One thing I don't understand about the creationist position

[coffee4u]

Actually, they pretty much do.

Based on assumed things, from what you see now, with no proof its always been so.

 

[pitabread]

Maybe not strictly speaking, but you still believe it occurred for millions of years as a natural part of the world. I do not. I believe sin brought in death.

Sure, but that's besides the point that evolution technically doesn't *require* death. That living things happen to die is just an observation of the history of life on this planet.

 

[Subduction Zone]

God says otherwise.
17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits.a]">[a]b]">[b] 21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

That is actually the Bible that says that. This is deifying the Bible, a practice that is thought to be blasphemy by some sects of Christianity. It is an example of idolatry. It appears that one is worshiping the Bible instead of God when one does this.

Have you ever thought of trying to learn how we know that there was no flood as portrayed by a literal interpretation of the Bible?

 

[coffee4u]

That is actually the Bible that says that. This is deifying the Bible, a practice that is thought to be blasphemy by some sects of Christianity. It is an example of idolatry. It appears that one is worshiping the Bible instead of God when one does this.

Accusing me of idolatry now. If you want to judge me as being idolatress for believing God's word then I will turn around and say the same of you. You are putting human learning above God.
Matthew 7:2
For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

John 5:46-47
For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

The Bible is God's Word.
2 Timothy 3:16-17

16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

The Word is Jesus.
John 1
The Word Became Flesh
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Therefor what the Bible says are the words of Jesus.

Have you ever thought of trying to learn how we know that there was no flood as portrayed by a literal interpretation of the Bible?

This isn't just about the flood, you also do not believe in creation, which means you have no explanation for sin, or death before sin, no explanation for the spirit and no explanation for many other passages of scripture.
If you had some good sound doctrine on those points I would be more inclined to listen.

Edit: You're an atheist, I was thinking I was replying to someone else. So lol you have no doctrine.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Accusing me of idolatry now. If you want to judge me as being idolatress for believing God's word then I will turn around and say the same of you. You are putting human learning above God.
Matthew 7:2
For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

John 5:46-47
For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

The Bible is God's Word.
2 Timothy 3:16-17

16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

The Word is Jesus.
John 1
The Word Became Flesh
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Therefor what the Bible says are the words of Jesus.



This isn't just about the flood, you also do not believe in creation, which means you have no explanation for sin, or death before sin, no explanation for the spirit and no explanation for many other passages of scripture.
If you had some good sound doctrine on those points I would be more inclined to listen.

Edit: You're an atheist, I was thinking I was replying to someone else. So lol you have no doctrine.

No, I said that some Christians believe that. And please, the Bible is not a valid source when arguing against atheists. Think about it. I need to remind you that the Bible is the claim. It is not the evidence.

And one example of a huge group of Christians that would disagree with you in your use of the Bible would be Catholics. Catholics do not tend to be science deniers. They made a terrible error a long time ago and learned their lesson. In fact it was a Catholic that was one of the early developers of the Big Bang theory.

I am sorry that you do not understand poetic language. Your interpretation of the Bible is interesting but besides the point.

 

[coffee4u]

No, I said that some Christians believe that. And please, the Bible is not a valid source when arguing against atheists. Think about it. I need to remind you that the Bible is the claim. It is not the evidence.

As I said, I thought I was replaying to someone else. That someone isn't an atheist.

And one example of a huge group of Christians that would disagree with you in your use of the Bible would be Catholics. Catholics do not tend to be science deniers. They made a terrible error a long time ago and learned their lesson.

Not getting into Roman Catholics except to say I'm a protestant. That should be enough to let you know where I stand on their doctrine.

In fact it was a Catholic that was one of the early developers of the Big Bang theory.

And that doesn't surprise me one little bit.

I am sorry that you do not understand poetic language. Your interpretation of the Bible is interesting but besides the point.

I am fully aware of poetic language, the Bible has entire chapters and even entire books on it, such as the Psalms.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As I said, I thought I was replaying to someone else. That someone isn't an atheist.

Okay. So what? This is an open forum so anyone can correct errors.

Not getting into Roman Catholics except to say I'm a protestant. That should be enough to let you know where I stand on their doctrine.

That is obvious. You seemed to have a problem with the claim that some Christians, in fact probably most, would disagree with your interpretation of the Bible.

And that doesn't surprise me one little bit.

That is a bit sad. It should make you a bit jealous. Catholics are not afraid of reality. The same cannot be said of other Christians.

I am fully aware of poetic language, the Bible has entire chapters and even entire books on it, such as the Psalms.

Then you really have no excuse for not understanding it when you find an example of it.

 

[coffee4u]

Okay. So what? This is an open forum so anyone can correct errors.

That is obvious. You seemed to have a problem with the claim that some Christians, in fact probably most, would disagree with your interpretation of the Bible.

That is a bit sad. It should make you a bit jealous. Catholics are not afraid of reality. The same cannot be said of other Christians.

Then you really have no excuse for not understanding it when you find an example of it.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[Subduction Zone]

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yes, we have all heard this. Too bad that you do not not know why it does not apply.

 

[pitabread]

John 5:46-47
For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

What is the context of that quote? (It's not about taking Genesis 1 literally).

 

[coffee4u]

What is the context of that quote? (It's not about taking Genesis 1 literally).

It's about believing Moses, Moses wrote Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy.

 

[pitabread]

It's about believing Moses, Moses wrote Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy.

Surely you can do a bit better than just that. What is the actual context of the quote?

What was Jesus talking about when he said that if people didn't believe Moses, they wouldn't believe him?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's about believing Moses, Moses wrote Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy.

That is not the thought of most modern Bible scholars that have dug deeper into the story than just what the Bible says.

Book of Genesis - Wikipedia.

"Tradition credits Moses as the author of Genesis, as well as the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy, but modern scholars, especially from the 19th century, onward see them as a product of the 6th and 5th centuries BC."

 

[coffee4u]

What is the context of that quote? (It's not about taking Genesis 1 literally).

You want a theology discussion now? Somehow I doubt that, but lets play along.

Jesus is talking to the Jewish leaders who were persecuting him for healing on the Sabbath.
These leaders knew the law of Moses well yet rejected Jesus and his message. They claimed to believe the words of Moses and know the father, Jesus called them out on this lie.

37 And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, 38 nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent.

He then goes on to say if they truly believed Moses they would believe in him but they are more concerned with the laws they have made and other men's opinions.

My point about believing the words of Moses still stands.

So what is your take on this passage of scripture?

 

[coffee4u]

That is not the thought of most modern Bible scholars that have dug deeper into the story than just what the Bible says.

Book of Genesis - Wikipedia.

"Tradition credits Moses as the author of Genesis, as well as the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy, but modern scholars, especially from the 19th century, onward see them as a product of the 6th and 5th centuries BC."

Most lefties do yes. The same ones who deny creation, deny the global flood and half of them even deny the virgin birth.

Isaiah 5:20
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Most lefties do yes. The same ones who deny creation, deny the global flood and half of them even deny the virgin birth.

Isaiah 5:20
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

There is nothing about being a lefty, and there is no denial. The conclusion that there was no flood is determined by evidence and evidence only. Unfortunately we cannot discuss theology properly here, but we can discuss science. A global flood would have left endless scientific evidence for it, unfortunately for literalists there is no scientific evidence for the flood.

 

[Speedwell]

Most lefties do yes. The same ones who deny creation, deny the global flood and half of them even deny the virgin birth.

Isaiah 5:20
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

You lose. That "lefties" comment disqualifies you.

 

[Hans Blaster]

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Since the "natural man" is being criticized here, what is the alternative? The "unnatural man"?

 

[sjastro]

Most lefties do yes. The same ones who deny creation, deny the global flood and half of them even deny the virgin birth.

I think you are on to something here; I'm left handed and fit your profile.
Should form the basis for a PhD thesis.
"Correlation of left handedness with creation, global flood and 50% virgin birth denial".

 

[Hans Blaster]

I think you are on to something here; I'm left handed and fit your profile.
Should form the basis for a PhD thesis.
"Correlation of left handedness with creation, global flood and 50% virgin birth denial".

I fit his profile, too, but I'm not left handed. So much for that dissertation topic.