gluadys said:
I am gonna start another thread on this. I don't want this thread to get off on this continuous tangent.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
gluadys said:As I read Gen. 3:22 it would appear that this was not the case. Otherwise, it wouldn't matter if they ate the fruit of the tree of life after the fall, because God could still take away the effect. As written, Gen. 3:22 implies the gift of life from the tree of life is permanent and cannot be taken away. Hence the preventive measures.
gluadys said:For the same reason those who do take Genesis literally say: to reveal the Father's love for us and to atone for our sins by his death and resurrection.
Why would not taking Genesis literally make us any less sinful and in need of redemption?
theywhosowintears said:I dont undertand the TE idea of sin and death and how they came about... I would love for someone to explain that.
We can't pinpoint a date for the fall, because we can't pinpoint a date at which the physically human species became spiritually human.
But we can say it was whenever a spiritually aware human (such as Adam) lost spiritual connection with God through pride and disobedience.
Perhaps, the more important question is not when was the fall, but what is the fall and how does it affect your life. In a symbolic sense, each of us is Adam and each of us incorporates the fall into our own life by repeating in our own way the sin of Adam. Romans 5:14
snip
As for neanderthals and animals, we can't really say. I would not be surprised if neanderthals were conscious, but I couldn't say whether they were ensouled. Some animals clearly have a higher level of conscious awareness than others---especially those that are more nearly related to us. Chimps and gorillas who have been taught to use language symbols exhibit an amazing capacity for reflectiveness and emotion.
http://www.koko.org/world/art.html
It is consistence with:theywhosowintears said:"the biggest reason why I hold to Old Earth creationism..."
Hello,knownbeforetime said:The Bible fits together so perfectly...
God created Adam and Eve
Adam and Eve sinned
God announces a plan to redeem them
Satan gets mad and tries to destroy their descendents to prevent the Messiah from coming.
The next nine generations become increasingly evil
God doesn't like it so He decides to start over with Noah
Some time later, Satan get Egypt to enslave the Hebrews in order to prevent the Messiah from coming.
God gets Moses on the case.
Satan tries over and over again to destroy the Hebrew race to prevent the Messiah from coming.
Two-thousand year ago, the Messiah DOES show up. "Satan got punk'd" and here we are today...
And then there's stuff about a rapture, tribulation, and millenial kingdom...
Only for you, because of your myopic theology. Evolution does not equal atheism. Only naturalistic evolution does. It will do you very well to study the difference.Evolution = Hopelessness
It did not take God billion's of years to "show up". I encourage you to spend some time reading to understand how God has been continuously molding and shaping the universe. For you 12 billion years is a long time, for God, the difference between 15 billion years or ten thousand years is utterly insignificant. You must be careful when anthropomorphising God (giving Him human attributes).If it took God some six or twelve billion years to show up, then it will probably take him another six or twelve billion years to show up again...
If Adam didn't exist, then we are born without sin.
My sister, who said that we are born without sin? We are! You don't need a young earth to be born with sin!!If we are born without sin, then Jesus needn't have been born of a virgin. If Jesus needn't have been born of a virgin, then he probably WOULD have been considered as nothing more than a teacher. If we are born without sin, then there is the possibility that there are people who have remained perfect throughout their whole lives and wouldn't need a saviour.
With Evolution, death creates life (with natural selection).
Chapter, verse please.This is very anti-biblical.
This is found nowhere in evolution. The idea of "deserving" is not part of evolutionary thought. Perhaps you can quote from a book where this is taught? Have you ever read a book on evolution that wasn't by a young earth creationist?With Evolution, only the best deserve to live (look at Terri Schiavo).
So does the apostle Paul's words that the "Jews are the enemy of the whole world." (look it up in your concordance if you don't know the verse). I don't believe you're about to throw out Christianity because people use Paul's words for racism and hate. Of course, to do such would be taking Paul and the Bible out of context to accomplish a personal agenda. Your application of Darwin's ideas to racism and hate is exactly the same situation. Just because radical idealogs took Darwin's ideas to justify their supremesist agendas does not make Darwin's idea equivalent to their agenda.This provides a very solid basis for racism and hate. (Hitler thought that the Jews were holding humanity back and had them exterminated.)
Some New Testament quotations from St. Paul:With the Bible, life produces life. With the Bible, everyone is given a chance to live. With the Bible, there is no excuse for racism and hate. In fact, the Bible teaches love and mercy.
My sister, you placed God in a box and just spit in his face. THAT, is blasphemy, and I pray God to forgive you. It is a much greater sin that you commit than those with whom you disagree.If evolution is true, then there is no God or at least one worth worshipping. I would spit in the face of a god who used evolution as a means of creation.
The difference? God did it or God didn't do it. I say he used neither. I say he told Moses exactly how it happened. Myopic theology? I'm flattered.Dark Matter said:Only for you, because of your myopic theology. Evolution does not equal atheism. Only naturalistic evolution does. It will do you very well to study the difference.
Of course God doesn't think "billions of years" is a long time. Humans do. That's the problem. Who would worship a God that only makes a physical presence in his creation every 15 billion years? There are atheist waiting for God to show up personally. I say, "He'll be here shortly." TE's say, "Wait another 15 billion years."Dark Matter said:It did not take God billion's of years to "show up". I encourage you to spend some time reading to understand how God has been continuously molding and shaping the universe. For you 12 billion years is a long time, for God, the difference between 15 billion years or ten thousand years is utterly insignificant. You must be careful when anthropomorphising God (giving Him human attributes).
A lot of TE's believe there was no real Adam.Dark Matter said:Who said Adam didn't exist? He did.
My sister, who said that we are born without sin? We are! You don't need a young earth to be born with sin!!
Sorry, death doesn't create life (in Natural Selection). Death provides for advancement. The weak must die so the strong can live.Dark Matter said:It does? I have studied this quite extensively and cannot figure out where you get this idea. Can you please give an example of how natural selection means death creates life.
Again, natural selection. Both evolution and Hitler agree that the weak cause problems and should be done away with. And I would be happy to discus Terri Schiavo!Dark Matter said:This is found nowhere in evolution. The idea of "deserving" is not part of evolutionary thought. Perhaps you can quote from a book where this is taught? Have you ever read a book on evolution that wasn't by a young earth creationist?
I'm sorry I can't find that verse. I looked on Biblegateway.com and they're usually pretty good.Dark Matter said:So does the apostle Paul's words that the "Jews are the enemy of the whole world." (look it up in your concordance if you don't know the verse). I don't believe you're about to throw out Christianity because people use Paul's words for racism and hate. Of course, to do such would be taking Paul and the Bible out of context to accomplish a personal agenda. Your application of Darwin's ideas to racism and hate is exactly the same situation. Just because radical idealogs took Darwin's ideas to justify their supremesist agendas does not make Darwin's idea equivalent to their agenda.
I won't take it back. It's only blasphemy if I'm wrong which I am not. God could have certainly used evolution but he didn't and he had His reasons. God has his way and Science is man's way. Science is fun to study and read about but it's nothing to build a theology on. Also, I don't think there is any sin in being wrong and there is no sin in discussion.Dark Matter said:My sister, you placed God in a box and just spit in his face. THAT, is blasphemy, and I pray God to forgive you. It is a much greater sin that you commit than those with whom you disagree.
knownbeforetime said:The difference? God did it or God didn't do it. I say he used neither. I say he told Moses exactly how it happened. Myopic theology? I'm flattered.
Of course God doesn't think "billions of years" is a long time. Humans do. That's the problem. Who would worship a God that only makes a physical presence in his creation every 15 billion years? There are atheist waiting for God to show up personally. I say, "He'll be here shortly." TE's say, "Wait another 15 billion years."I would. Why? Because He is the Creator. Evolution was just how He did it, as science has discovered.
A lot of TE's believe there was no real Adam.
Fallacy of Appealing to the Masses. Just because a lot do doesn't mean it isn't compatable.
Sorry, death doesn't create life (in Natural Selection). Death provides for advancement. The weak must die so the strong can live.
Nope. That isn't biological evolution; it is social Darwinism. See below for the specific logical fallacy you've committed.
Again, natural selection. Both evolution and Hitler agree that the weak cause problems and should be done away with. And I would be happy to discus Terri Schiavo!
Fallacy of Equivocation. You are confusing two things that have no relation.
I'm sorry I can't find that verse. I looked on Biblegateway.com and they're usually pretty good.
Fallacy of Straw Man. You've missed the point of his post here. Regardless whether you can find it or not, it is the situation described which is the basis, not whether you can find the said verse.
I won't take it back. It's only blasphemy if I'm wrong which I am not.
Another logical fallacy; Non-Support.
God could have certainly used evolution but he didn't and he had His reasons. God has his way and Science is man's way. Science is fun to study and read about but it's nothing to build a theology on. Also, I don't think there is any sin in being wrong and there is no sin in discussion.
Same Non-Support.
That third possibility is that God did it as described in the BiblePaladinValer said:Fallacy of False Dilema. There is a third possibility.
Why would God tell Moses one thing and then expect us to believe another?PaladinValer said:I would. Why? Because He is the Creator. Evolution was just how He did it, as science has discovered.
Natural selection is defined as: "The process in nature by which, according to Darwin's theory of evolution, only the organisms best adapted to their environment tend to survive and transmit their genetic characteristics in increasing numbers to succeeding generations while those less adapted tend to be eliminated." (Boldface mine) This is where Social Darwinism comes from.PaladinValer said:Nope. That isn't biological evolution; it is social Darwinism.
I didn't miss the point. You were insinuating that the Bible can be used for hatred just as much as evolution. Since those verses don't exist, your point is false. Actually, "all cretans are liars" (Titus 1:12) IS in the Bible but it is in the form of a quote, the source of which is NOT in the Bible. Titus is telling them to STOP IT. Only if this is taken out of context... can we hate cretans (those who live on crete). Anyway...PaladinValer said:Fallacy of Straw Man. You've missed the point of his post here. Regardless whether you can find it or not, it is the situation described which is the basis, not whether you can find the said verse.
Are there days where God is at? Isn't heaven eternally lit? God created the 24 hour day when he created the heavens and the earth in day 1. The concept didn't exist before. BTW, Psalm 90:4 says a thousand years are LIKE a day to God. LIKE not IS. It's simple semantics. Besides, that would only give you 7,000 years. Now, if every day were like a billion years... then you might have something.PaladinValer said:Six Days? In whose perspective? God's. And how long is that like to humans? 1,000 years. Significance of 1,000? It means "a great amount."
My sister,knownbeforetime said:The difference? God did it or God didn't do it. I say he used neither. I say he told Moses exactly how it happened. Myopic theology? I'm flattered.
God made a manifest physical presence at the appropriate time. It is not every 15 billion years. It is at the appointed times in human history. Please show me where TEs have written that you need to wait another 15 billion years for Christ's return!! You are making things up as you go along, and it is sinful. You are bearing false witness against the views of Theistic Evolutionists. You are continuously breaking the 9th commandment and misrepresenting views that you don't understand.Of course God doesn't think "billions of years" is a long time. Humans do. That's the problem. Who would worship a God that only makes a physical presence in his creation every 15 billion years? There are atheist waiting for God to show up personally. I say, "He'll be here shortly." TE's say, "Wait another 15 billion years."
Yes, this is true. It is not, however, a necessary view. Has someone here said it, or are you simply misrepresenting the views of those with which you argue? There are still many young earth creationists who don't accept an expanding universe. Would I be righteous in accusing you of believe that simply because you also are YEC?A lot of TE's believe there was no real Adam.
Yes, yes, yes...more YEC literature and foolisheness. I've read all the YEC books. They say this garbage. I will need you to quote from the actual literature of those who discuss Natural Selection (again, have you ever read a non YEC book?). Again, you are speaking from ignorance and bearing false witness--for which you must repent according the the 9th commandment. If the weak must die so that the strong can live, then why is there a range of strong to weak animals on the planet? Using your ideology, the planet should now have a uniform race of equally strong creatures. The actual teaching of NS is simply that when two animals must fight over limited food source, or for mating rights, the stronger animals will win and the weaker will neither eat nor breed, and therefore will die. That is all. Do you disagree with this?Sorry, death doesn't create life (in Natural Selection). Death provides for advancement. The weak must die so the strong can live.
Again, natural selection. Both evolution and Hitler agree that the weak cause problems and should be done away with.Natural Selection and evolution does not argue that the weak cause problems and should be done away with!! (9th commandmant again) The idea of "should" is a moral idea and is not found in the realm of natural selection. Hitler believed they "should" be done away with. However, he believed this based upon a great many more ideals that Darwin's theories! I don't find the character of Christ in so many purposeful misrepresentations of facts!!
Make a new thread in the Christian side of the forums, make your point, and let me know where it is. You can PM me if you wish.And I would be happy to discus Terri Schiavo!
Yes, I misquoted it from memory. It has been a long time since I referenced it. Let me make the argument for you. **I will state here clearly that I don't believe the argument, it is a false argument, but it has been used for racism and hate throughout the years.** I make it simply so that you will disagree with my representation of the Bible, and hopefully then so that you will understand how wrong it is for you to misrepresent others the way you have been doing.I'm sorry I can't find that verse. I looked on Biblegateway.com and they're usually pretty good.
It is Romans 11:28, "From the standpoint of the gospel they [the Jews] are enemies for your sake" Now combine this with Philipians 3. Beginning in verse 1, Paul begins to argue against the Jews and their emphasis on physical things (like circumcision) is false confidence. He continues in this context until vs 18 where Paul states, "For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many [again in context speaking of the Jews] live as enemies of the cross of Christ. 19Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame."
So then, at least twice we are told that the Jews are our enemies, and that their end destruction...how now shall I think about them?
**Again, the scripture does not teach this, but I have layed out an argument that has been used by the Church for centuries!
You did not discuss Titus 1:12,13. "Even one of their own prophets has said, Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons. 13This testimony is true."
Tell me how this is not racist!! Cretans are ALWAYS liars!! Really? Please defend this.
Romans 1:20 states that "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse." God states that the natural revelation, which is best understood through scientific process, provides true revelation of God's nature. You are bound, and without excuse to that revelation. Yet you spit in the face of that revelation's God. This sister is blasphemy of the highest order. Your God has told you that your are accountable to the knowledge of nature and that this nature is a true representation of his power and divine nature. This nature unequivocally shows that he expanded the universe over from a moment of creative power and formed that universe to where a planet was developed which could foster the carbon based life he designed as man. If you spit in the face of the God who did this, then you spit in the face of Christ. Beware.I won't take it back. It's only blasphemy if I'm wrong which I am not. God could have certainly used evolution but he didn't and he had His reasons. God has his way and Science is man's way. Science is fun to study and read about but it's nothing to build a theology on. Also, I don't think there is any sin in being wrong and there is no sin in discussion.
Dark Matter
knownbeforetime said:That third possibility is that God did it as described in the Bible
Why would God tell Moses one thing and then expect us to believe another?
Natural selection is defined as: "The process in nature by which, according to Darwin's theory of evolution, only the organisms best adapted to their environment tend to survive and transmit their genetic characteristics in increasing numbers to succeeding generations while those less adapted tend to be eliminated." (Boldface mine) This is where Social Darwinism comes from.
I didn't miss the point. You were insinuating that the Bible can be used for hatred just as much as evolution. Since those verses don't exist, your point is false. Actually, "all cretans are liars" (Titus 1:12) IS in the Bible but it is in the form of a quote, the source of which is NOT in the Bible. Titus is telling them to STOP IT. Only if this is taken out of context... can we hate cretans (those who live on crete). Anyway...
Non-support? My evidence is the Bible, the unadulterated version, where God created the world in six 24 hour days and created man on the sixth day.
He created Adam and Eve individually. Adam came from the dust of the ground and Eve from his rib. He created them individually just as he created me individually.
He didn't just "guide things along", he was (and is) an active participant.
Are there days where God is at?
God created the 24 hour day when he created the heavens and the earth in day 1.
The concept didn't exist before.
BTW, Psalm 90:4 says a thousand years are LIKE a day to God. LIKE not IS. It's simple semantics.
Besides, that would only give you 7,000 years.
Now, if every day were like a billion years... then you might have something.[
/QUOTE]
You are conviently ignoring the significance of numbers in Hebrew linguistics. This is entirely illogical. The very number 1,000 actually means something in Hebrew culture, just as numbers 12 and 7 do. When you read Hebrew writing, to ignore these significances is to entirely misread what is trying to be expressed; you will never come to the correct conclusion.
Matthew777 said:I do not enjoy debating this issue because it really should be a non-issue.
PaladinValer said:Six Days? In whose perspective? God's. And how long is that like to humans? 1,000 years. Significance of 1,000? It means "a great amount."
God spoke, and Bang!
I see nothing wrong with evolution in your Catechism. Nice try though.
PaladinValer said:Six Days? In whose perspective? God's. And how long is that like to humans? 1,000 years. Significance of 1,000? It means "a great amount."
God spoke, and Bang!
I see nothing wrong with evolution in your Catechism. Nice try though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?