to represent what you want and interpreted it to be.

You can't reject evidence when it is given, even if it doesn't align to a traditional concept interpreted from scripture because when you face someone who isn't a believer yet knows the facts about the world, how do you think Bible is going to look to him? You can't just think that since you believe in God you know more than he does and everything you don't agree with is just lies, because that is fanaticism rather than faith.

 

[coffee4u]

Several reasons why the beginning is not scientifically outlined or explained in scripture.

It is you bringing up science not I. Never said scripture was science.
Science is mans efforts at understanding the world
Scripture is God revealing the truth. Should scripture ever go against man man findings it is scripture that should be held up and above, not man made findings.

1. It's not important, everything that in this world is meant for our own discovery.

Who says it is?

All you will discover is how the groaning corrupt world works, not how it worked before the flood or before the fall. You can't discover what is no longer here.

The Bible is meant for man's relationship with God. That is the focus, purpose and intent of the written word. There is over 1,200 pages in the Bible, why would God waste the space to talk about things that offer nothing to our salvation?

We stand with creation and the fall because it's a vital part of the gospel. Why else did you think we argue so strongly for it? So we could picture lions skipping around eating hay?

1. It forms a foundation for the rest of Scripture. It teaches us the why.
When someone asks "Why did he die? "Why is there this suffering?" The creation and fall answers that. That mankind was created in perfection but fell into sin and that sin is why. Sin is responsible for all the death and suffering that we see.
Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

2. Understanding that you are a fallen sinful human being is needed to come to Christ.

Acts 3:19
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.

And where did that sin come from to start with? From Adam
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

Who is Adam?
20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.But for Adam no suitable helper was found.
Right back to Genesis

I would love to see an explanation for sin without Adam or the fall.

2. There is no way people from BC to the early 20th century would understand it anyway because humanity did not develop this kind of knowledge yet. People today need to spend years to understand things we've already learned in basic science class, what more for the people back then who had not even a concept of the water cycle, electricity, or didn't know other continents in this planet existed?

Why do you keep thinking that their understanding was needed?
Do you think they understood why God gave them hygiene laws? No. All they had to do was believe, trust and obey.

It's not because I have "trust in fallen humanity over scripture" it's because I stopped classifying the Bible for what it is not - which is a book about the natural universe. You should not make your own understanding of things to be considered "following scripture" because the reality is you are making scripture to represent what you want and interpreted it to be.

Did Adam's sin bring in death? Yes or no?

You can't reject evidence when it is given, even if it doesn't align to a traditional concept interpreted from scripture because when you face someone who isn't a believer yet knows the facts about the world, how do you think Bible is going to look to him? You can't just think that since you believe in God you know more than he does and everything you don't agree with is just lies, because that is fanaticism rather than faith.

I can reject something when I know that what they are making claims about no longer exists.

And when they ask you why there is suffering and what is sin and read Romans 5:12
and ask you "Who is this one man this talks about?" What will you say?

Evolution promotes the idea that God is not needed and that man is merely an animal. It destroys both the gospel as well as the nature of God. Evolution is the reason for the general lack of faith that people have. They have more faith in science then in God's word, and trying to fit God into it does not work. Everything it stands for is completely incompatible with scripture.
John 3:12

12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?
They don't believe in sin or the sovereignty of God because of their world view. Why should they believe in God when they don't even see him as needed. The world made itself after all. And what do you do, agree with them and try and shove God into that world view. The results? Worldly churches claiming things like 'you are all god's and 'God loves you and there is no such thing as sin'. These people have not come to Christ in repentance of their sin. They haven't denounced their sin and now live for Christ in purity. They have sermons talking about love and tolerance and how they are all 'gods'. Nothing about sin, nothing about hell, nothing about scripture except a verse taken out of context. God is an image, an idea they have set up for what they want God to be. That is not Christianity but counterfeit Christianity and they are still lost in their sins.
2 Timothy 4:3
3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather round them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

Matthew 10:28
28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

[Cis.jd]

It is you bringing up science not I. Never said scripture was science.
Science is mans efforts at understanding the world
Scripture is God revealing the truth. Should scripture ever go against man man findings it is scripture that should be held up and above, not man made findings.

We are in a discussion that involves science and you have been actively participating it, while using the Bible as your basis to reject something scientific so in you are making scripture to be science.

And no, scripture should not be held above any scientific discovery that has been proven because that is making scripture a science book, so you are actually saying scripture to be something it's not.

Who says it is?
All you will discover is how the groaning corrupt world works, not how it worked before the flood or before the fall. You can't discover what is no longer here.

Because the Bible is not meant for it. God did not reveal the workings of the universe in scripture and did not intend it to be so, so by logical sense the natural world is of our own discovery.
You don't read anything in scripture talking to you about planets like Neptune, Jupiter, or Saturn. You don't have anything in scripture telling you how volcanoes work, how tornados happen, how to do physics, how to engineer a car do you? We discovered all of that.

We stand with creation and the fall because it's a vital part of the gospel. Why else did you think we argue so strongly for it? So we could picture lions skipping around eating hay?

1. It forms a foundation for the rest of Scripture. It teaches us the why.
When someone asks "Why did he die? "Why is there this suffering?" The creation and fall answers that. That mankind was created in perfection but fell into sin and that sin is why. Sin is responsible for all the death and suffering that we see.
Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

2. Understanding that you are a fallen sinful human being is needed to come to Christ.

Acts 3:19
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.

And where did that sin come from to start with? From Adam
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

Who is Adam?
20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.But for Adam no suitable helper was found.
Right back to Genesis

I would love to see an explanation for sin without Adam or the fall.


Why do you keep thinking that their understanding was needed?
Do you think they understood why God gave them hygiene laws? No. All they had to do was believe, trust and obey.



Did Adam's sin bring in death? Yes or no?



I can reject something when I know that what they are making claims about no longer exists.

And when they ask you why there is suffering and what is sin and read Romans 5:12
and ask you "Who is this one man this talks about?" What will you say?

Evolution promotes the idea that God is not needed and that man is merely an animal. It destroys both the gospel as well as the nature of God. Evolution is the reason for the general lack of faith that people have. They have more faith in science then in God's word, and trying to fit God into it does not work. Everything it stands for is completely incompatible with scripture.
John 3:12

12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?
They don't believe in sin or the sovereignty of God because of their world view. Why should they believe in God when they don't even see him as needed. The world made itself after all. And what do you do, agree with them and try and shove God into that world view. The results? Worldly churches claiming things like 'you are all god's and 'God loves you and there is no such thing as sin'. These people have not come to Christ in repentance of their sin. They haven't denounced their sin and now live for Christ in purity. They have sermons talking about love and tolerance and how they are all 'gods'. Nothing about sin, nothing about hell, nothing about scripture except a verse taken out of context. God is an image, an idea they have set up for what they want God to be. That is not Christianity but counterfeit Christianity and they are still lost in their sins.
2 Timothy 4:3
3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather round them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

Matthew 10:28
28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

First of all, it's only bible fanatics that argue strongly for the creation story to be complete and literal. Second, your entire response is meaningless because in the end, the fact is animals could not have been the same. I don't care if you think its because of sin or what not, because no matter what you believe is the cause the fact is animals had to biologically change in order to adapt and also play their roles in nature. What about animals with poison skin, why would they have those type of cells or physical traits back then? What about animals that have spikes, pincers, and such that help them defend from predators or to kill their pray, are they also with that in the garden? This entire response has nothing at all that is useful as to why evolution isn't fact, the reality is you are so bias into your views that you do not care about anything else because it is automatically unacceptable to you regardless of it having so much evidence.

 

[coffee4u]

We are in a discussion that involves science and you have been actively participating it, while using the Bible as your basis to reject something scientific so in you are making scripture to be science.

Scripture is God revealing the truth. It doesn't take observation, tests or repeatability. If God says he created in 6 days, then he created in 6 days. If a donkey spoke, it spoke; and if Jesus turned water into wine immediately then that is what he did. Supernatural miracles do not follow any laws of observable science, they just are.
Science is man observing, testing the world and drawing conclusions about natural things.
The worlds creation was not natural but supernatural, it was a miracle and like all miracles it can't be tested.

These are not the same. If mans ideas contradict the Bible it is men who are wrong. Either because he is mistaken, doesn't have all the facts or is drawing conclusions about things without proper testing or is making claims about something that can't actually be tested. God is the higher truth not mans knowledge.

And no, scripture should not be held above any scientific discovery that has been proven because that is making scripture a science book, so you are actually saying scripture to be something it's not.

What you are calling proof, is not proof.
Evolution has never and will never be proven. The closest mankind gets to proof over anything are things that consistently work and test a certain way in the here and now.
Something like gravity could said to have strong evidence backing it but proving anything is an impossibility.
Scientific Proof Is A Myth
Scientific Proof Is A Myth

Because the Bible is not meant for it. God did not reveal the workings of the universe in scripture and did not intend it to be so, so by logical sense the natural world is of our own discovery.
You don't read anything in scripture talking to you about planets like Neptune, Jupiter, or Saturn. You don't have anything in scripture telling you how volcanoes work, how tornados happen, how to do physics, how to engineer a car do you? We discovered all of that.

When someone builds a car it is built now, driven now, observed and tested now. You are not making claims about a car that was supposedly built 6 billion years ago.
I have said many times I have no issues with most science in the here and now.

First of all, it's only bible fanatics that argue strongly for the creation story to be complete and literal. Second, your entire response is meaningless because in the end, the fact is animals could not have been the same. I don't care if you think its because of sin or what not, because no matter what you believe is the cause the fact is animals had to biologically change in order to adapt and also play their roles in nature. What about animals with poison skin, why would they have those type of cells or physical traits back then? What about animals that have spikes, pincers, and such that help them defend from predators or to kill their pray, are they also with that in the garden? This entire response has nothing at all that is useful as to why evolution isn't fact, the reality is you are so bias into your views that you do not care about anything else because it is automatically unacceptable to you regardless of it having so much evidence.

Yet again-there were no predators at creation nothing had to protect itself and nothing was poisonous. Eden was a sample of how the new earth will be. You could ask how will God revert everything back, such as the lion eating straw? Or maybe you don't believe this either?

How you enplane sin without Adam or the fall?

 

[Cis.jd]

Scripture is God revealing the truth. It doesn't take observation, tests or repeatability. If God says he created in 6 days, then he created in 6 days. If a donkey spoke, it spoke; and if Jesus turned water into wine immediately then that is what he did. Supernatural miracles do not follow any laws of observable science, they just are.
Science is man observing, testing the world and drawing conclusions about natural things.
The worlds creation was not natural but supernatural, it was a miracle and like all miracles it can't be tested.

But as I said, scripture is not about how/why/when in regards to the knowledge of the physical universe. This is the mistake you are making. You are mistakenly making scripture the truth in regards to physical/natural explanations when it's not. Science is the truth when it comes this category and we can not deny evidence that has been discovered and proven to be legit. Supernatural is just something we have not been able to explain or dissect. God created the natural universe, every atom and ever molecule, if some mystery is naturally explained then it just means we saw his recipe and doesn't mean it is no longer a miracle.

Evolution itself can be seen as a miracle, just as Dr William Craig explained in his debate with Christopher Hitchens, because for certain cells or biological imprints to be able to rapidly change (which would normally take years longer) hints a divine mastermind behind the process because the fact that life is so ordered and backed up with natural resources to prevent natural extinction is just to brilliant to be thought of as an accident.

These are not the same. If mans ideas contradict the Bible it is men who are wrong. Either because he is mistaken, doesn't have all the facts or is drawing conclusions about things without proper testing or is making claims about something that can't actually be tested. God is the higher truth not mans knowledge.

But man can also misinterpret and misuse the Bible. If your claims of what the Bible says contradicts what is already known to be fact then it is either the Bible is wrong or your views of it our. Since the Bible is truth then it is your views that are wrong.

For example, look at Genesis' description of the moon it describes it as an independent light. It is a ball of light made at the same time as the sun and stars and it is described in the same manner. You know that the moon isn't an actual ball of light and I bet you that if some christian came to you and said the moon is an independent light, you know that christian is uneducated because the moon is just reflecting the light from the sun.

 

[The Barbarian]

Did Adam's sin bring in death? Yes or no?

We can answer this question by looking at God's word. He tells Adam that if he eats from the tree, he will die that day. Adam eats from the tree and lives on physically for many years thereafter. So if God tells the truth, we know the "death" is not a physical one.

It was a spiritual death that separated Adam from God.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

We can answer this question by looking at God's word. He tells Adam that if he eats from the tree, he will die that day. Adam eats from the tree and lives on physically for many years thereafter. So if God tells the truth, we know the "death" is not a physical one.

It was a spiritual death that separated Adam from God.

Good point.

The Hebrew word for die is "mut." It is actually found twice in Genesis 2:17
It is translated various ways:

(KJV+) But of the treeH4480 H6086 of the knowledgeH1847 of goodH2896 and evil,H7451 thou shalt notH3808 eatH398 ofH4480 it: forH3588 in the dayH3117 that thou eatestH398 thereofH4480 thou shalt surely die.H4191 H4191 (mut mut)

(LITV) but of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil you may not eat, for in the day that you eat of it, dying you shall die.

(LSV) but from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, you do not eat from it, for in the day of your eating from it—dying you die.”
.
(YLT) and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it—dying thou dost die.'​

It is also interesting that the word "death" in Is 53 is the plural form, "deaths"

Isaiah 53:9
9. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.​

TSK death: Heb. deaths
JFB in his death — Hebrew, “deaths.”

I read this to mean: If you eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, on that day you will die spiritually, and because that spiritual death, you will eventually physically die also.

 

[Dale]

Scripture is God revealing the truth. It doesn't take observation, tests or repeatability. If God says he created in 6 days, then he created in 6 days. If a donkey spoke, it spoke; and if Jesus turned water into wine immediately then that is what he did. Supernatural miracles do not follow any laws of observable science, they just are.
Science is man observing, testing the world and drawing conclusions about natural things.
The worlds creation was not natural but supernatural, it was a miracle and like all miracles it can't be tested.

These are not the same. If mans ideas contradict the Bible it is men who are wrong. Either because he is mistaken, doesn't have all the facts or is drawing conclusions about things without proper testing or is making claims about something that can't actually be tested. God is the higher truth not mans knowledge.



What you are calling proof, is not proof.
Evolution has never and will never be proven. The closest mankind gets to proof over anything are things that consistently work and test a certain way in the here and now.
Something like gravity could said to have strong evidence backing it but proving anything is an impossibility.
Scientific Proof Is A Myth
Scientific Proof Is A Myth

When someone builds a car it is built now, driven now, observed and tested now. You are not making claims about a car that was supposedly built 6 billion years ago.
I have said many times I have no issues with most science in the here and now.

Yet again-there were no predators at creation nothing had to protect itself and nothing was poisonous. Eden was a sample of how the new earth will be. You could ask how will God revert everything back, such as the lion eating straw? Or maybe you don't believe this either?

How you enplane sin without Adam or the fall?

Coffee: “How you enplane sin without Adam or the fall?”

Very easily. Sin exists because mortals are finite and mortals are fallible.


Coffee: << Supernatural miracles do not follow any laws of observable science, they just are.
Science is man observing, testing the world and drawing conclusions about natural things.
The worlds creation was not natural but supernatural, it was a miracle and like all miracles it can't be tested. >>

To you, miracles offer freedom from logic. Since nothing is supposed to make sense, don’t try to understand it. Yet when we look around, almost everywhere we see cause and effect.

 

[The Barbarian]

I read this to mean: If you eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, on that day you will die spiritually, and because that spiritual death, you will eventually physically die also.

That's not what God said to Adam, of course. I've heard some creationists say that this is an error in the Bible, but it seems so unlikely over something that important that I just can't think so.

 

[coffee4u]

But as I said, scripture is not about how/why/when in regards to the knowledge of the physical universe. This is the mistake you are making. You are mistakenly making scripture the truth in regards to physical/natural explanations when it's not.

And you have divorced the two.

Scripture does not say when, but it does say how.
Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

As to why, God created the world and mankind for his glory.
Isaiah 43:6b–7
“Bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth, everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made.”

Science is the truth when it comes this category and we can not deny evidence that has been discovered and proven to be legit.

God alone is the truth.
Psalm 119:160
The entirety of Your word is truth,

science
noun
"The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment."

Science is simply an intellectual endeavour by men. You talk about science as if it were some kind of all knowing, never wrong entity, that it is God like and should be upheld as truth. it isn't truth nor is it proof. It is simply mankind's best guess-fallen humanity who do not believe in God.
You don't have to look far to find mistakes.
Thlalidomide: Thought to be safe it was given to woman in the 1950s and early 1960s for the treatment of nausea in pregnancy.
Results: Severe birth defects in thousands of children

Men make mistakes, men lie, men assume, men also reject God and want him gone. Of course they came up with a theory that allows the world itself to be a type of god, that the world made itself. Taking that theory and simply slapping God onto one side claiming God must have done it this way because sinful, lying, atheistic men said it is proven is putting man above God. They may clever, they may be Nobel prize winners, they may have designed rockets, so what. They are still nothing compared to God.

1 Corinthians 1:25
For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Supernatural is just something we have not been able to explain or dissect. God created the natural universe, every atom and ever molecule, if some mystery is naturally explained then it just means we saw his recipe and doesn't mean it is no longer a miracle.

Evolution itself can be seen as a miracle, just as Dr William Craig explained in his debate with Christopher Hitchens, because for certain cells or biological imprints to be able to rapidly change (which would normally take years longer) hints a divine mastermind behind the process because the fact that life is so ordered and backed up with natural resources to prevent natural extinction is just to brilliant to be thought of as an accident.

If God had used evolution, if he had slowly over millions of years changed an ape like creature into a man he would not have told us a completely opposite account. He would have included it in scripture in the literal parts, there would be hints through the poetry, it would all hang together and make sense with evolution, but it doesn't, anywhere.
The only reason you believe in evolution is because of what scientists who are just men have said, and you trust their word above scripture. That's it.

And don't say the Bible only deals with the spiritual, no it doesn't. God talks about the physical as does Jesus who by the way came here physically as a man to die physically.
1 John 4:2-3.
“By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God.”

Again we have come back to death. Death is God's sworn enemy whose fate is in the same lake of fire as Satan, the false prophet and the beast. God would never allow his enemy to shape his creation.

But man can also misinterpret and misuse the Bible.

The same way he can misinterpret and misuse what he thinks are facts.
The entirety of scripture supports creation. Not just one chapter.
Also if God had wanted Genesis to be read as a parable he would have said so. There would be many indicators for that, but there isn't. Nothing in scripture indicates creation to be anything other than literal. You are coming back to stand on science, because that is all you have. You can't make a theological case from scripture because scripture interprets scripture and it loudly proclaims special creation and the fall bringing about death multiple times -you just don't trust it to be actually true.

If your claims of what the Bible says contradicts what is already known to be fact then it is either the Bible is wrong or your views of it our. Since the Bible is truth then it is your views that are wrong.

Since you are claiming my interpretation of scripture is wrong then make a theological argument for your views on Genesis and all the other verses.

If death went on for millions of years as simply a natural part of life and isn't due to sin then explain what God really meant when he said to Adam.
17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’
By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

For example, look at Genesis' description of the moon it describes it as an independent light.

No it doesn't. That's an argument flat earth believers hold to.

It is a ball of light made at the same time as the sun and stars and it is described in the same manner. You know that the moon isn't an actual ball of light and I bet you that if some christian came to you and said the moon is an independent light, you know that christian is uneducated because the moon is just reflecting the light from the sun.

You will find all of us who hold to special creation apart from aforementioned group agree that the moon is reflecting the suns light -as far as we can tell. Again nothing is proven, but we agree that it most likely is.
Now if there was an actual verse teaching that the moon made its own light that would be different, but there isn't one.

This is the claimed verse
Genesis 1:15
15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so.
Except it doesn't say that the moon is an independent light source making its own light, only that the moon gives light to the earth- and it does that. If you walk into your backyard on a moonlight night with no clouds and no other lights on you use the light of the moon to see where you are going. The moon in indeed "giving light to the earth" just as God said it was to do.

 

[The Barbarian]

Scripture does not say when, but it does say how.

For example, God says that the earth and waters brought forth living things. He used nature to make living things, but He does not say how. He only says that He did so by means of the natural world.

The only reason you believe in YE creationism is because of what men who are just men have said, and you trust their word above scripture. That's it.

You don't have to look far to find mistakes. Luther and Calvin bitterly criticized scientists who found that the Earth went around the Sun. Just as YE creationists do, they cited Bible verses that they picked out to support their own ideas.

And because they relied on their own wishes, instead of that which God actually said, they were completely wrong.