Adam was made from the dust of the ground.....

[expos4ever]

So the 4th Commandment is based on a lie?

Oh not this again. Please - the readers are not fools: you present a clearly false choice: take the text literally or imply it is a lie.

Reason forces me to conclude that when the theories of man conflict with the word of God then man is wrong.

Are you not a "man"? Did you magically acquire your knowledge that all scripture is to be taken literally? Of course not - you came to believe in this position precisely through a series of judgments you made yourself.

 

[lesliedellow]

Your own understanding. Just something that sounds wise but has no validity whatsoever and doesn't phase some of us in the least.

Just suspend your disbelief for a moment, and imagine that Evolution is true. How would God communicate the fact that he had used Evolution to create life on Earth to people who lived 2-3 thousand years ago? They had never heard of chemical elements, chemical reactions, DNA, or any of the rest of it. Should God have said nothing to them, and delayed making his Revelation for 3,000 years, or should he have spoken in terms that they could understand? He is not in the business of imparting scientific knowledge; we can acquire that for ourselves. What God is interested in is revealing truths about himself, to both them and us.

 

[Kenny'sID]

You appear to assume that there is a way to read "what the Bible says" that does not require an act of interpretation.

Geez...yes, I read Adam was made from the dust of the earth as just that. I just can't put it any simpler than that. How do you read that.

My answer would be the same as given by another poster - the guy whose head is sideways - in post 69.

No idea what that means, but if that's truly all you get from the verse and not just a way of evading the question....oh well.

 

[expos4ever]

This will probably make people angry, but I believe it needs to be said. Christians often make claims that are manifestly incorrect - a high school student could see this. Examples:

1. Either the text is to be taken literally or it cannot be believed at all (e.g. in a metaphorical or allegorical sense);
2. There is an objective reading of the Biblical texts that is not mediated by the reader's interpretive framework.

Both these claims are obviously incorrect. Yet we read them over and over again.

I politely suggest that other Christians - ones who know better - give a "pass" to those who make these absurd claims precisely because "we are all on the same team"; no one wants to be seen as critiquing a fellow believer.

Well that is a noble sentiment, but I suggest it ultimately backfires - we (the church) come across as lacking basic critical thinking skills.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Just suspend your disbelief for a moment, and imagine that Evolution is true.

No...very bad idea. You do that, but I just won't open myself up to lies that tech the Bible is not the truth in it's entirety.

Close minded? Well, I have looked into it before and wasn't convinced so, yes, I shut it out and closed my mind to it. Most any firm believer in ALL the Bible would do the same....test it, see it fail miserably and move on with something solid from God.

My rock is bigger and much more solid than your rock.

As I've said before, I won't sit here and agree to chipping away at the Bible with tricks like, "yeah the bible is true but it's not" until 50yrs from now there is nothing left of it. That will come close to happening anyway in my view but nothing will change of the Bible being true, just people who allow themselves to be swayed or not and show God what they are really about... God or the World.

 

[KWCrazy]

Oh not this again. Please - the readers are not fools: you present a clearly false choice: take the text literally or imply it is a lie.

If Adam evolved, then the entire foundation of the Bible is a lie. Sin and death came into the world through Adam, so therefore he could not have evolved. Nothing died before him.
I understand your position. You want to be cool and believe in evolution, but you want to say you believe in the Bible.
The trouble is, the Bible is very clearly in opposition to what you believe about evolution.
You twist things in your mind, trying to blend them, but you cannot mix truth with a lie. Man cannot have been created and evolved. God could not have made the universe in six days over billions of years.
You're hiding behind the lie that ALL Scripture has to be literal for any of it to be literal.
There are metaphors and parables in the Bible, and things written clouded in mystery.
However, it's not the things which are unclear you reject.
The 6 day creation is clear. You reject it.
The story of Noah, repeated by Jesus, is clear, but you reject it.
The story of Jonah, repeated by Jesus, is clear, but you likely reject it.
How I came to believe in the Scripture is by reading it. I was taught that the earth was millions of years old. I could never find anything in the Scriptures to agree with that teaching. God said He created man, not evolution. God. The Creator. Lord. It is He you attack when you say things did not happen this way. You aren't attacking me. I didn't write the word.

 

[lesliedellow]

No...very bad idea. You do that, but I just won't open myself up

That just about says it all. In the fundamentalist world closed mindedness is a virtue.

 

[Kenny'sID]

This will probably make people angry, but I believe it needs to be said. Christians often make claims that are manifestly incorrect - a high school student could see this. Examples:

1. Either the text is to be taken literally or it cannot be believed at all (e.g. in a metaphorical or allegorical sense);
2. There is an objective reading of the Biblical texts that is not mediated by the reader's interpretive framework.

Both these claims are obviously incorrect. Yet we read them over and over again.

I politely suggest that other Christians - ones who know better - give a "pass" to those who make these absurd claims precisely because "we are all on the same team"; no one wants to be seen as critiquing a fellow believer.

Well that is a noble sentiment, but I suggest it ultimately backfires - we (the church) come across as lacking basic critical thinking skills.

Need examples of what you mean so I know exactly what you mean.

Experiment/challenge to anyone here:

Start reading at Genesis 1:1 and tell us at what verse we have to stop believing God meant exactly what he said and why.

 

[Kenny'sID]

That just about says it all. In the fundamentalist world closed mindedness is a virtue.

Yep it says it all. And just as often happens, even though I told you I already considered it, I'm wrongly accused of being closed minded. Let's not forget shallow, arrogant, and there were a few more I can't recall at the moment...feel free to add on.

 

[lesliedellow]

Yep it says it all. And just as often happens, even though I told you I already considered it, I'm wrongly accused of being closed minded. Let's not forget shallow, arrogant, and there were a few more I can't recall at the moment...feel free to add on.

I have read The Fundamentals. Have you read anything by Francis Collins, or somebody similar?

Silly question, I know.

 

[46AND2]

I'm wrongly accused of being closed minded.

er...you admitted you are...

 

[Kenny'sID]

I have read The Fundamentals. Have you read anything by Francis Collins, or somebody similar?

Silly question, I know.

It's silly only because you should have already gotten the fact I'm convinced what I believe is true and I'm not going to continually try to convince myself other wise. To do so would be dangerous for some, or at the very least a waste of time for the immovable.

I'd rather believe what God says, all of it...it's just that simple. One might say well, you haven't seen this or that version of beliefs that differ from yours, and that would be true, but they all seem to bring to the table something other than what the Bible teaches, or just enough truth to make it seem convincing to the unaware, and I already know I have no use for that...understand?

 

[46AND2]

It's silly only because you should have already gotten the fact I'm convinced what I believe is true and I'm not going to continually try to convince myself other wise. To do so would be dangerous for some, or at the very least a waste of time for the immovable.

I'd rather believe what God says, all of it...it's just that simple. One might say well, you haven't seen this or that version of beliefs that differ from yours, and that would be true, but they all seem to bring to the table something other than what the Bible teaches, or just enough truth to make it seem convincing to the unaware, and I already know I have no use for that...understand?

**wonders why Kenny objects to the closed mind accusation...then repeatedly admits to being close minded**

 

[Kenny'sID]

er...you admitted you are...

I admitted to being open minded enough to look into it, then closing my mind to what I didn't believe in, just as many with an opposing view do. If it gives you jollies to see that as me admitting to being closed minded in general, or that you "caught me" go for it.

 

[KWCrazy]

Start reading at Genesis 1:1 and tell us at what verse we have to stop believing God meant exactly what he said and why.

They would say Genesis 1:1. Why? Because in their world the heavens and earth created themselves.

 

[KWCrazy]

Yep it says it all. And just as often happens, even though I told you I already considered it, I'm wrongly accused of being closed minded. Let's not forget shallow, arrogant, and there were a few more I can't recall at the moment...feel free to add on.

Simple, anti-intellectual, uneducated, science denier, Ultra literalist...

 

[Kenny'sID]

**wonders why Kenny objects to the closed mind accusation...then repeatedly admits to being close minded**

*wonders why 46 is still in the pick at nothing, or make something from nothing stage, when most all self respecting Atheists or anyone for that matter, got past that as means to discredit a long time ago. Always good to bring some type of legit argument to the table.

Reminds me of the spell checkers of the past. If you can't beat em, hit em' where it's really going to hurt and inform them their spelling is in error.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Simple, anti-intellectual, uneducated, science denier, Ultra literalist...

That's me.

 

[Kenny'sID]

They would say Genesis 1:1. Why? Because in their world the heavens and earth created themselves.

That or they would say nothing at all. No takers as of yet, but I should give it some time.

 

[46AND2]

*wonders why 46 is still in the pick at nothing, or make something from nothing stage, when most all self respecting Atheists or anyone for that matter, got past that as means to discredit a long time ago. Always good to bring some type of legit argument to the table.

Reminds me of the spell checkers of the past. If you can't beat em, hit em' where it's really going to hurt and inform them their spelling is in error.

The difference is that the spell checkers complaints were unsolicited, in most cases, to people who didn't specifically claim that their spelling is impeccable.

In this situation, however, you specifically complained about being "wrongly accused" of being closed minded, then proved the accusation correct, by admission.

By contrast, I am fully convinced that the earth is billions of years old, and we are the product of the evolution of life. However, I'm fully willing to admit I'm wrong, should evidence prove otherwise. And this is the point that Leslie was trying to make. Fundamentalists and evolution supporters are both convinced of their positions, but only one is willing to continually search for truth, rather than assume they already have it.