Adam & Eve

[AV1611VET]

How could anyone tell that story was from an atheist?

He just posted the same thing in my counting thread here: 206.

 

[dad]

He just posted the same thing in my counting thread here: 206.

Guess he needs prayer. Probably, in some way, he thinks it is clever or something.

 

[AV1611VET]

Guess he needs prayer. Probably, in some way, he thinks it is clever or something.

Yup.

 

[dad]

Yup.

Reminds me of another forum, where rudeness was the order of the day. I know we already got one stalker in from there. They don't come for honest exchange of ideas.

Anyhow, you do seem to have a gift for encouraging people weak in the faith. Not sure what that one is called...'helps'?

 

[sandwiches]

Ps 66:9 - Which holdeth our soul in life, and suffereth not our feet to be moved. This means that we will not be moved from faith in God, and life. It does not mean our feet will not move.

Don't get me wrong. I understand context and all that makes sense but the phrasing in the "poem" of Psalms has the same kind of language as the rest of the Bible. Yet some are taken literally are others are not. It just seems like there's some arbitrary system for this but no one can explain it in detail and obviously not everyone seems to use the same system as different people come to different meanings from the same passages.

The earth is forever, yes. That is clear from many passages. God is moving here. If you doubt that the earth id forever, I can give some verses.

I doubt that the Earth will last forever if that's what you're referring to but I equally doubt a Bible quote will have strong evidence to counter what we know of the universe, so far.

No, but if you can't get your problem resolved, then I would most definitely take it to the Author, Himself.

So, any person, regardless of belief, so long as they've studied the Bible, its history, historicity, should come to the same conclusion as someone who's a Christian?

 

[AV1611VET]

Reminds me of another forum, where rudeness was the order of the day. I know we already got one stalker in from there. They don't come for honest exchange of ideas.

June must be stalker month. Someone stalked Mark Kennedy earlier this month.

Anyhow, you do seem to have a gift for encouraging people weak in the faith. Not sure what that one is called...'helps'?

Praise the LORD!

(And thank you for the compliment.)

 

[AV1611VET]

So, any person, regardless of belief, so long as they've studied the Bible, its history, historicity, should come to the same conclusion as someone who's a Christian?

Well ... there's a real devil out there who uses divide-and-conquer tactics --- but this is what I tell people:

1. Take 10 people and put them in a room with 10 Bibles and have them read It.
2. Then give them a written test with 100 basic questions and compare the answers.
3. How many answered the same questions the same way?
4. Repeat the process --- have them read It again.
5. Test them again and compare the answers.

If I'm right, at first there will be a large percentage of disagreement.

But the more they read the Bible, the closer they should come to agreement.

They may never totally agree (q.v. Acts 15, which starts and ends with severe disagreement), but the more they read, the closer they should come to agreement.

 

[sandwiches]

Well ... there's a real devil out there who uses divide-and-conquer tactics --- but this is what I tell people:

1. Take 10 people and put them in a room with 10 Bibles and have them read It.
2. Then give them a written test with 100 basic questions and compare the answers.
3. How many answered the same questions the same way?
4. Repeat the process --- have them read It again.
5. Test them again and compare the answers.

If I'm right, at first there will be a large percentage of disagreement.

But the more they read the Bible, the closer they should come to agreement.

They may never totally agree (q.v. Acts 15, which starts and ends with severe disagreement), but the more they read, the closer they should come to agreement.

That does sound like an interesting experiment. I'm assuming that this would be without interactions between the participants.

However, isn't the current state of the Christian church itself a sign that people do NOT interpret the Bible the same way?

 

[LightHorseman]

For the Christian evolutionist:

Ok so if we are not to take Adam and Eve literally, then that means we can discredit all their descendants.

Which means Adam/Eve through Noah were all mythical, then Noah to lets say Jesus were all mythical? If this is true, then wouldn't that be like saying the entire Bible is nothing more than a 66 Book fable?

So who exactly would of been the first human (i.e. evolved monkey) to have a conversation with God?

Whats with all the absolutism?

Adam and Eve not being literal doesn't mean ALL their decendents must be mythical... all it means is that somewhere along the list of descendents, they stop being historical, and become mythical. I don't care to guess where that point is exactly.

Hey, possiblky there really wasd a real Adam and a real Eve, and all the listed descendents after them were real, historical people! Just that Adam and Eve both had parents who, for whatever reason, were left off the list.

Or maybe the first non-literal person on the list is considerably later on. Who knows?

I'm quite sure that this occurs in the geneologies somewhere before the last historically verifiable person, and somewhere after Adam and Eve.

But as Paul says, we aren't mean't to obsess over endless geneologies.

 

[AV1611VET]

That does sound like an interesting experiment. I'm assuming that this would be without interactions between the participants.

Correct.

However, isn't the current state of the Christian church itself a sign that people do NOT interpret the Bible the same way?

As an Independent Baptist, I'll abstain from answering ---

 

[LightHorseman]

That does sound like an interesting experiment. I'm assuming that this would be without interactions between the participants.

However, isn't the current state of the Christian church itself a sign that people do NOT interpret the Bible the same way?

Indeed. But some people will deny the blindingly obvious reality if it conflicts with what they want to believe. See any of the "its obvious the Bible means precisely what my personal interpretation is" crowd.

 

[sandwiches]

As an Independent Baptist, I'll abstain from answering ---

Well, exactly. That's my point. I was raised Catholic and I always heard of the evil protestants who rebelled because all they wanted was to do their immoral acts. Now that I think about it, it sounds kind of familiar... hmmm... At any rate, I then moved to the US and I would hear the opposite a lot more. "Catholics think a person can give them absolution." "They worship Mary." Et cetera.

You would ask my Catholic grandmother (God rest her soul) and she would've told you that Catholics interpret the Bible the way Jesus and the Apostles said to -- what with the whole apostolic succession and whatnot. However, you ask my wife's stepmother and Baptists REALLY know the REAL way the Bible is meant to be interpreted.

Doesn't this lack of concensus even among those who DO believe in the Bible, Jesus, creation, etc indicate that not everything is very clear even among those who say they're possessed by the holy spirit or the spirit of God.

 

[dad]

Don't get me wrong. I understand context and all that makes sense but the phrasing in the "poem" of Psalms has the same kind of language as the rest of the Bible. Yet some are taken literally are others are not. It just seems like there's some arbitrary system for this but no one can explain it in detail and obviously not everyone seems to use the same system as different people come to different meanings from the same passages.

Why interpret it in a way that does not fit with the rest of the bible, and a way that leaves God looking real dumb? Why strain at nats and swallow the camels of the ungodly fables?

I doubt that the Earth will last forever if that's what you're referring to but I equally doubt a Bible quote will have strong evidence to counter what we know of the universe, so far.

What we know of the temporary universe is of little import, if it is slated to disappear forever! Why counter it? What is needed in the creation debate is to look at what will be and what was, not what is. What science needs to do is prove what is is what what be and what was. It can't. What we need to know about is the unknown universe of creation.

So, any person, regardless of belief, so long as they've studied the Bible, its history, historicity, should come to the same conclusion as someone who's a Christian?

On the contrary. These things are hidden from those that think they are wise, and revealed to believers. The natural mind cannot understand the things of the spirit, they are foolishness to him. We need to ask God, so we can be spiritually minded. Then, we start to see more than the physical.

 

[AV1611VET]

Doesn't this lack of concensus even among those who DO believe in the Bible, Jesus, creation, etc indicate that not everything is very clear even among those who say they're possessed by the holy spirit or the spirit of God.

Again, I'll abstain --- but I will say this much:

1. There's a real devil out there who uses divide-and-conquer tactics.
2. Paul told Timothy that this would be indicative of the latter days.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

 

[dad]

Hey, possiblky there really wasd a real Adam and a real Eve, and all the listed descendents after them were real, historical people! Just that Adam and Eve both had parents who, for whatever reason, were left off the list....

So God is a liar according to you, He never formed man from the dust of the earth. OK. Not like you know squat about Adam anyhow, so it is your word against God's.

 

[LightHorseman]

So apparently its been "the later days" since the schism between Orthodox and Catholic Churches?

Or maybe since the Copts went there way and we went ours?

 

[LightHorseman]

So God is a liar according to you, He never formed man from the dust of the earth. OK. Not like you know squat about Adam anyhow, so it is your word against God's.

Or... hows this for an alternative... "God didn't write Genesis"?

 

[dad]

Indeed. But some people will deny the blindingly obvious reality if it conflicts with what they want to believe. See any of the "its obvious the Bible means precisely what my personal interpretation is" crowd.

I have never been blinded by this blindingly obvious reality that is in your head. Sorry. Whatever it is, it can't change the fact we live in a temporary state, according to the bible. Nor that that was a flood. Or a creation.

 

[dad]

So apparently its been "the later days" since the schism between Orthodox and Catholic Churches?

Or maybe since the Copts went there way and we went ours?

Everything is relative. In the history of man, after Jesus, we are in the latter times, of course. Not the day of the Lord, though, of course. Or the tribulation. I will note that Jesus listed churches in Revelations, and mostly, they were out to lunch. No wonder they disagree. No one can disagree that there are latter times though! Or a tribulation! Or a return to earth by Jesus, or that believers have eternal life...etc etc etc.

 

[dad]

Or... hows this for an alternative... "God didn't write Genesis"?

It is unfounded, and unbiblical. Thats how.