So can the Genesis be infallible and inerrant history?

[CabVet]

Oh, that's right.

Those who aren't are called "liars" ... aren't they?

Yes, right along with the vast majority of Christians that are not (young earth or embedded age) creationists. They are all called "liars". By you, the judge of all judges.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Since God is omniscient then suffice it to say that his creation's fate has been preordained.

True, this is biblical.

In this case it is clearly a matter of; either believe or perish!

Selection and election. True as well.

Clearly there is no room for free will here.

Man, like a dog, has free will up to the end of the chain.

Either join the Mafia or be shot!

Not quite. One must be selected, then elected.

 

[EternalDragon]

It isn't JUST that God knows what you are going to choose to eat for breakfast tomorrow. He isn't JUST an observer. If he was, then what you say is true. But the illogic of it comes when you consider that he created the universe exactly as he did, already knowing what choices the people make in it. No matter what universe he creates, he is making every decision, for every person, when he chooses exactly which universe to create. We cannot make a choice contrary to what he created this universe to do. Ergo, no free will.

That is incorrect. I am not sure what teaching you are listening to.

If what you say is true then there would be no need for a savior. Just start with Genesis. God showed the animals to Adam to see what he would name them. He told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree. They both could have chosen not to eat.

Lets take that out then. They have kids, and their kids have kids....and someone, somewhere along the line would have chosen to eat and we are right back to the same outcome. Only Genesis would have been slightly different.

 

[Doveaman]

And that is precisely my point. You can live with gravity (even though Jesus walked on water) or biology (even though Jesus resurrected himself and others) but you cannot live with evolution. This is beyond me.

Here, let me help.

I cannot live with the Darwinian version of evolution, which includes the claims of humans evolving from apes and birds from dinosaurs.

Darwinian evolution is not a law nor an observation. At worst it’s a mere assumption. At best it’s an educated guess. And even then it is not consistent with the miraculous event of creation. Therefore Darwinian evolution can take a hike.

 

[Doveaman]

Jesus no more walked on water than the emperor Augustus was conceived via the union of a god with a human female.

Why not?

But you don't need to accept the law of gravity.

I don’t accept your version of the law.

So you accept the Bible's claim that gravity has nothing to do with rainfall?

The Bible doesn’t make that claim.

You know this how?

Observation and experience.

How did you work out that they were written perfectly?

They were written just as they were intended by God to be written.

And if you have an intimate relationship with and guidance by an omnipotent, omnipresent God, why can't you live the perfect life?

Because my weak humanity often gets in the way. God is in the process of correcting my human weaknesses. When I am finally glorified (God willing) the end product will be a perfect human. I would have become all that God intended me to be.

God has already completed the process of correcting any human error that might have slipped into the Bible while it was being written. The end product is now an infallible, inerrant book that can be completely relied upon as a revelation of truth.

And if you cannot do this, then clearly there is no need to accept that the words in the Bible are infallible and inerrant. Humans wrote them.

Fallible humans wrote the Bible under the infallible supervision of God.

“Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” – (2 Peter 1:20-21).

Any human error would have been addressed and corrected by God in the process of writing the Bible, so that the end product is now an infallible, inerrant book that can be completely relied upon as a revelation of truth.

Again, how do you know this? Does God have limitations?

No, but humans do.

A perfect relationship is dependent upon the commitment and faithfulness of both sides, not just one side.

So you are implicitly claiming that the Bible is not necessarily infallible and inerrant?

I am implicitly claiming that the Bible is necessarily infallible and inerrant if it is to be relied upon as a guide for correcting our human imperfections.

“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete” – (2 Tim 3:16-17).

 

[essentialsaltes]

Darwinian evolution is not a law nor an observation. At worst it’s a mere assumption. At best it’s an educated guess.

Wrong. It is a scientific theory, which is far stronger than a 'guess' no matter how educated. 150 years of research have only made the theory stronger.

And even then it is not consistent with the miraculous event of creation.

Oh, see there's your real objection. Your objection is personal, not scientific. And even then, is not gravity inconsistent with the miraculous event of Jesus walking on water? Why shouldn't gravity take a hike?

 

[CabVet]

Wrong. It is a scientific theory, which is far stronger than a 'guess' no matter how educated. 150 years of research have only made the theory stronger.

Isn't it amazing how creationists here demonstrate, over and over and over again, that they know close to nothing about evolution?

 

[CabVet]

Darwinian evolution is not a law nor an observation.

No, the fossil record, DNA, proteins, things that we can actually see, those are not observations. The words on a 3,000 year old book? That's an observation. Good on you.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Isn't it amazing how creationists here demonstrate, over and over and over again, that they know close to nothing about evolution?

Upton Sinclair used to say "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

If you change salary to salvation, that might be what motivates some creationists.

Of course, millions of Christians believe that salvation does NOT depend on a literal reading of Genesis.

But if salvation depends on believing lies and rejecting evidence, then salvation can take a hike.

 

[Doveaman]

Not all scientists are atheists.

...science does not delve into the spiritual world

But scientists do.

Why do they?

Is it because they recognize that reality is more than just matter and energy.

 

[CabVet]

But scientists do.

Why do they?

Is it because they recognize that reality is more than just matter and energy.

No, it's because you delve into science and someone has to set the record straight.

 

[Doveaman]

Since God is omniscient then suffice it to say that his creation's fate has been preordained.

I don't follow your logic.

Just because God knows the creation's fate doesn't mean He preordained it.

The creation's fate is determined by the free-will choices made by the creation itself.

Cause and effect.

God foreknew the effect but He is not the cause.

In this case it is clearly a matter of; either believe or perish!

That's a free-will choice.

Clearly there is no room for free will here. Either join the Mafia or be shot!

You can freely choose to be shot. No one is stopping you.

Jesus freely chose to be crucified rather than join the "Mafia".

You really need to work on your logic.

 

[AV1611VET]

Isn't it amazing how creationists here demonstrate, over and over and over again, that they know close to nothing about evolution?

Big deal.

You guys can't demonstrated you know NOTHING about creationism.

 

[CabVet]

You guys can't demonstrated you know NOTHING about creationism.

Oh, we might not know the stuff that you read between the lines (you know, the stuff that differs between every single person you talk to, things like flood waters going to Neptune), but the actually Biblical stuff we know all about.

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh, we might not know the stuff that you read between the lines (you know, the stuff that differs between every single person you talk to, things like flood waters going to Neptune), but the actually Biblical stuff we know all about.

I don't know whether to stand in awe or facepalm.

Do I see a big EXEMPT stamped here?

Hebrews 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

 

[CabVet]

I don't know whether to stand in awe or facepalm.

Do I see a big EXEMPT stamped here?

Hebrews 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

I don't know whether to stand in awe or facepalm. Here is an answer to your constant Arab phoning (embedded age, Neptune waters, slide shows on top of mountains) of the Bible:

Proverbs 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't follow your logic.

Just because God knows the creation's fate doesn't mean He preordained it.

The creation's fate is determined by the free-will choices made by the creation itself.

Cause and effect.

God foreknew the effect but He is not the cause.
That's a free-will choice.
You can freely choose to be shot. No one is stopping you.

Jesus freely chose to be crucified rather than join the "Mafia".

You really need to work on your logic.

Clearly you did not understand the analogy. Jesus is the "Mafia".

And creationists should admit that they do not understand logic. That is all that needs to be said.

 

[Doveaman]

Isn't it amazing how creationists here demonstrate, over and over and over again, that they know close to nothing about evolution?

Isn't it amazing how Cabvet here keeps repeating, over and over and over again like a scratched CD, that creationists know close to nothing about evolution?

I’m sure there are many creationists here who understand evolution just as well or far better than many of you internet scientists. Their interpretation of the facts are more consistent with all of reality, not just parts of it.

In any case, we don’t need to be well educated on a subject to reject it if we are well educated on why fundamental parts of it are flawed.

No, it's because you delve into science and someone has to set the record straight.

No, it’s because many scientists believe in miraculous events that render physical evidence meaningless.

 

[Doveaman]

No, the fossil record, DNA, proteins, things that we can actually see, those are not observations.

Those are observation of physical facts, not Darwinian evolution.

The words on a 3,000 year old book? That's an observation.

The book was written based on observations.

Good on you.

Yup.

 

[CabVet]

Isn't it amazing how Cabvet here keeps repeating, over and over and over again like a scratched CD, that creationists know close to nothing about evolution?

Yes, and what is even more amazing is that they don't know anything about evolution.

I’m sure there are many creationists here who understand evolution just as well or far better than many of you internet scientists. Their interpretation of the facts are more consistent with all of reality, not just parts of it.

I am sure that if there are any, they do not participate in this forum. And by "creationist" here, I am restricting myself to young-earth creationist Biblical literalists. I know that sfs and at least one more (forgot who) understand evolution, but they are far from being YEC and came to piece with the fact that evolution and their faith can co-exist.

In any case, we don’t need to be well educated on a subject to reject it if we are well educated on why fundamental parts of it are flawed. No, it’s because many scientists believe in miraculous events that render physical evidence meaningless.

You are correct, you don't need to be "well-educated". You do need to know the basics though, especially those "fundamental parts" that you claim to be flawed. And unfortunately, you don't know them.