6 Day Creation Is A Lie Because.....

[Crusadar]

wblastyn said this in Post #120:Where is your evidence to back up what you say?

The Scriptures:

“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” Ex 20:11

“It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” Ex 31:17

So where does it say God took millions of years in the scriptures? If God did not create the world in 6 literal days why reiterate it throughout the Scriptures?

All those things have been refuted by real science before. Are you arrogant enough to believe that you, a layman, can disprove science by simply quoteing some "facts" about the moon dust, etc. If it were as simple to disprove an old earth then why would so many scientists accept an ancient earth?

Are thou so proud of thy knowledge of worldly things which thou can not taketh into the kingdom of the most high? That is exactly my point, facts alone are meaningless it is the belief system that makes use of the facts – if it does not support my faith in God - it is garbage. It was to prove a point that regurgitating facts back and forth will not solve issues of faith. I do not care about who or what refutations of fallible theories have been refuted by fallible men, for I stand foremost on God’s word and that I do to my death for the truth of God remains irregardless of what we take as literal or allegory. I am sure you cannot say that about your beloved ToE. It does not effect my faith in the absolute authority of the word of God in even the slightest way if men’s theories are so called refuted.

Moon dust: http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/moondust.html
Btw, moon dust is also refuted by AiG.

What is AiG, another atheistic site? As I have said before spare me the links - if they mention nothing of God’s sovereignty over His creation – don’t even bother to link because it will be but a waste of my time and yours.

What has accepting evolution got to do with apparantly forgetting my belief in Satan?

I have said many times before you have removed the sin factor. Evolution - smevolution, nor by any other name it is still false and for it is connected to deeper and darker forces that you are not aware of and have been duped into believing.

Well anyone can say "God told me". We can't just sit back and expect God to send His angels to tell us things, we have to get up and do our own research and pray God will lead us to the truth.

And again I say what matters is not what I say, but what does God’s words say, go read the scriptures - what I say simply reflect what has been written you should know that by now. I suggest you read the scriptures more and man's theories less.

So in God's view the earth is flat and at the center of the solar system? Uh huh...

You said it, not me. And besides where does it ever say that the earth was flat in the Scriptures? I sure would like to know since my KJV version mentions nothing about the world being flat or the earth as the center of the universe?

I'm so sure because evolution is the best explaination for the evidence found in Creation and has yet to be falsified, Creationism on the other hand was falsified by CHristian geologists hundreds of years ago.

100% sure? Pretty bold claim there, if you ask me, with no undisputed proof, and a lot of wishful thinking I bet. So tell me how many so called “Christian scientists” do you know that are willing to be mocked and ridiculed by men for their absolute faith in a God at any day and age? Not many I predict – shows you how Christian they are if they are not willing to take up the cross. I have no doubt when the Lord returns He will separate the goats from the sheep and the chaff from the wheat for have you not read:

“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” 2Peter 2:1  KJV

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” 1 John 4:1 KJV

The men interpreted scripture literally just as you do, they thought anyone who thought different was a heretic. How are you any different.

Ah yes, the in crowd syndrome. There is nothing new about going with the flow for it is much easier – I guess I understand now your position on this issue but be forewarned that he who mocks the one who stands on the Word of God mocks not the person but the one whose words they are. As I have said many times, there is no interpretation being done, read the scriptures for crying out loud! Does it not say in 6 days God created the world? Does it say in 6 million years He created? No! It says 6 days, what can be plainer to understand than that? What makes me different? I am among the very few rare breed of God’s children who stand not on man’s deceptions but on God’s truth.

You have knowledge available to you yet you chose to ignore it.

What you seek or have sought for is not true knowledge but faith in false doctrines, for what you truly seek elusively finds you not for you continue to worship a god of an old earth. Fill your mind with whatever falseness you deemed fit but bare in mind that we cannot take with us such earthly things that we have gained or learned.

No, I'm saying a literal interpretation is wrong because it does not reflect what we see in reality. I do not believe God's Word is wrong.

No, what is wrong is that by saying God used evolution you blame God for all the atrocities of life and have no rationale for solving them. True, reality does not reflect what we read in scripture of a perfect creation because the sin factor is at play most pervasively throughout God’s creation, or have you forgotten that?

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Blessed is that man that maketh the Lord his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies." Psalms 40:4 KJV
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Revelations 4:11 KJV

 

[wblastyn]

The Scriptures:

“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” Ex 20:11

“It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” Ex 31:17

So where does it say God took millions of years in the scriptures? If God did not create the world in 6 literal days why reiterate it throughout the Scriptures?

I also have verses to support a flat earth and geocentric solar system.

Isaiah 40:22 "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Here Isaiah says the earth is a circle (not a sphere), which is flat, and is covered by the dome of the universe described as "like a tent."

The tree grew large and strong and its top touched the sky; it was visible to the ends of the earth." (Daniel 4:11
For something to be visible to the ends of the earth, the earth would have to be flat.

"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." (Psalm 104:5)

"The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved." (Psalm 93:1)

"Say among the nations, 'The Lord reigns.' The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved." (Psalm 96:10)

"Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved." (1 Chronicles 16:30)

If the earth cannot move then it is not revolving around the sun, so the church believed in geocentricism.

"The pillars of the heavens quake, aghast at his rebuke." (Job 26:11)

"When the earth and all its people quake, it is I who hold its pillars firm." (Psalm 75:3)

"For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he set the world upon them." (1 Samuel 2:8)

Here the earth is said to sit on pillars.

So where does it say the earth is a sphere and moves around the sun? HINT: The Bible is not a science book.

Are thou so proud of thy knowledge of worldly things which thou can not taketh into the kingdom of the most high? That is exactly my point, facts alone are meaningless it is the belief system that makes use of the facts – if it does not support my faith in God - it is garbage. It was to prove a point that regurgitating facts back and forth will not solve issues of faith. I do not care about who or what refutations of fallible theories have been refuted by fallible men, for I stand foremost on God’s word and that I do to my death for the truth of God remains irregardless of what we take as literal or allegory. I am sure you cannot say that about your beloved ToE. It does not effect my faith in the absolute authority of the word of God in even the slightest way if men’s theories are so called refuted.

Evolution does not support or unsupport God, gravity is the same.

What is AiG, another atheistic site? As I have said before spare me the links - if they mention nothing of God’s sovereignty over His creation – don’t even bother to link because it will be but a waste of my time and yours.

No, Answers in Genesis is a Christian creationist website.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

I have said many times before you have removed the sin factor. Evolution - smevolution, nor by any other name it is still false and for it is connected to deeper and darker forces that you are not aware of and have been duped into believing.

Yes because "descent with modification" is so evil and cunning. Evil finches for being different in one population to those of another island, they've obviously been manipulated by Satan.

And again I say what matters is not what I say, but what does God’s words say, go read the scriptures - what I say simply reflect what has been written you should know that by now. I suggest you read the scriptures more and man's theories less.

It's really what your interpretation of God's Word says, not God's Word.

You said it, not me. And besides where does it ever say that the earth was flat in the Scriptures? I sure would like to know since my KJV version mentions nothing about the world being flat or the earth as the center of the universe?

See verses above.

100% sure? Pretty bold claim there, if you ask me, with no undisputed proof, and a lot of wishful thinking I bet. So tell me how many so called “Christian scientists” do you know that are willing to be mocked and ridiculed by men for their absolute faith in a God at any day and age? Not many I predict – shows you how Christian they are if they are not willing to take up the cross. I have no doubt when the Lord returns He will separate the goats from the sheep and the chaff from the wheat for have you not read:

I never said 100% sure. That is why science is based on "theories" because scientists know that they do not know everything.

It's not about not wanting to be mocked, it's about finding the truth. If Christian scientists ignored the evidence for evolution they'd be lying to themselves, and science would get no where.

“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” 2Peter 2:1 KJV

Yes, creationism is a damnable heresy, it pushes scientists and other educated people away from the church.

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” 1 John 4:1 KJV

Creationism was tried over 100 years ago and failed.

Ah yes, the in crowd syndrome. There is nothing new about going with the flow for it is much easier – I guess I understand now your position on this issue but be forewarned that he who mocks the one who stands on the Word of God mocks not the person but the one whose words they are. As I have said many times, there is no interpretation being done, read the scriptures for crying out loud! Does it not say in 6 days God created the world? Does it say in 6 million years He created? No! It says 6 days, what can be plainer to understand than that? What makes me different? I am among the very few rare breed of God’s children who stand not on man’s deceptions but on God’s truth

What are you talking about now, what crowds? Heliocenticism was very much against the flow at the time because the church believed a literal interpretation of scripture, look who was wrong.

You think rather highly of yourself. Are you so sure it's not you who is being deceived?

What you seek or have sought for is not true knowledge but faith in false doctrines, for what you truly seek elusively finds you not for you continue to worship a god of an old earth. Fill your mind with whatever falseness you deemed fit but bare in mind that we cannot take with us such earthly things that we have gained or learned.

Evolution is not a doctrine, it's a scientific theory based on overwhelming supporting evidence.

No, what is wrong is that by saying God used evolution you blame God for all the atrocities of life and have no rationale for solving them. True, reality does not reflect what we read in scripture of a perfect creation because the sin factor is at play most pervasively throughout God’s creation, or have you forgotten that?

Evolution was the very thing that saved Christianity because theologians were having trouble explaining how God created everything so special with so many mistakes. (human tail for instance - it's a real tail locked away in the human genome activated by mutation, it can be wiggled by some). I would post a site but you'll only ignore it because it goes against your position, it just shows how insecure you are about your beliefs.











Well if all I read was the Bible I'd believe in a flat earth.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Crusadar,

Its really not worth your effort with these fine folks.

Look at the joke of a verse he pulls out to show that the earth is flat.
Nothing about flat in it.
I would say that the fact that a circle is used gives much credit to a writer who would normally have had no idea that the earth wasnt flat.

You gave a great shot, but I would leave these folks to their beliefs.

If evolution is as I believe, you really dont stand much chance of persuading them out of their delusion. They dont want to leave it.

There are other areas in this very forum where folks are actually looking for Gods truth.
You really seem like you could do much good for some of those people.

 

[Crusadar]

wblastyn said this in Post #122: I also have verses to support a flat earth and geocentric solar system.

No my brother you have theories surmised from incredulity of Scripture by fallible men not the scriptures, for God does not contradict His own truth. It is men who seek to discredit God such as yourself. This is nothing new, for since God created the universe men have not thanked God for continuing to sustaining them even when they have turned against Him. 

Here Isaiah says the earth is a circle (not a sphere), which is flat, and is covered by the dome of the universe described as "like a tent."

Really? The word flat is not even in the verse! Was this revealed to you by the HS or was it based on your presuppositions that evolution was how God created and therefore distorted the verse to meet your needs?

If the earth cannot move then it is not revolving around the sun, so the church believed in geocentricism.

Yes the church believed, the church where dwelleth fallible men who used their fallen mind in explaining a world with only those tools available to them at the time.

Here the earth is said to sit on pillars. So where does it say the earth is a sphere and moves around the sun? HINT: The Bible is not a science book.

What is your point? Where does it say it is “flat”? Circle, dome - suggests more of a round earth then a flat one if you ask me. I have address this science text book stuff before.

Evolution does not support or unsupport God, gravity is the same.

Of course it doesn’t support God, I am glad you’re finally coming to your senses. Unsupport is not in my vocabulary nor is it in the dictionary so I’m not sure what you mean. And please lose the gravity thing, I’ve addressed that before.

No, Answers in Genesis is a Christian creationist website.

I stand corrected. I will have to read some of their material over before commenting – still however it is no substitute for the word of God.

Yes because "descent with modification" is so evil and cunning. Evil finches for being different in one population to those of another island, they've obviously been manipulated by Satan.

What false doctrine is this? Descent from what? Evil finches? What island? You’re talking about Darwin’s ordeal right? My thoughts, the man was simply wrong. He was out to remove God because of his commitment to materialistic means. No, it is the consequence of sin and man’s rebellion.

It's really what your interpretation of God's Word says, not God's Word.

No, it is a plain reading, a plain understanding, no interpretation needed or used – what can be plainer than that? And if that were the case - that the majority of Christians believe in an old earth, old universe, and so on – why not modify the words of scripture to reflect this belief? Why not change the days in Genesis to millions of years?

I never said 100% sure. That is why science is based on "theories" because scientists know that they do not know everything.

And that is why I base my faith on God’s words, not man’s theories. Because the word of God has remain intact since the creation of this world and will remain intact when you and I are dead and buried.

It's not about not wanting to be mocked, it's about finding the truth. If Christian scientists ignored the evidence for evolution they'd be lying to themselves, and science would get no where.

Yes it is. It is about carrying the cross. Suffering for JC and the cause of truth that matters to God, not believing in a theory agreed on by men who often times reject God. Please don’t use the word Christian with scientist together anymore, as I have said earlier not everyone who call themselves a Christian is worthy of the name. What science are you talking about? You mean the science of evolution? That is not real science, it is wishful thinking and nothing more. True science involves testable, repeatable, observable experiments - not evolution where wishful thinking is supported by only more wishful thinking.

Yes, creationism is a damnable heresy, it pushes scientists and other educated people away from the church.

It is a heresy to those who have been polluted by men’s theories and not God’s Truth. You are willing to follow these so called scientists and educated people even into eternal darkness – as for me, I will follow God’s truth. There is not much else I can do for you accept pray for you have chosen you path. You have ignored the signs of the time and when it comes time to pay, you will have nothing but an empty theory and a lot of explaining to do before the almighty God. You have forgotten that even scientists are merely human and ignorant of God's truth - even in the days of Noah only 8 were spared because only they saw the truth of God.

Creationism was tried over 100 years ago and failed.

Tried by fallible men I suppose. And Yes the ultimate judge will not care about what theories one knows, or how respected in the eyes of men one becomes but in whether we know His son Jesus Christ. How does he know this? Not by the mere confession of ones tongue but by the presence of JC in their hearts. Because you should know merely believing in Jesus is not enough to guarantee salvation, it is only in abandoning all earthly things and living for Christ that will guarantee salvation.

What are you talking about now, what crowds? Heliocenticism was very much against the flow at the time because the church believed a literal interpretation of scripture, look who was wrong.

The so called scientific crowd whom you’ve embraced as holders of your truth. Instead of carrying the cross you have taken the easy way out by going with the flow instead of against it. It was found wrong because it was conceived by fallible men. God is not blind! He sees and knows what is troubling you.

You think rather highly of yourself. Are you so sure it's not you who is being deceived?

No, I think highly of my God, for He alone is worthy of my praise. For in His infinite mercy He has saved an unworthy wretch like me. And yes I am sure, 100% sure, for God does not deceive.

Evolution is not a doctrine, it's a scientific theory based on overwhelming supporting evidence.

No it isn’t just a doctrine, it is a false doctrine. It is a lie of Satan and I am afraid you have fallen for it as I once have and so many Christians today. Evidence smevidence - Is that all that you base your faith on? Perhaps that is why you do not see God’s truth for you have ignored everything in the Scriptures that disagree with your evolutionary view and have embraced whatever else you deem fit because it sounds much better and because “scientists” agree on it. Need I remind you that scientists are also sinners and are not exempt from God’s judgment.

Evolution was the very thing that saved Christianity because theologians were having trouble explaining how God created everything so special with so many mistakes. (human tail for instance - it's a real tail locked away in the human genome activated by mutation, it can be wiggled by some).

It did not save Christianity, it distorted the truth of God, and He will bring his wrath on those deceiving His children. They simply gave up the cross and took an easier path. For it is in times of persecution that we will be tested as true believers of God or not. It is not in compromising of God's truth and in good times that we are made true Christians but in trials and tribulations that we are molded into the true children God. And by the way please lose the tail thing, it is blasphemous to my God to equate that He was apelike and besides there is no gene for tails – otherwise all of us would be walking around with one.

I would post a site but you'll only ignore it because it goes against your position, it just shows how insecure you are about your beliefs.

Insecurity of faith stems from belief in something that is always changing like your sacred ToE. My God never changes, neither does His truth, therefore who do you think has more insecurity?

Well if all I read was the Bible I'd believe in a flat earth.

Yes you would because you have chosen to simply take what you want out of the Scriptures that agrees with your evolutionary view and have disregarded the rest. If only you would have read the Scriptures as a whole through prayer and meditation you would see it says no such thing.



--------------------------------------------------------------
"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Revelations 4:11 KJV

 

[Crusadar]

Follower of Christ,

It is this breed of Christians that seem to be the most difficult to convince of the truth. They see themselves as the children of God and trust not His word. They seem to believe more what they see and are not willing to take up the cross for they value themselves more before men than in the sight of God.

Perhaps you are correct in concluding that there is no convincing them to change their beliefs. But I think that it has made them think about what they believe in if not change their beliefs. In their defense of their faith they have shown me how Christian they are in their retreat to theories of men rather than on the truth of God – for you and I know theories of men cannot stand against the word of God. It is not a question of who has the most evidence but who has the most faith, because evidences alone without faith are meaningless.

I think this shall be my final post here, for I have taken up my cross and will begin seminary soon to prepare myself for the coming kingdom of God and will have little time to spare.

Give God the glory my brother, for He is the only one worthy of any praise. I am simply His unworthy messenger.

To God be the Glory! 


--------------------------------------------------------------
"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Revelations 4:11 KJV

 

[wblastyn]

Crusadar,

Its really not worth your effort with these fine folks.

Look at the joke of a verse he pulls out to show that the earth is flat.
Nothing about flat in it.
I would say that the fact that a circle is used gives much credit to a writer who would normally have had no idea that the earth wasnt flat.

You gave a great shot, but I would leave these folks to their beliefs.

If evolution is as I believe, you really dont stand much chance of persuading them out of their delusion. They dont want to leave it.

There are other areas in this very forum where folks are actually looking for Gods truth.
You really seem like you could do much good for some of those people

Then what exactly do you think they are saying? It's funny how you don't give any explaination.

Isaiah was using Babylonian science, which believed the earth was flat covered in a dome.

Why are you still posting in here, I thought you did not accept the Nicene Creed.

No my brother you have theories surmised from incredulity of Scripture by fallible men not the scriptures, for God does not contradict His own truth. It is men who seek to discredit God such as yourself. This is nothing new, for since God created the universe men have not thanked God for continuing to sustaining them even when they have turned against Him.

[
I am not seeking to discredit God, it is you who is trying to tell God how He should have created rather than going to creation and finding out for yourself.

You don't seem to realise that the church believed in a flat geocentic earth based on taking these verse literally, just as you are rejecting science based on your interpretation.

Really? The word flat is not even in the verse! Was this revealed to you by the HS or was it based on your presuppositions that evolution was how God created and therefore distorted the verse to meet your needs?

No, but word trinity isn't in the Bible either. Isaiah says the earth is a circle, a circle is flat, it's not hard to figure out.

Yes the church believed, the church where dwelleth fallible men who used their fallen mind in explaining a world with only those tools available to them at the time.

Yes, and you're even worse, you're explaining a world with much more tools available to you.

What is your point? Where does it say it is “flat”? Circle, dome - suggests more of a round earth then a flat one if you ask me. I have address this science text book stuff before.

A circle is FLAT, a sphere is SPHERICAL/ROUND. It's not hard to figure out, if Isaiah wanted to say the earth was a sphere he would have said so.

Of course it doesn’t support God, I am glad you’re finally coming to your senses. Unsupport is not in my vocabulary nor is it in the dictionary so I’m not sure what you mean. And please lose the gravity thing, I’ve addressed that before.

I mean it doesn't prove or disprove God, I think I just made up the word unsupport lol.

No, because scientists accept evolution as they would gravity.

What false doctrine is this? Descent from what? Evil finches? What island? You’re talking about Darwin’s ordeal right? My thoughts, the man was simply wrong. He was out to remove God because of his commitment to materialistic means. No, it is the consequence of sin and man’s rebellion.

If he was trying to remove God then why would he refer to Him in "the origin"?

Evolution is "descent with modification".

If he was so wrong then why don't you prove it, you'll win a Nobel Prize if you falsify evolution.

No, it is a plain reading, a plain understanding, no interpretation needed or used – what can be plainer than that? And if that were the case - that the majority of Christians believe in an old earth, old universe, and so on – why not modify the words of scripture to reflect this belief? Why not change the days in Genesis to millions of years?

Yes, and a "plain reading" of scripture tells us the earth is flat, sits on pillars and doesn't move. You do not believe 2 "plain reading" of scripture any more than I do. Talk about double standards. If you were a theologian you would know that scripture isn't as simple as a "plain reading".

And that is why I base my faith on God’s words, not man’s theories. Because the word of God has remain intact since the creation of this world and will remain intact when you and I are dead and buried.

Well since the Bible is not science you would have to base your faith in mans science, otherwise you wouldn't be using a computer.

Yes it is. It is about carrying the cross. Suffering for JC and the cause of truth that matters to God, not believing in a theory agreed on by men who often times reject God. Please don’t use the word Christian with scientist together anymore, as I have said earlier not everyone who call themselves a Christian is worthy of the name. What science are you talking about? You mean the science of evolution? That is not real science, it is wishful thinking and nothing more. True science involves testable, repeatable, observable experiments - not evolution where wishful thinking is supported by only more wishful thinking.

Arrogant much? You're basically saying any scientist who does not ignore the evidence in creation could not be Christian.

Evolution is observable, bacteria become more resistant to antibiotics, that is evolution by definition - "descent with modification".

It is a heresy to those who have been polluted by men’s theories and not God’s Truth. You are willing to follow these so called scientists and educated people even into eternal darkness – as for me, I will follow God’s truth. There is not much else I can do for you accept pray for you have chosen you path. You have ignored the signs of the time and when it comes time to pay, you will have nothing but an empty theory and a lot of explaining to do before the almighty God. You have forgotten that even scientists are merely human and ignorant of God's truth - even in the days of Noah only 8 were spared because only they saw the truth of God.

So how does "descent with modification" lead me into darkness?

If you don't like scientists so much why are you using a computer?

If creationism is false then God will have to explain why He planted false evidence everywhere, deceiving people.

Insecurity of faith stems from belief in something that is always changing like your sacred ToE. My God never changes, neither does His truth, therefore who do you think has more insecurity?

Creationists make a huge mistake when they try and equate evolution with atheism. See unlike atheists I have no belief system that requires me to accept evolution, I couldn't care less if it was falsified or if God revealed He really did create as it says in literal Genesis. I don't care how God created, it doesn't matter to my salvation. It's just the all the data points to evolution and I will not ignore the data because people like you think "I'm ignoring God's Word". You can go and live in your cave where God creates everything the way you want Him to, I on the other hand would prefer to find out how he created.

Why do you think I accept evolution?

 

[Follower of Christ]

Of course I am still posting here, you are the one claiming my God is a liar.

 

[troodon]

We're the ones saying God isn't lying. God did not write the Bible, He did create the universe. The Bible says the universe is 6,000 years old, the universe itself says it's 13.7 billion.

 

[wblastyn]

Of course I am still posting here, you are the one claiming my God is a liar.

No, we're claiming God gave us brains to figure out when something should not be taken literally.

1) Genesis has conflicting creation accounts
2) Creation shows a literal Genesis is false
3) God does not lie
4) So we can chose - the Bible is all made up, God is a liar or a literal interpretation is wrong and Genesis was never supposed to have been taken literally in the first place.

I prefer literal Genesis is wrong interpretation.

 

[chrix]

OK folks, Here is the real answer ok. Firstly I am a REAL CHRISTIAN.
God didn't create the world in 6 days. Genesis is not a Lie, but it was a poem written to the glorify God, but the peotic theme is about the creation of the world.

It is a bit like the song the '12 days of Christmas, one the first day of christmas, ...on the second day of christmas' and so on.... So the writer was writing in the peotic style of that time where on the 7th day (7 means perfection) God stopped and rest. Meaning he created the world in perfection.

When the writer said God created Adam, well Adam means "mankind" in hebrew , and Eve "women(kind)".

This simply shows that God created Both Mankind and Women(kind).

If Adam and Eve had only 3 sons, Cain Abel and Seth, How did they reproduced ?

Cain represented the Cannanites and Abel another tribe., the whole story is this.
(think of George Owells Animal farm style of writing)
God created Humans, they sin against Him, they fought with each other. they need a saviour.

So that's it. The bible is not a lie, but Genesis simply wasn't out there to teach you about History or Medicine or How creation started. How can the earth be only 6000 years ?

Please christians. Science has showed that earth is probably 500000mil years old. They can't be that off.

Did we come from Apes ? The bible didn't say... so i don't know. My guess is No,, it is just my Guess.. But it really didn't say.

 

[Crusadar]

For those who are following this thread, yes I did say something to the effect that I will no longer be posting here, but I am but a fallible human being and my absolute faith in God and His truth urges me to return for I see yet another brother who has been misguided by the lies of evolution.

chrix,

Welcome Christian brother from Singapore, it is good to know there are believers of Christ in that part of the world.

Today at 04:26 AM chrix said this in Post #130: OK folks, Here is the real answer ok. Firstly I am a REAL CHRISTIAN.

God didn't create the world in 6 days. Genesis is not a Lie, but it was a poem written to the glorify God, but the peotic theme is about the creation of the world.

So chrix you are telling me that Genesis is only a poem? Excuse my rashness for I am only human, but are you willing to back up your bold claims and defend your faith? Step into the ring my brother and we will go a few rounds - if you truly believe that God did not create the world in just 6 days.

It is a bit like the song the '12 days of Christmas, one the first day of christmas, ...on the second day of christmas' and so on.... So the writer was writing in the peotic style of that time where on the 7th day (7 means perfection) God stopped and rest. Meaning he created the world in perfection.

It is bad analogy to compare works by fallible men with the Holy Scriptures inspired by an infallible God. Ah, God gave you eyes but you do not see, He gave you ears but you do not hear.

When the writer said God created Adam, well Adam means "mankind" in hebrew , and Eve "women(kind)". This simply shows that God created Both Mankind and Women(kind)

No my brother it means He created Adam – our forefather the first man, and Eve his helper, wife, and companion, the first woman,  from Adam’s own flesh.

If Adam and Eve had only 3 sons, Cain Abel and Seth, How did they reproduced ?

And now read further on in Genesis. For it is written: “And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters.” Genesis 5:4 KJV

That seems to be a reoccuring problem nowadays - not reading far enough in Scripture.

Cain represented the Cannanites and Abel another tribe, the whole story is this.

It is not Cain who represented the Canaanites but Noah’s son Ham who was cursed by his father who was the father of Canaan and the forefather of the Canaanites. Abel by the way was murdered by Cain, therefore would not of had any tribe.

(think of George Owells Animal farm style of writing).

Another bad analogy.

God created Humans, they sin against Him, they fought with each other. they need a saviour.

They need a Savior because they have rebelled against God in choosing to disobey God. As a consequence death, suffering, mutation, diseases, bloodshed and the like entered the world for God has removed His eternal sustaining power because of sin. And thus He sent Jesus Christ His beloved son to pay the price for man’s redemption.

So that's it. The bible is not a lie, but Genesis simply wasn't out there to teach you about History or Medicine or How creation started. How can the earth be only 6000 years ?

It is not as easy as that my brother. It is a much bigger topic than you anticipate for there are dark forces at work here that is beyond simple explanations.

Please christians. Science has showed that earth is probably 500000mil years old. They can't be that off.

You have forgotten that science is merely the study of God’s creation and a fallible convention of man and cannot be used in substitution of Scripture. Rather let the HS guide you to the truth of God.

Did we come from Apes ? The bible didn't say... so i don't know. My guess is No,, it is just my Guess.. But it really didn't say.

Tell me was God an ape? No, because we were made in the image of God. Some of us like to think so because they have been duped by Satan to conclude that the ape kind was in their line of ancestry - for they have embraced the lies of evolution rather than stand on the truth of God.

To God be the Glory!



--------------------------------------------------------------
"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Revelations 4:11 KJV

 

[Follower of Christ]

Crusadar, great post.

I was going to respond to that post, but its a new person and I figured we'd let them get settled in first.

I guess youre having as hard a time as me avoiding this forum

 

[wblastyn]

Did we come from Apes ? The bible didn't say... so i don't know. My guess is No,, it is just my Guess.. But it really didn't say.

Biologically we are apes. Scientists accept that we share a common ancestor with the other apes.

 

[lucaspa]

17th April 2003 at 10:02 AM Crusadar said this in Post #131

Today at 04:26 AM chrix said this in Post #130: OK folks, Here is the real answer ok. Firstly I am a REAL CHRISTIAN.

God didn't create the world in 6 days. Genesis is not a Lie, but it was a poem written to the glorify God, but the peotic theme is about the creation of the world.

So chrix you are telling me that Genesis is only a poem?

Not only a poem, but a poem.  Which is one of several reasons not to read it literally.  Go to any synagogue on any Sabbath and listen to the Cantor.  The Cantor is singing the Torah, including Genesis. Why? Because Genesis is a poem meant to be sung.  The repitition of certain phrases is a tip-off. Such as "evening and morning". Those are in there to keep the meter in Hebrew.

Step into the ring my brother and we will go a few rounds - if you truly believe that God did not create the world in just 6 days.

I accept that God did not create the world in 6 days. One reason is that Genesis 2:4b says that God created the world in one day.  "in the day" (beyom).  Now, since we have contradictory accounts within Genesis, the conclusion is that neither account was meant to be read literally.

I have a question for you.  Genesis, like the rest of the Bible, exists to tell you theology.  What are the theological messages of Genesis 1?  You are so busy reading it as literal history, have you even stopped to consider the theology?

It is bad analogy to compare works by fallible men with the Holy Scriptures inspired by an infallible God.

But interpreted by fallible men.  How are you so sure that your, fallible man, interpretation is the correct one?

Ah, God gave you eyes but you do not see, He gave you ears but you do not hear.

Nicely said. Applies perfectly to young earth creationists, don't you think?

And now read further on in Genesis. For it is written: “And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters.” Genesis 5:4 KJV

1. So we have incest?
2. If you are reading literally, Seth and Cain are married before this passage saying that Adam and Eve had daughters.  Aren't you here deviating from the inspired word of God and inserting your own ideas? 

They need a Savior because they have rebelled against God in choosing to disobey God. As a consequence death, suffering, mutation, diseases, bloodshed and the like entered the world for God has removed His eternal sustaining power because of sin.

Again you seem to be inserting your ideas into scripture.  WHere does it say that mutation and disease entered the world?  That seems to be your intepretation and not the "inspired word of God".  So, how do you know your interpretation is correct?

You have forgotten that science is merely the study of God’s creation and a fallible convention of man and cannot be used in substitution of Scripture.

And you seem to have forgotten that the world IS God's Creation. Therefore all the evidence in it must have been put there by God.  You seem to place scripture above God's Creation. Why?  Are you aware that Christianity has held the "two books" doctrine and treated them as equals?  Is it possible that you have substituted worship of the Bible for worship of God?

Rather let the HS guide you to the truth of God.

And all those Christians that were led to decide that Genesis was not literal and God created by evolution were not led by the HS?

Tell me was God an ape? No, because we were made in the image of God.

We are apes.  In the family "Ape". So if you are saying that God has our physical form, then you are saying that God is an ape.

However, do you see what you are doing here? You are making God a physical creature with a physical form.  Did Moses see a human form on the mountain?  Or did Moses see a burning bush that was not consumed.

I think you have told us your real objection to evolution: human pride.  Humans want to be special in and of themselves.  Evolution "demotes" humans to not being special on their own.  They are just another animal.  So, if we are special in God's sight, then it must be only because God decides we are special.  While couching your argument in terms that evolution denigrates God, I submit that what you really mean is that you don't want to be dependent on God.  You want to be special independent of God, so you want to be created to be like God.  Being like God makes you special no matter what God decides afterward.  It's a done deal.

Instead, evolution forces you to be dependent on God to be considered special.  It is your pride that is hurt.

Now, as to the phrase "image of God",  in that time period in the MidEast, to be "in the image" meant something quite different than what you say.  There are several other documents talking about ambassadors from one country to another. In those times of primitive communication, an ambassador didn't have time to communicate back with the king, like we can now.  Therefore ambassadors were given authority to negotiate and make binding agreements.  When this was given, the ambassador was said to be "in the image of" the king involve.  He represented the king and could make decisions for that king.

And this is what the phrase means in Genesis. God is trusting humans to make binding decisions regarding the use (or abuse) of the earth and the creatures on it.  We get to act in the stead of God.

Some of us like to think so because they have been duped by Satan to conclude that the ape kind was in their line of ancestry - for they have embraced the lies of evolution rather than stand on the truth of God.

Well, that does keep you from considering that you are worshipping the false god of your erroneous interpretation of Genesis.  Of course, it ignores that the people that showed a 6 day creation to be false were all Christians and most of them were ministers. However, thinking they were duped is a comfortable fantasy.

To God be the Glory!

Agree.  And there is just as much glory in creating by the processes discovered by science as by a 144 hour creation.

 

[lucaspa]

22nd March 2003 at 11:44 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #1 



EXPLAIN IN YOUR OWN WORDS WHY YOUR EVIDENCE PROVES THE BIBLES ACCOUNT OF 6 DAYS IS INNACURATE....

Well, for starters there is Genesis 2, which contradicts the account in Genesis 1.

But you also wanted data from the physical universe.

1. If all animals and plants were created in a 144 hour period, then they should all be present together in the same layers in the ground. All mixed up.  Elephants with Apatosaurus, dolphins with ichthyosaurs, hermit crabs with trilobites.  But that isn't what we see.  Instead, icthyosaurs are never found in the same sediments as dolphins, hermit crabs with trilobites, elephants with Apatosaurs, etc. Worse, whole groups of animals and plants aren't found in layers.  Flowering plants aren't found in the same layers as the giant cycads and ferns.  Teleostian fishes aren't found in the same layers as major extinct groups of cartilaginous fishes (the Flood won't save this one, BTW), the large mammals are never found in the same layers as the dinosaurs and flying reptiles.

2.  If a 144 hour creation is correct, stars should all be the same age.  But stars are not the same age.  Looking at the composition of stars by their emission spectrum and looking at the accumulation of products of nuclear fusion, it can be calculated how old a star is.  Stars in globular clusters are about 12 billion years old, while white giants are only a few hundred million years old. White giants burn their nuclear fuel so fast that they can't be any older or they would have burned out their fuel. So different age stars falsifies the 6 day creation.

3. Kinds.  According to the 6 day creation, kinds only breed "after their own kind". This led Biblical literalists to theorize that species (kinds)  could not change,  However, fossil sequences of individuals in undisturbed strata go across any possible taxonomic grouping which can be a kind (unless you make "kind" completely meaningless). These sequences show a gradual change from one individual to another and the accumulation of changes until you are in a different species, genus, family, order, or even class.

Some examples of these in the literature for anyone to go look at for themselves (admittedly a few are going to be difficult to find and this is by no means a complete list) are:
Transitional across species:
1.  McNamara KJ, Heterochrony and the evolution of echinoids. In CRC Paul and AB Smith (eds) Echinoderm Phylogeny and Evolutionary Biology, pp149-163, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1988 pg 140 of Futuyma.
2. Kellogg DE and Hays JD Microevolutionary patterns in Late Cenozoic Radiolara. Paleobiology 1: 150-160, 1975.
3.  "Unscrambling Time in the Fossil Record"  Science vol 274, pg 1842, Dec 13, 1996.  The primary article is by GA Goodfriend and SJ Gould "Paleontolgy and Chronolgy of Two evolutionary Transitions by Hybridization in the Bahamian Land Snail Cerion", pgs 1894-1897.

Transitionals across genera:
1.   Williamson, PG, Paleontological documentation of speciation in cenozoic molluscs from Turkana basin. Nature 293:437-443, 1981.

Transitionals across family:
1.  PD Gingerich, Paleontology and phylogeny: patterns of evolution of the species level in early Tertiary mammals.  American J. of Science, 276: 407-424, 1980.  Transitional series between species of early horses linking "higher" taxa.  web site for horse evolution: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses/
2. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/foram/foramintro.html
  http://cushforams.niu.edu/Forams.htm

Transitionals across order:
1. C Teichert "Nautiloidea-Discorsorida"  and "Actinoceratoidea" in Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology ed RC Moore, 1964
2.   PR Sheldon, Parallel gradualistic evolution of Ordovician trilobites.  Nature 330: 561-563, 1987.  Rigourous biometric study of the pygidial ribs of 3458 specimens of 8 generic lineages in 7 stratgraphic layers covering about 3 million years.  Gradual evolution where at any given time the population was intermediate between the samples before it and after it. 

Transitionals across class:
1.  Principles of Paleontology by DM Raup and SM Stanley, 1971. 2.  HK Erben, Uber den Ursprung der Ammonoidea. Biol. Rev. 41: 641-658, 1966.

 

[Crusadar]

lucaspa said this in Post #134 :Not only a poem, but a poem.  Which is one of several reasons not to read it literally.  Go to any synagogue on any Sabbath and listen to the Cantor.  The Cantor is singing the Torah, including Genesis. Why? Because Genesis is a poem meant to be sung.  The repitition of certain phrases is a tip-off. Such as "evening and morning". Those are in there to keep the meter in Hebrew.

That seems to be a pervasive way of thinking this day and age, something that is not exclusively held by this generation. Not taking Genesis literally has little to do with it being poetry - for there are no rhymes, no rhythms, no alliterations, no iambic pentameter, nor are there metaphors or simile’s associated with any line in the creation of Genesis. I do have a minor in English you know and Genesis is no Shakespeare, for it is written as literal history. And if it was meant to be only a poem, then it is poor poetry. Those who read it as songs do so to write into their hearts and minds not because it is poetry but because they believe it to be the inspired word of God and the basis of their faith, just as I do when I wish to memorize Scripture.

I accept that God did not create the world in 6 days. One reason is that Genesis 2:4b says that God created the world in one day.  "in the day" (beyom).  Now, since we have contradictory accounts within Genesis, the conclusion is that neither account was meant to be read literally.

You accept. Maybe that is the problem, accepting and having faith in it are two different things. The devil acknowledges in the existence of God, and yet it is quite a different type of acknowledgement is it not? I’ve addressed this day thing before. Anyway tell me if the word day does not mean day when it clearly says day, then when does it mean day when it says day? You mean to tell me that the word day means what a thousand? A million years? A billion years? I don’t think that I am that gullible now. And by the way we are talking about the omnipotent God of the Bible right? You realize He is not confined to our time for He is God, and has always been and will always be.

I have a question for you.  Genesis, like the rest of the Bible, exists to tell you theology.  What are the theological messages of Genesis 1?  You are so busy reading it as literal history, have you even stopped to consider the theology?

Ask God first and He will show you His truth, it is that God created the world as He had said and if you read further on it is the foundation of all Christian doctrines or have you forgotten that? Theology is a term invented by man, and therefore fallible and does not aid me in understanding Scripture

But interpreted by fallible men.  How are you so sure that your, fallible man, interpretation is the correct one?

I have answered this before in this thread.

Nicely said. Applies perfectly to young earth creationists, don't you think?

Yes, it is a shame you do not hear the word of God, but rather turned your eyes and ears to the theories of men and to the lies of the father of all lies himself – Lucifer. 

1. So we have incest?
2. If you are reading literally, Seth and Cain are married before this passage saying that Adam and Eve had daughters. Aren't you here deviating from the inspired word of God and inserting your own ideas? 

Incest by the way is a modern term. If you note it is not until Moses’ time that God had ordered that close relations could no longer marry because He is God you know and foresaw the effects of interbreeding. And by the way according to evolutionary thinking – incest should be no issue should it?

It says no such thing about Seth and Cain, for as you should be aware homosexuality is an abomination and a sin against God so why would He condone it?

Again you seem to be inserting your ideas into scripture.  WHere does it say that mutation and disease entered the world?  That seems to be your intepretation and not the "inspired word of God".  So, how do you know your interpretation is correct?

What own ideas? This is nothing new. This belief is held by the children of God who have not compromised the authority of His words with theories by fallible men. How do I know it is correct? I know this because of my absolute faith in God and His truth and from the total dedication of my life to Jesus Christ.

And you seem to have forgotten that the world IS God's Creation. Therefore all the evidence in it must have been put there by God.  You seem to place scripture above God's Creation. Why? Are you aware that Christianity has held the "two books" doctrine and treated them as equals?  Is it possible that you have substituted worship of the Bible for worship of God?

Yes it is His creation, but it is a fallen creation, cursed by God. Or have you also forgotten the sin factor as many others have? And besides would the God of the Bible, a perfect and loving God create an imperfect world so that He can watch and see his creation struggle, maimed and die all at His whim? What sort of god is that? Surely this does not show a god of love as he claims to be? Worship of God stems from the truth of what He has revealed to us in the Scriptures, not what men can see in nature. By your logic you are saying that it is then okay to worship His creation since God created it? Because that is exactly what you are doing.


 

 

[Crusadar]

lucaspa said this in Post#134: And all those Christians that were led to decide that Genesis was not literal and God created by evolution were not led by the HS?

They are all fallible men as you and myself.  I think I have addressed this issue much earlier and I see no need to repeat myself. I will tell you though that there are spiritual forces at work here that you have yet to recognize for you insist on reading your Bible as a book of moral stories and allegories and not as the inspired word of God and in your continued worshipping of a god of an old earth.

We are apes.  In the family "Ape". So if you are saying that God has our physical form, then you are saying that God is an ape.

You are an ape, not me. Which is an insult to the apes and not you, because instead of giving God credit for what He said He has done using the mind He has given you, you have become futile in your thoughts because you give not God the credit He deserves – rather say we are the result of unguided processes? So tell me what is your definition of “image” if it does not mean likeness?

However, do you see what you are doing here? You are making God a physical creature with a physical form.  Did Moses see a human form on the mountain?  Or did Moses see a burning bush that was not consumed.

I know what it is that God is telling me and that is what you are hearing - as it has been written so it had been done. Do you know what it is that you are doing? For He has created us in His physical manifestation, in the likeness of God we were created. If the likeness be spiritual in nature, mental capacity, moral conduct or likewise – why do we have so much animosity for our fellow man? Is hatred also the character of our God? And besides if we descended from apes why was Jesus not born among apes? God is not simply thought. He chooses whatever form He pleases to reveal His divine nature to man and that likeness is that of man.

I think you have told us your real objection to evolution: human pride.  Humans want to be special in and of themselves. 

I have not yet begun to tell you my objections to your sacred cow of evolution. Of course if you have followed this thread from the beginning there is little that I can say to convince anyone of anything since everyone must walk their own faith and live their own lives, for they will die their own deaths and be judged by God in His own way. If you seek absolute proof of God’s truth, you will find it not in the theories of men, but only in the absolute authority of the word of God when it touches on everything including that of origins.

Evolution "demotes" humans to not being special on their own.  They are just another animal.  So, if we are special in God's sight, then it must be only because God decides we are special.  While couching your argument in terms that evolution denigrates God, I submit that what you really mean is that you don't want to be dependent on God.

No, evolution demotes us to be less than animals, for it is an insult to animals to compare ourselves to them. Because God has given us a mind and yet we do not think of Him, and has given us a tongue and we praise Him not for His continued sustenance of His fallen creation. Instead of using our God given intellect to glorify and thank Him, we have become futile in our thoughts and no longer homo sapiens – (man the wise), but homo stolitus (man the fool). For He has given us His truth and yet we say it is a lie. He has given us light and yet we have chosen darkness. He has given us love and yet we have chosen hate. He has offered us life and yet we have chosen death.

You want to be special independent of God, so you want to be created to be like God.

Yes I do feel special, not because you say so, but because in God’s infinite love and mercy He has chosen to save an unworthy wretch as myself. And He did create us in His image, thus the reason we were not obliterated or cast into the pits of hell along with the rebellious angels - who by the way cannot be redeemed. We however are held with more value than the life of His own Son. Now would you send your own son to die for a race of apes? Absurd to think so isn’t it?

Being like God makes you special no matter what God decides afterward.  It's a done deal.

Being in His image yes, like Him hardly. It is men who reject God and His truth that call themselves gods – the gods of a decrepit earth that is.

Instead, evolution forces you to be dependent on God to be considered special.  It is your pride that is hurt.

My pride is of no concern here, nor is it of any value, for I live on my faith in the absolute authority of the word of God, not the fallible theories of men - whether it be creationism or evolution. Yes I have pride, not in myself but in an infinitely wise and powerful creator who can create whatever and however He chooses for His own pleasure and purpose, despite the fallible theories of men to discredit Him.

Now, as to the phrase "image of God",  in that time period in the MidEast, to be "in the image" meant something quite different than what you say.  There are several other documents talking about ambassadors from one country to another. In those times of primitive communication, an ambassador didn't have time to communicate back with the king, like we can now.  Therefore ambassadors were given authority to negotiate and make binding agreements.  When this was given, the ambassador was said to be "in the image of" the king involve.  He represented the king and could make decisions for that king. And this is what the phrase means in Genesis. God is trusting humans to make binding decisions regarding the use (or abuse) of the earth and the creatures on it. We get to act in the stead of God.

Yes another fallible theory by fallible men. Nothing I haven’t heard before. If it is not Biblically based don’t waste your time or mine. We are in no position to make any decision in regards to His creation. God allows what He sees fit. He is God you know – whatever theories surmised to explain otherwise does not invalidate the truth of God, it exists irregardless of our adherence to them.

Well, that does keep you from considering that you are worshipping the false god of your erroneous interpretation of Genesis.  Of course, it ignores that the people that showed a 6 day creation to be false were all Christians and most of them were ministers. However, thinking they were duped is a comfortable fantasy.

No, my God is an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God who holds the answers to the death, suffering, mutations, hate, bloodshed, wickedness, atrocities, lawlessness and the like – while your god uses these very things to bring about his creation. What sort of god is that? A false god is one who is a powerless weakling, for you have reduced the God of the Bible into an ogre of a god having no sovereignty of such things.

Agree.  And there is just as much glory in creating by the processes discovered by science as by a 144 hour creation.

Glorify man then if it pleases you, for have you not read that we cannot serve two masters as you have come to do. My God is worthy and deserves my praise, whereas no man is worthy of any praise unless he speaks only of God’s truth.

 

[wblastyn]

No, my God is an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God who holds the answers to the death, suffering, mutations, hate, bloodshed, wickedness, atrocities, lawlessness and the like – while your god uses these very things to bring about his creation. What sort of god is that? A false god is one who is a powerless weakling, for you have reduced the God of the Bible into an ogre of a god having no sovereignty of such things.

Oh...you shouldn't have said that. What if it turns out you're wrong (being falliable and all) and God did use evolution? Who are we to question the ways of God.

 

[lucaspa]

Today at 02:03 PM Crusadar said this in Post #136

And besides would the God of the Bible, a perfect and loving God create an imperfect world so that He can watch and see his creation struggle, maimed and die all at His whim? What sort of god is that?

God says in Genesis 1 that creation is "good".  He never says creation is perfect.  Again, you are taking your fallible human vision and trying to tell God how He has to have done things. 

Creation is not struggling and dieing at God's whim.  It is struggling because God made a universe with meaning.  If God pulls the strings so that nothing bad ever happens, then life has no meaning.  We are nothing but puppets and playthings for God.  You ask what sort of God made the universe through evolution? A God who so loves His creations that He wants their lives to have meaning.  A God who wants their actions to mean something, either good or bad.  A God who will share triumph and grief, who will rejoice at heroism against great odds, who will grieve with those hurt or who have lost loved ones, but who so loves Creation that He will not deprive His creatures of the meaning of their lives. 

Surely this does not show a god of love as he claims to be?

It shows a god of so much love that He is beyond your imagination. 

lucaspa said this in Post #134 :Not only a poem, but a poem.  Which is one of several reasons not to read it literally.  Go to any synagogue on any Sabbath and listen to the Cantor.  The Cantor is singing the Torah, including Genesis. Why? Because Genesis is a poem meant to be sung.  The repitition of certain phrases is a tip-off. Such as "evening and morning". Those are in there to keep the meter in Hebrew.

That seems to be a pervasive way of thinking this day and age, something that is not exclusively held by this generation. Not taking Genesis literally has little to do with it being poetry - for there are no rhymes, no rhythms, no alliterations, no iambic pentameter, nor are there metaphors or simile’s associated with any line in the creation of Genesis.

Oh, there is meter and rhythms if you use the Hebrew. That is why it is sung!  BTW, iambic pentameter is only one possible meter.  However, there are metaphors. For instance, you don't really think the sun and moon "rule" over the day and night, do you? That's a metaphor.  Nor do you think that the sea "brought forth" life as stated, do you?  Another metaphor. According to your literalistic reading, didn't God "speak" and all these creatures appear?

I do have a minor in English you know and Genesis is no Shakespeare, for it is written as literal history.

Unfortunately, English isn't the language Genesis was written is, is it?  That's why I told you go to a synagogue where Genesis is sung in the original language.

And if it was meant to be only a poem, then it is poor poetry.

Everybody's a critic!

I accept that God did not create the world in 6 days. One reason is that Genesis 2:4b says that God created the world in one day.  "in the day" (beyom).  Now, since we have contradictory accounts within Genesis, the conclusion is that neither account was meant to be read literally.

You accept. Maybe that is the problem, accepting and having faith in it are two different things.

Yes, they are.  Acceptance means facing the evidence and having no choice.  Accepting that I sin is facing the evidence and having no choice.  Your acceptance of your fallibility is in the same category.  Faith is believing something is true without solid evidence.  The evidence God left in His Creation and the evidence in the Bible leave me no choice but to accept that Genesis 1 is not literal history.

 Anyway tell me if the word day does not mean day when it clearly says day, then when does it mean day when it says day?

We have the word "yom" in Genesis 1 and the modified word "beyom" in Genesis 2:4b.  Look at a Hebrew dictionary. The prefix "be" means "within", so that "beyom" becomes "within the day". Elsewhere in the Bible "beyom" also means a time period within a 24 hour day.  For instance, Genesis 2:17. When God tells Adam he will die "in the same day", the word in Hebrew is "beyom". 

You mean to tell me that the word day means what a thousand? A million years? A billion years?

Crusader, please read what I'm saying.  It will keep you from making strawmen and keep the discussion on track.  I didn't say that at all. I said Genesis 2:4b states that God made the earth in one day right after the preceding verses have been telling us God took 6 days.

Now, since "we are talking about the omnipotent God of the Bible", the only legitimate reason that this contradiction exists is to tell us that neither creation story is to be read literally.

I have a question for you.  Genesis, like the rest of the Bible, exists to tell you theology.  What are the theological messages of Genesis 1?  You are so busy reading it as literal history, have you even stopped to consider the theology?

Ask God first and He will show you His truth,

I asked you. What has God told you about it?

it is that God created the world as He had said and if you read further on it is the foundation of all Christian doctrines or have you forgotten that?

Only one phrase of that is theology:  "it is that God created the world".  The "as He said" is a how of creation. Genesis 1 has two parts: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth". That is a statement of faith and theology.  One deity who created the universe.  The rest of Genesis 1 is a particular sequence and timing of creation.  So tell me, if God creates by a different mechanism -- say evolution -- how does that challenge Judaism or Christianity?  Does God cease to be God if He creates by a way different from your literal interpretation?

Theology is a term invented by man, and therefore fallible and does not aid me in understanding Scripture

Theology, according to Merriam-Webster, is "the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially <B>:</B> the study of God and of God's relation to the world"&nbsp; The term may be invented by man, but then all terms are invented by man.&nbsp; Nowhere does it say God invented language.&nbsp; Understanding the relation of God to the world is theology, and you understand scripture for that very purpose, don't you? C'mon, don't you study Scripture to understand God and the purpose God meant and has for the world? That's theology.

So, what does Genesis 1 try to tell you about God's relation to the world? What does Genesis 1 tell you about God? You are so busy insisting Genesis is literal history that you haven't even thought about that, have you?&nbsp; After all, the first thing you do is tell me to ask God! Well, don't you think God's Word should tell us something about these issues?


But interpreted by fallible men.&nbsp; How are you so sure that your, fallible man, interpretation is the correct one?

I have answered this before in this thread.

Humor me, please, and don't make me scroll thru 130 posts.&nbsp; You do admit that your interpretation, coming from fallible man, is fallible, don't you?

Nicely said. Applies perfectly to young earth creationists, don't you think?

Yes, it is a shame you do not hear the word of God, but rather turned your eyes and ears to the theories of men and to the lies of the father of all lies himself – Lucifer.&nbsp;

And here is where creationists always retreat to:&nbsp;the people who disagree with them are possessed of&nbsp;Lucifer.&nbsp; Why don't you&nbsp;consider that we can be just as faithful and&nbsp;are really&nbsp;hearing the word of God?&nbsp; Why don't you stop to consider that it is perhaps you who have gone astray?&nbsp; At least we give you the benefit of the doubt.

This is where you derail the discussion.&nbsp; What you have is an ironclad excuse.&nbsp; Can't answer an argument?&nbsp; Your opponent does not listen to God and instead is possessed of Lucifer.&nbsp;It's a one-size-fits-all excuse that surrenders reason and trust.&nbsp;

Now, for students of&nbsp;human and Christian history, your statement is very scary. It is the first step in demonizing your opponents and&nbsp;stripping them of humanity and respect.&nbsp; After all, if we are deliberately&nbsp;not listening to God&nbsp;and instead listening to Satan, then it becomes easy to justfiy whatever violence you choose to use to correct us.&nbsp; You don't have to use reason anymore, after all, those only listening to Lucifer won't respond to reason.&nbsp; Right?This is the exact argument the Inquisition used: we are on the side of God and anyone against us is thus in rebellion against God.

Of course, when we look at the premises behind the argument we see some other scary things.
1. You identify yourself with God and are sure anyone that does not agree with you is against God.&nbsp; This is the worst sort of arrogance and demagoguery.&nbsp;
2. The only way you can tell we are listening to Lucifer is that we don't agree with you. This is of course circular reasoning, but you don't seem to care.

Now, if you notice, theistic evolutionists don't demonize creationists the same way.&nbsp; For the most part, we give you the benefit of the doubt that you are sincere in your beliefs.

However, I'm beginning to question the motives of the most right-wing creationists such as yourself and FoC.&nbsp; One hypothesis that fits is that you are undercover atheists out to destroy Christianity the only way it can be destroyed: by insisting that it contradicts the evidence in the physical universe that everyone can see.&nbsp; Another is that you&nbsp; really are making a grab for power like the Inquisition.&nbsp; Creationism&nbsp;becomes an easy way to identify your friends and those who also want power.&nbsp; Like communism ideology became the way to unite and identify&nbsp;those like Lenin and Stalin who wanted power.&nbsp;&nbsp;Creationism, like communism, also becomes an ideology such that&nbsp;you can easily eliminate anyone who strays from it.

 

[lucaspa]

Today at 02:03 PM Crusadar said this in Post #136

1. So we have incest?
2. If you are reading literally, Seth and Cain are married before this passage saying that Adam and Eve had daughters. Aren't you here deviating from the inspired word of God and inserting your own ideas?&nbsp;

Incest by the way is a modern term.

It's also a Biblical term, as you note with Moses.

And by the way according to evolutionary thinking – incest should be no issue should it?

This is the naturalistic fallacy: that what does happen in nature is what we ought to do.&nbsp;

It says no such thing about Seth and Cain, for as you should be aware homosexuality is an abomination and a sin against God so why would He condone it?

I copied what I wrote. Go back up and look at it.&nbsp; This is another case where you have misread.&nbsp; IF Genesis is literal history, then it follows the timeline of history. Well then, the timeline in Genesis is that Cain and Seth are married before Genesis says Adam and Eve had other kids, including daughters. Therefore there were no daughters for Cain and Seth to marry; they are married before the daughters come along.

What you are doing is abandoning the history and inserting into the text what you want to be there.&nbsp; You are no longer reading God's Word, but making up Crusader's word.

Again you seem to be inserting your ideas into scripture.&nbsp; WHere does it say that mutation and disease entered the world?&nbsp; That seems to be your intepretation and not the "inspired word of God".&nbsp; So, how do you know your interpretation is correct?

What own ideas? This is nothing new. This belief is held by the children of God who have not compromised the authority of His words with theories by fallible men.

But the advent of mutations and disease is not mentioned in Genesis.&nbsp; Therefore there is no authority of His words, because God did not say this.&nbsp; What you have is a theory by fallible men -- you -- passed off as God's word.&nbsp;

How do I know it is correct? I know this because of my absolute faith in God and His truth and from the total dedication of my life to Jesus Christ.

IOW, not because of what God said, but because you made it up.&nbsp; Isn't your absolute faith supposed to be based on the Bible? Well, the Bible does not say anything about mutations or disease happening after Adam's disobedience.&nbsp; You've made it up on your own "authority" but now try and tell us it's God.&nbsp; Forgive us if we don't think you are God.&nbsp;

And you seem to have forgotten that the world IS God's Creation. Therefore all the evidence in it must have been put there by God.&nbsp; You seem to place scripture above God's Creation. Why? Are you aware that Christianity has held the "two books" doctrine and treated them as equals?&nbsp; Is it possible that you have substituted worship of the Bible for worship of God?

Yes it is His creation, but it is a fallen creation, cursed by God. Or have you also forgotten the sin factor as many others have?

So?&nbsp; Does that mean all the rocks creatures get changed so as to deceive us? Who did that?&nbsp; Where does it say it happened that way in the Bible? The results of Adam and Eve's transgression are explicitly spelled out in Genesis 3.&nbsp; And they are very limited: snakes lose their legs, humans are afraid of and hate snakes, childbirth gets painful, and farming is difficult.&nbsp; God didn't curse creation.&nbsp; He punished Adam and Eve.&nbsp;

We haven't forgotten anything, but we don't go around and make up stuff like you are doing, either.

Worship of God stems from the truth of what He has revealed to us in the Scriptures, not what men can see in nature. By your logic you are saying that it is then okay to worship His creation since God created it?

Stop projecting.&nbsp; I'm not saying worship creation the way you worship the Bible.&nbsp; I'm saying that there are two books to learn about God, not one.&nbsp; I'm saying that those books complement each other with neither one telling the whole story. I'm saying that when it comes to learning how God created, the more reliable book is God's Creation.&nbsp; I'm saying that God's Creation also serves as a check to know when our interpretation of the Bible is wrong.&nbsp; Christians have been using that check for centuries, first when they decided that passages did not mean the earth was flat, then later when they decided that other passages did not mean the earth did not move.&nbsp;

Creationism is simply another case of stubborn, prideful, fallible humans refusing to admit that they could be wrong and instead clinging to their erroneous interpretation of the Bible in the face of all the evidence from God that it is wrong.