Incredible - a single cell

[nolidad]

So the Bible says. God's ways are not always the way we would do it.

Well they are definitely not the way you have declared in your own opinion of god. I defend what I believe by HIs word and empirical proven science!

Evolution is the way you want HIm to do it- But He said different.

And look up "deism" and see why your faith in it is misplaced.

And look up what the conditional IF means so you can stop creating these red herrings

I can only believe that He's doing things in the best possible way. If each of us could make it as we think is right, it would be different. Let God be God and do it His way.

I agree 100% and if He told us how He did it, you should accept it. but you don't for whaterver reasons you are rejecting His communication to HIs people so that is your problem.

 

[The Barbarian]

Well they are definitely not the way you have declared in your own opinion of god. I defend what I believe by HIs word and empirical proven science!

You've constantly denied empirical science (no science is "proven", BTW; you really don't have any idea what science actually is). And you continually add to scripture, even to inserting non-scriptural miracles to patch up the flaws in your beliefs.

 

[The Barbarian]

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

Imagine that. God says that He uses nature instead of miracles to do all those. All these from the Bible. If you'd just let it be His way, instead of yours, you'd have a better relationship with Him.

Barbarian, notes that in his discussion with Woodmorappe, he said that he believed that families were just about the limit of "kind."

Well if He really did talk to you-

This may be hard for you to understand, but I never write anything here that I don't believe to be true. If I'm joking, I try to remember to leave my WFTH-I for you guys. Woodmorappe (that's not his real name, BTW) said "just about", because there are some cases where creationists would like to extend "Kind" to order, rather than to family. But there aren't many of those.

Now show me your research that it was the same for the animals God HImself brought to the Ark 4,400 years ago and I will agree with you!

Your new belief that God Himself brought the animals to Noah, is another of your additions to scripture. God told Noah to go and get them.

Gen. 6:19 And of every living creature of all flesh, thou shalt bring two of a sort into the ark, that they may live with thee: of the male sex, and the female.

I do accept it gods Way-

See just above. You continually edit scripture to make it acceptable to you. Because a God as great as the God of the Bible is uncomfortable for you, you repeatedly edit scripture with your own ideas.

 

[nolidad]

You've constantly denied empirical science (no science is "proven", BTW; you really don't have any idea what science actually is). And you continually add to scripture, even to inserting non-scriptural miracles to patch up the flaws in your beliefs.

Consensus does not make a hypothesis empirical. and your lying about the Scriptures lowers you !

Don't know the game you are playing- but until you publicly recant of your false accusation that I am adding unscriptural miracles to the Word of God- There will be no more responsed from me to your false accusations.

 

[nolidad]

Your new belief that God Himself brought the animals to Noah, is another of your additions to scripture. God told Noah to go and get them.

Genesis 6;
20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

How did just 2 come to Noah- I am tired of your lack of biblical knowledge.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Your new belief that God Himself brought the animals to Noah, is another of your additions to scripture. God told Noah to go and get them.

20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

How did just 2 come to Noah

He told Noah to get them.
Genesis 6:19 And of every living creature of all flesh, thou shalt bring two of a sort into the ark, that they may live with thee: of the male sex, and the female.

And how did Noah get the other five pairs of clean animals?

While we're on the subject, how, exactly, did seven pairs of koalas and Kangaroos come to Noah, and then return to their homes in Australia after the flood? Another non-scriptural miracle? Or should we add a few verses about Noah dropping them off on the way to Ararat? Or what? Did Noah just add them on his own?

I am amused by your lack of biblical knowledge.

 

[The Barbarian]

Consensus does not make a hypothesis empirical. and your lying about the Scriptures lowers you !

I don't lie on these forums, so I'm not easy to fool. That accusation comes too quickly after your temper, and tell us much about your character.

Don't know the game you are playing- but until you publicly recant of your false accusation that I am adding unscriptural miracles to the Word of God- There will be no more responsed from me to your false accusations.

Doesn't matter. Everyone can see the argument, and decide for themselves. It's not me that's your problem here.

 

[nolidad]

Barbarian observes:
Your new belief that God Himself brought the animals to Noah, is another of your additions to scripture. God told Noah to go and get them.



He told Noah to get them.
Genesis 6:19 And of every living creature of all flesh, thou shalt bring two of a sort into the ark, that they may live with thee: of the male sex, and the female.

And how did Noah get the other five pairs of clean animals?

While we're on the subject, how, exactly, did seven pairs of koalas and Kangaroos come to Noah, and then return to their homes in Australia after the flood? Another non-scriptural miracle? Or should we add a few verses about Noah dropping them off on the way to Ararat? Or what? Did Noah just add them on his own?

I am amused by your lack of biblical knowledge.

BLAh BLah BLah!

Read verse 20 and become knowledgeable

19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

 

[The Barbarian]

Genesis 7:2 You are to take with you seven pairs, a male and its female, of all the clean animals, and two of the animals that are not clean, a male and its female,

You're telling us that cattle aren't clean, meaning O.K. to eat. C'mon.

 

[nolidad]

Genesis 7:2 You are to take with you seven pairs, a male and its female, of all the clean animals, and two of the animals that are not clean, a male and its female,

You're telling us that cattle aren't clean, meaning O.K. to eat. C'mon.

You have seriously confused things. The menu of clean and unclean animals to eat came 2 millenia after noah with Moses and the Mosaic Law.

Noah was a vegetarian because God did not give approval to eat meat until after Noah left the Ark! So clean and unclean in Genesis 6 is for purposes of sacrficing to God.

Gen. 8: 20 And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

Genesis 9:
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

As compared to Gods diet command earlier:

Genesis 1:
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

 

[The Barbarian]

You have seriously confused things. The menu of clean and unclean animals to eat came 2 millenia after noah with Moses and the Mosaic Law.

So exactly why did God bring up clean and unclean animals with Noah, then?

Genesis 7:2
You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female.

You're digging yourself a hole, I think.

Noah was a vegetarian because God did not give approval to eat meat until after Noah left the Ark! So clean and unclean in Genesis 6 is for purposes of sacrficing to God.

That's not what it says. You've just added it to scripture to make it fit your ideas. Some Jewish theologians (the ones who believed in a literal flood) made the same addition, but even most of them did not:

In summary, understanding Adam’s dietary status is dependent upon when the seventh Universal Law was given. If it was given together with the rest of the Universal Laws, we must conclude that Adam was permitted to eat meat but not kill animals. If, however, it was given at a later date, we can assume that Adam was indeed a vegetarian.
Are You Sure Meat Was Forbidden Until After the Flood?

 

[nolidad]

So exactly why did God bring up clean and unclean animals with Noah, then?

Genesis 7:2
You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female.

You're digging yourself a hole, I think.

That's not what it says. You've just added it to scripture to make it fit your ideas. Some Jewish theologians (the ones who believed in a literal flood) made the same addition, but even most of them did not:

In summary, understanding Adam’s dietary status is dependent upon when the seventh Universal Law was given. If it was given together with the rest of the Universal Laws, we must conclude that Adam was permitted to eat meat but not kill animals. If, however, it was given at a later date, we can assume that Adam was indeed a vegetarian.

read you rbible for a change and see what God had to say, instead of conjuring up your fanciful reinterpretations of Gods Word!

Actually the hole I am digging is the grave for your pretend bible knowledge. You either are woefully ignorant or intentionally deceptrive- which one is not my concern.

I gave you the verse where God OK'd man to eat meat- if they did before that- it was in violation of Gods command in the beginning.

If you feel compelled to have to reinterpret Gods Word to fit whatever- that is your danger .

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
So exactly why did God bring up clean and unclean animals with Noah, then?

Genesis 7:2
You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female.

You're digging yourself a hole, I think.

That's not what it says. You've just added it to scripture to make it fit your ideas. Some Jewish theologians (the ones who believed in a literal flood) made the same addition, but even most of them did not:

In summary, understanding Adam’s dietary status is dependent upon when the seventh Universal Law was given. If it was given together with the rest of the Universal Laws, we must conclude that Adam was permitted to eat meat but not kill animals. If, however, it was given at a later date, we can assume that Adam was indeed a vegetarian.

read you rbible for a change

Genesis 7:2 is from the Bible. I thought you knew. I'm just showing you what Hebrew theologians have to say about it.

You're free to disagree, but with most Christians, and at least many Jews disagreeing with your new doctrine...

 

[nolidad]

In summary, understanding Adam’s dietary status is dependent upon when the seventh Universal Law was given. If it was given together with the rest of the Universal Laws, we must conclude that Adam was permitted to eat meat but not kill animals. If, however, it was given at a later date, we can assume that Adam was indeed a vegetarian.

YOu can conclude anything you want- but God disagrees in HIs Word.

Genesis 7:2 is from the Bible. I thought you knew. I'm just showing you what Hebrew theologians have to say about it.

You're free to disagree, but with most Christians, and at least many Jews disagreeing with your new doctrine...

Which theologians, which Christians? Other than you with your Barbarian translation.

So exactly why did God bring up clean and unclean animals with Noah, then?

I thought you knew! For the purpose of sacrifice! They were sacrificing animals to the Lord since God slew the first two lambs!

Genesis 8:20:

20 And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

It wasn't until after this that God allowed eating meat

Genesis 9:3
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Notice that little word EVERY ? There were no dietary restrictions on clean and unclean animals until the Mosaic Law 2 millenia later!

You can rely on your faux theologians and many Christians- I will rely on gods Word every time!

 

[The Barbarian]

YOu can conclude anything you want- but God disagrees in HIs Word.

He doesn't say so. You merely propose to speak for Him.

Which theologians, which Christians?

About 57% of Americans, according to Gallup. Most of the world's Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran believers.

Other than you with your Barbarian translation.

That was from a prominent Jewish theologian. They don't buy your new doctrine, either.

I thought you knew! For the purpose of sacrifice!

Bible doesn't say so. You just added that to make it more acceptable to you.

You can rely on your faux theologians

I will refrain from calling you a "faux theologian"; I won't report your for questioning the faith of others, but some people will. Try to do better.

I will rely on gods Word every time!

If you relied on God's will, you would avoid editing His words.

 

[nolidad]

About 57% of Americans, according to Gallup. Most of the world's Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran believers.

Cite the poll pleasde!

and since when did God decide doctrine by polling anyway?????

I will refrain from calling you a "faux theologian"; I won't report your for questioning the faith of others, but some people will. Try to do better.

I cannot apologize. when someone twists the Word of God beyond what it says- they are a faux theologian. What I have to say will be the least of their problems.

If you relied on God's will, you would avoid editing His words.

Old tired worn out Alinsky tactic.

That was from a prominent Jewish theologian. They don't buy your new doctrine, either.

You going to share His work and name or will it be just like the mystery letter you got from Woodmorappe.

Bible doesn't say so. You just added that to make it more acceptable to you.

Maybe you should have taken Cleopatra as a screen name- for you certainly are the queen of de-nial!

 

[The Barbarian]

Cite the poll pleasde!

Those denominations have statements confirming that believing in a literal Genesis is not a requirement for orthodox Christian belief.

and since when did God decide doctrine by polling anyway?????

Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The Church, as a whole will not be in error, according to Jesus.

I cannot apologize. when someone twists the Word of God beyond what it says-

Which is what you have done, time after time, asserting what is not written in Scripture.

they are a faux theologian.

You're too hard on yourself. You're merely in error. If you relied on God's will, you would avoid editing His words.

Old tired worn out Alinsky tactic.

I don't believe Alinsky inserts new ideas in scripture. Can you show me even one time when he's done what you have done?

You going to share His work and name or will it be just like the mystery letter you got from Woodmorappe.

I left you a link. Read it.

I thought you knew! For the purpose of sacrifice!

Bible doesn't say so. You just added that to make it more acceptable to you.

Maybe you should have taken Cleopatra as a screen name- for you certainly are the queen of de-nial!

When you call names, you merely confirms what many people here think about your behavior. Feel free to show us the verse that says Noah was told about clean and unclean animals for sacrifice. You merely added that to scripture on your own.

 

[nolidad]

Those denominations have statements confirming that believing in a literal Genesis is not a requirement for orthodox Christian belief.

Well as the issue was eating meat before God gave permission after the flood- this statement is irrelevant.

Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The Church, as a whole will not be in error, according to Jesus.

So then you think that those who say one can be a practicing unrepentant homosexual and be in good standing with God is perfectly Orthodox?

You're too hard on yourself. You're merely in error. If you relied on God's will, you would avoid editing His words.

thank You Cleopatra!

I don't believe Alinsky inserts new ideas in scripture. Can you show me even one time when he's done what you have done?

No you just use his tactics as a shield!

I left you a link. Read it.

Please post again . I missed a link that shows God approved of eating meat before He approved of eating meat!

Bible doesn't say so. You just added that to make it more acceptable to you.

I can at least show fro gods Word that:

a. God commanded Adam and all to be vegetarians.
b. That Noah offered as sacrifice from clean animals.
c. That God gave a specific permission at a specific time to eat meat.
d. It took 2 millenia for clean and unclean foods to be revealed in His INpsired Word.

What do you offer but esoteric mystery things without the Bible to draw form.

Well did the Lord Jesus say this:

Mark 7:9
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition

Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[nolidad]

When you call names, you merely confirms what many people here think about your behavior. Feel free to show us the verse that says Noah was told about clean and unclean animals for sacrifice. You merely added that to scripture on your own.

Well what you think of me takes about a nanosecond of my time. but I will answer that again if you answer me this:

When did God tell anyone from Adam to Noah what animals were clean or unclean for eating?

BTW I read y9our link (I found it)

All sorts of opinions and theories on what Scripture says. YOu follow in many of their footsteps. Teh Scripture says one thing- but this is what it really means! Such esoteric and mystery religion practices were and still are srictly forbidden. But I am sure you have a counter argument to defned altering Scriptures to suiot your following the Word of men instead of God.

Once again I can by strong direct scriptures show there was no permission to eat meat until after Noah left the Ark. (Gen. 1:29-30 and Gen 9:2-5)

I can by direct inference show that clean animals were for sacrifice! Gen. 8: 20

I also can show that there were no clean and unclean animals for dietary purposes for Noah!

Genesis 9:3

Clean and unclean for eating purposes did not show up until Moses got those commands from God on sinai 800 years later.

so what Scriptures do you show to defend your arguments?

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
When you call names, you merely confirms what many people here think about your behavior. Feel free to show us the verse that says Noah was told about clean and unclean animals for sacrifice. You merely added that to scripture on your own.

I will answer that again if you answer me this:

When did God tell anyone from Adam to Noah what animals were clean or unclean for eating?

As I said, there isn't a verse where God said what you claimed. You refusal is sufficient.

BTW I read y9our link

But of course, you don't agree. Doesn't matter. You inserted that idea into scripture; God never said it to Noah.

Once again I can by strong direct scriptures show there was no permission to eat meat until after Noah left the Ark. (Gen. 1:29-30

Before the fall? Maybe, although it doesn't say that they can't eat meat. But since God killed animals and gave the skins to Adam and his wife to wear, that prohibition was obviously over.

and Gen 9:2-5)

This restriction came after flood. It doesn't say anything about not eating meat, only bleeding the animal first. Again, it doesn't say what you want it to say.

I can by direct inference show that clean animals were for sacrifice! Gen. 8: 20

One can directly infer all sorts of things that aren't true. As I said, you inserted that into scripture to make it more acceptable to you.

so what Scriptures do you show to defend your arguments?

I'm merely pointing out the lack of scripture to support your new beliefs.