The Literal Fall of Man

[-57]

I believe Jesus knew He was the creator. Not sure what that has to do with what we are discussing.

If Jesus knew He was the creator....then why did He get Genesis wrong?

I would bet Jesus did not any of the following things:

1. E=mc squared;
2. The sun is 150 million kilometres from the earth;
3. DNA is the "code" for living beings;
4. The proton is about 2000 times more massive than the electron;
5. The universe sprang into existence about 14 billion years ago.

Do you believe Jesus knew these things?

The bible says Jesus existed before anything else, and he holds all creation together. Col 1:17. Perhaps He did and had no reason to talk about it.

Do you think Jesus knew DNA was a code within a code? Interesting article here.
Every code know to man has a code writer. DNA is way to complicated and sophisticated to have the ability to gain its information...to the point it is a code within a code...coding in two languages...to have evolved by random chance so-called beneficial mutations and natural selection.

And please do not insult my intelligence or that of any poor soul who happens to be lurking - I never posted anything that would justify your suggestion that I might believe Jesus was mistaken about being the way the truth and the life.

I wasn't trying to insult your intelligence. You simply remarked earlier that Jesus as well as Paul were simply human and had the ability to get their message wrong. In doing so you suggested Jesus might have gotten it wrong when He said he was the way..truth...and life. Just saying.

 

[expos4ever]

If Jesus knew He was the creator....then why did He get Genesis wrong?

Obviously, it is possible for Jesus to know one thing and not another.

DNA is way to complicated and sophisticated to have the ability to gain its information...to the point it is a code within a code...coding in two languages...to have evolved by random chance so-called beneficial mutations and natural selection.

Care to actually support this statement?

I wasn't trying to insult your intelligence. You simply remarked earlier that Jesus as well as Paul were simply human and had the ability to get their message wrong. In doing so you suggested Jesus might have gotten it wrong when He said he was the way..truth...and life. Just saying.

Well, perhaps. But now you know: I am confident Jesus did not know a lot of things that were unrelated to His mission. Such as the theory of evolution.

 

[-57]

Care to actually support this statement?

Did you click on the link?

 

[expos4ever]

Did you click on the link?

Just read the article. I see nothing there to support your claim.

 

[-57]

Well, perhaps. But now you know: I am confident Jesus did not know a lot of things that were unrelated to His mission. Such as the theory of evolution.

It's rather obvious Jesus didn't know about evolutionism because it didn't happen....We are told Adam was formed from the dust then woman from Adams rib.

 

[-57]

Just read the article. I see nothing there to support your claim.

Of course you didn't.

 

[expos4ever]

It's rather obvious Jesus didn't know about evolutionism because it didn't happen....We are told Adam was formed from the dust then woman from Adams rib.

I think it is clear we are not getting anywhere. I am out of this one. No hard feelings - until next time.

 

[-57]

I think it is clear we are not getting anywhere. I am out of this one. No hard feelings - until next time.

Atlas you now understand where you're wrong.

 

[expos4ever]

Atlas you now understand where you're wrong.

Can't let this pass.

You are really playing games here - this is an obvious misrepresentation. You cannot possibly believe I am conceding that I am wrong - no one who actually can read and has read my posts would come to this conclusion.

So you must be intentionally misrepresenting.

 

[-57]

Can't let this pass.

You are really playing games here - this is an obvious misrepresentation. You cannot possibly believe I am conceding that I am wrong - no one who actually can read and has read my posts would come to this conclusion.

So you must be intentionally misrepresenting.

Are you conceeding you're wrong? I doubt it. I would think that any lurker reading this thread would admitt your arguments were seriously injured.

 

[Open Heart]

What keeps coming to mind for me, however, is how in the world man's "fall" can be "figurative"......

A literal fall would be like falling out of a tree. The fall of man in Christian terms IS figurative.

I believe in the fall of man. When mankind became morally sentient, knowing good from evil, it created a chasm between his animal instincts and his higher nature (soul). And so guilt and shame arose for the first time. This fall alienated man from nature, from others, from himself, and from God. It is perfectly easy to believe in evolution and still believe in the Fall.

The details of the story, the Garden, the fruit, the serpent, are mythic representations. For example, the eating of the fruit represents the first man and woman having a developed moral sentience. The serpent represents their first temptation. The Garden represents the ignorant bliss of that primordial forest from which we came. Once internal strife between our instinct and our morality developed, that bliss was gone, hence we were "exiled" from "the Garden."

 

[SeventyOne]

The details of the story, the Garden, the fruit, the serpent, are mythic representations. For example, the eating of the fruit represents the first man and woman having a developed moral sentience. The serpent represents their first temptation. The Garden represents the ignorant bliss of that primordial forest from which we came. Once internal strife between our instinct and our morality developed, that bliss was gone, hence we were "exiled" from "the Garden."

Where in scripture can one find these substitutions?

 

[SeventyOne]

Atlas you now understand where you're wrong.

You aren't going to get anywhere on a topic like this with someone wholly given over to the evolution lie. They'll fight you with everything they have to remain in the dark.

I just wish the people who were caught up in this deception wouldn't go around calling themselves brothers. It makes us all look bad.

 

[Open Heart]

Where in scripture can one find these substitutions?

This is called reading comprehension. You read the text, and you understand it. Taking a figurative text literally is poor reading comprehension.

 

[expos4ever]

You aren't going to get anywhere on a topic like this with someone wholly given over to the evolution lie. They'll fight you with everything they have to remain in the dark.

I just wish the people who were caught up in this deception wouldn't go around calling themselves brothers. It makes us all look bad.

More of the desperate rhetoric that is the only choice available to those who have to deny manifest facts to retain an unsupportable position.

Those who would deny evolution have no facts in their quiver since the matter has been settled scientifically - evolution happened. So what can they do if they wish to retain their belief in abject denial of the facts?

Resort to rhetoric that somehow paints those who accept science as "deceived" or "believing a lie".

 

[-57]

Those who would deny evolution have no facts in their quiver since the matter has been settled scientifically

Obviously you have never been to a Creationist web site...or truly read the bible that tells us mAdam was made from the dust then woman from Adams rib.

But, you seem to be smarter than us bible believers...your science has demonstrated the bible is wrong. Your science has demonstrated that a guy who died on the cross...stays dead on day 3.

 

[miknik5]

This is called reading comprehension. You read the text, and you understand it. Taking a figurative text literally is poor reading comprehension.

You may be a teacher of the works of men.

But when did THIS PARTICULAR AUTHOR give you the rights to suggest when HE is and is not being literal?

Did you just take your own privileges to suggest what GOD said and meant by HIS WORD?

Did GOD tell you when HE was using and not using figurative language to relay SPIRITUAL (not mythical ) truths?

 

[miknik5]

More of the desperate rhetoric that is the only choice available to those who have to deny manifest facts to retain an unsupportable position.

Those who would deny evolution have no facts in their quiver since the matter has been settled scientifically - evolution happened. So what can they do if they wish to retain their belief in abject denial of the facts?

Resort to rhetoric that somehow paints those who accept science as "deceived" or "believing a lie".

Evolving from to where?

 

[Speedwell]

Did you just take your own privileges to suggest what GOD said and meant by HIS WORD?

Why not? You did.

 

[miknik5]

Why not? You did.

Never