Eve came from Adam, evolution does not allow this

[Archivist]

I think that there was a lot more to it than the lords supper...

No, that was the major dividing point. You need to study your history.

Actually, that's precisely what you said.."yet the majority of Christians accept evolution as being true".

This was implied to have some sort of bearing or weight on your point.

You aren’t getting my point. You said that the age of the earth had major implications on believers. Yet a majority of believers accept evolution, so where are these implications?

M

y post was implying that no matter how many believers hold a certain position, has nothing to do with the actual facts...

Also, in conjunction with this, most believers are happy to sit in a pew, sing a few hymns, hear the prayer request, sleep through a message and go home to a football game.

Most believers just sit and believe what they are told.. They don't want controversy... they don't want to argue because their knowledge is simply.. God is God, Jesus is His son, Jesus died for our sins... pass the potato salad.

The other stuff... well they have been told, in school that it is fact... then they are told that Genesis is allegory in order to make it all fit in a nice little package.. The school is happy, the believers are happy... all is "good".

Again, sorry if that is your experience. I don’t attend a pass the potato salad kind of church.

You still have not explained this double standard. I am apparently to literally accept Genesis but you can ignore the plain meaning of the words of Jesus.

Of course nothing wrong with telling believers that Genesis is allegory because it is. You are, of course, entitled to your own interpretation.

 

[lifepsyop]

You aren’t getting my point. You said that the age of the earth had major implications on believers. Yet a majority of believers accept evolution, so where are these implications?

The implications are that you're ignoring the words of Jesus himself.

How many non-believers see professing Christians that don't even believe their own Bible? We claim to follow God and then throw his words in the garbage when they offend us? Oh, how that must encourage the enemy....

You still have not explained this double standard. I am apparently to literally accept Genesis but you can ignore the plain meaning of the words of Jesus.

Like when Jesus testified to the Genesis flood? And directly compared it to the judgment when he would return?

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. " - Matthew 24:36-39

Of course nothing wrong with telling believers that Genesis is allegory because it is.

Jesus didn't think Genesis was an allegory.

Do you think His return is just an allegory?

You are, of course, entitled to your own interpretation.

And how should we interpret a direct warning that scoffers will come in the last days denying the flood?

2 Peter 3:5-6

For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.

 

[Archivist]

The implications are that you're ignoring the words of Jesus himself.

How many non-believers see professing Christians that don't even believe their own Bible? We claim to follow God and then throw his words in the garbage when they offend us? Oh, how that must encourage the enemy....

Except I’m replying to someone who denies that the bread and wine of Holy Communion are the body and blood of Jesus. How is that different? And, for the record, I keep saying that everyone posting here is entitled to their own interpretation.

Like when Jesus testified to the Genesis flood? And directly compared it to the judgment when he would return?

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. " - Matthew 24:36-39. Jesus didn't think Genesis was an allegory.

Already addressed. You can go find it.

Do you think His return is just an allegory?

I’m a Christian. What do you think my answer is?

And how should we interpret a direct warning that scoffers will come in the last days denying the flood? Are you one of them?

So now I’m a scoffer. Are you unable to engage in polite conversation?

 

[lifepsyop]

I’m a Christian. What do you think my answer is?

I honestly don't know. When Jesus says that His return will be a judgment over the world, just like the flood of Noah... and then you believe the flood never happened... what do you really believe about His return?

So now I’m a scoffer. Are you unable to engage in polite conversation?

I didn't call you a scoffer, I just quoted scripture. In 2 Peter 3:5-6 we are clearly warned that people will come denying the flood. Why do you think that was such a concern?

 

[Archivist]

I honestly don't know. When Jesus says that His return will be a judgment over the world, just like the flood of Noah... and then you believe the flood never happened... what do you really believe about His return?

You do realize that to be a Christian on CF you must accept the Nicene Creed. If you know what the Creed says, and I presume you do because you are posting here, then you already know the answer to your question.

I didn't call you a scoffer, I just quoted scripture. In 2 Peter 3:5-6 we are clearly warned that people will come denying the flood. Why do you think that was such a concern?

I don’t recall the words “are you one of them” being in scripture. Don’t tell me you aren’t calling me a scoffer.

 

[dad]

Genesis is not a scientific book, its a theological book. Its descriptions are not scientific, but theological. Why cant you grasp this simple thing.

Science is not a scientific endeavor on origins issues, it is religion. Bible believers have another. Get it?

 

[dad]

Do you accept that the Promise Land is/was flowing with literal milk and honey?

It will be. Even then it was in comparison, they had a taste. There goes your excuse to erase Eve.

 

[dad]

My saying that isn’t “insulting to God” because I view it as an allegory.

The bible seems to suggest otherwise, He is a jealous God and will have no demon science or gods before Him. He does not allow bending the knee to multiple gods. If God be God then worship Him. If demon science be god then worship and believe it.

As to your claim that I’m insulting Bible believers, you have admitted that you don’t believe every word in the Bible because you don’t believe that Holy Communion is the actual body and blood of Jesus.

He called the cup fruit of the vine not blood. Your point is moot. Why are you grasping at straws to find some excuse to wave away Genesis/creation/Eve?

You are picking and choosing what is literal and what is not.

No one gets to pick if Adam and Eve were real.

Again, there is nothing wrong with that—you are free to your interpretation of the New Testament just as I am free to my interpretation of Genesis.

Free to believe or disbelieve.

As to the two conflicting creation stories, they do differ. The order is different.

There IS no order in chapter two...show me one morning and evening were the...day!!!!? It was over. Finished already. Done. Complete. Past. Finito.

 

[dad]

Except I’m replying to someone who denies that the bread and wine of Holy Communion are the body and blood of Jesus. How is that different?

Interesting thought, Jesus fulfilled the law. He was circumcised, etc etc etc. So if He drank blood that would be breaking the law!

Le 7:27 - Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

 

[trophy33]

Science is not a scientific endeavor on origins issues, it is religion. Bible believers have another. Get it?

Its not a religion, its just a model putting together DNA, geological strata, background microwave radiation, mutations of organisms etc.

And Bible believers do not have to be afraid of it, because Bible is not a scientific book, therefore there is no clash with scientific discoveries.

And in the same way, atheists cannot use science against Christianity, because science does not have any theological message, it only describes the system we live in. Whether the system we live in is real, simulation, created to only look that way, holographic, part of larger system, relative to something, only in our minds etc. is not their job to say. Its a job of religion.

Bible is religion, science is science. Two different fields. Get it?

 

[Cis.jd]

The bible seems to suggest otherwise, He is a jealous God and will have no demon science or gods before Him. He does not allow bending the knee to multiple gods. If God be God then worship Him. If demon science be god then worship and believe it.

He called the cup fruit of the vine not blood. Your point is moot. Why are you grasping at straws to find some excuse to wave away Genesis/creation/Eve?

No one gets to pick if Adam and Eve were real.

Free to believe or disbelieve.
There IS no order in chapter two...show me one morning and evening were the...day!!!!? It was over. Finished already. Done. Complete. Past. Finito.

Stop tagging your bad views/arguments as "bible believers". You are making it look that making uneducated statements and just talking nonsense is a christian attribute.

 

[dad]

Its not a religion, its just a model putting together DNA, geological strata, background microwave radiation, mutations of organisms etc

False. The WAY they put anything together is only by the glue of belief and belief alone. Who says the former nature even had DNA that was like the modern DNA? How would you know? Who says present nature mutation and rates represents what happened in the pre flood era?? After all they lived about 1000 years, so a lot was not the same. The radiation we see on earth and the solar system area could represent creation remnants...you interpret with a belief set, and do so religiously. Geologic strata?? The rate and manner of deposition and major sudden events as well as the nature in which the layer was deposited all mean that your attempts at uniformity are a religious joke doomed to be hopelessly skewed. I would call it sabotage...since they subject evidences to methodologies and criteria that is bound to have the wrong outcome! Demonic sabotage!

And Bible believers do not have to be afraid of it,

I assure you I am not. Once we see the evidences divested of demon influenced beliefs, it all fits the bible like a glove.

because Bible is not a scientific book, therefore there is no clash with scientific discoveries.

The bible involves eternal and far superior science, and modern science is a religion of darkness.

And in the same way, atheists cannot use science against Christianity, because science does not have any theological message, it only describes the system we live in.

They teach kids God is basically a joke like Santa, and that creation happened far far far far differently than the God of the bible says.

Whether the system we live in is real, simulation, created to only look that way, holographic, part of larger system, relative to something, only in our minds etc. is not their job to say. Its a job of religion.

The projections they do on evidences result in an unreal future and past dream worlds that have no connection to reality.

 

[dad]

Stop tagging your bad views/arguments as "bible believers". You are making it look that making uneducated statements and just talking nonsense is a christian attribute.

The whole bible shares a reverence and acknowledgment of Genesis as fact actually. It is a matter of belief or unbelief. Trying to please man and what some folks think they must believe above all else, rather than God's word is the reason mutilation attempts have been made on Scripture. I would think an honest admission of unbelief would be far better, especially if they looked to God for help. Otherwise they become part of the problem, and fight on the wrong side...with the inevitable results.

 

[trophy33]

They teach kids God is basically a joke like Santa, and that creation happened far far far far differently than the God of the bible says.

And thats your fault, fault of people like you, who spread all over the America, that the YEC reading is the Christian reading.

Atheists have actually no argument against learned reading of Genesis, they have plenty of arguments against yours, though.

 

[dad]

And thats your fault, fault of people like you, who spread all over the America, that the YEC reading is the Christian reading.

There were no Yecs in the early church as far as I know, because there was no issue with the time when the earth and man were created! They had the genealogies all the way back to the first person alive. Nowhere did any prophets or apostle or anyone else even suggest that there was untold millions of foolish years involved. The only reason people in more modern generations had to take a position on the timing, is because so called science claims were getting more and more bizarre and older! It doesn't matter to me the exact year or really even the century so much. I doubt the early church worried much about that, as they had the records that were close enough. Now when unbelief creeped in to the bodies of believers many looked to history and the bible to set the record straight, and were labelled yecs by the folks trying to be so progressive that they progressed beyond God and His word! YEC just means bible believer. Now if some folks who are actual bible believers get a little too zealous with certain super exact dates or days or whatever, that is a mistake, and not supportable I would suggest. But they would be one hec of a lot closer than the billions of years between whatever verse they feel like inserting it folks!!!

Atheists have actually no argument against learned reading of Genesis, they have plenty of arguments against yours, though.

How would total unbelievers NOT disagree with God and His word?? If they do agree with you that is a red flag for sure! Probably the only reason they agree is because you may have tossed out/butchered/bent/folded/mutilated/welded/reinvented Scripture wherever it disagreed with their doctrine of demons!

 

[trophy33]

How would total unbelievers NOT disagree with God and His word??

Because its easy to disagree with what you teach and its easy to make jokes about what you teach.

The same with Flat earthers. You are making wrong and useless obstacles for people thinking about God and Christianity.

 

[dad]

Because its easy to disagree with what you teach and its easy to make jokes about what you teach.

The same with Flat earthers. You are making wrong and useless obstacles for people thinking about God and Christianity.

So Eve is the same as the flat earth, and we must erase her or else face laughter from the foolish. Scary.

 

[Cis.jd]

The whole bible shares a reverence and acknowledgment of Genesis as fact actually. It is a matter of belief or unbelief. Trying to please man and what some folks think they must believe above all else, rather than God's word is the reason mutilation attempts have been made on Scripture. I would think an honest admission of unbelief would be far better, especially if they looked to God for help. Otherwise they become part of the problem, and fight on the wrong side...with the inevitable results.

We've already answered this, effectively. You have been doing nothing but repping your own arguments to be "God's word" because you have nothing to support your case other than self-proclaiming your credibility.

You are telling me that your arguments about God's word is (and has to be) loaded with academically fallacious content and 0 educated reasoning that no apologetic sites cosigns with? Sure

 

[Cis.jd]

So Eve is the same as the flat earth, and we must erase her or else face laughter from the foolish. Scary.

Why do we have to erase eve because certain details about her creation and story are allegorical? We didn't erase the "earth" because we finally admitted that it wasn't flat, did we?

 

[dad]

We've already answered this, effectively. You have been doing nothing but repping your own arguments to be "God's word" because you have nothing to support your case other than self-proclaiming your credibility.

You are telling me that your arguments about God's word is (and has to be) loaded with academically fallacious content and 0 educated reasoning that no apologetic sites cosigns with? Sure

Disbelief in the heart and spirit of what is clearly stated all through the bible has not been answered actually. As for science it is religion concerning origin issues and I have pointed out why..and stand ready to quickly crush any so called science offered.

Checkmate.