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.
Experts are still not sure what the biblical genealogies meant or how they were used. Instead of claiming some dogmas about them, we should be open to various possibilities. They are no article of faith or of any creed.We already know a year was 360 days. So that leaves you with believe it or not once again. They either lived way over 900 years or not. True or false.
Anyone not believing often and clearly stated facts about how long people lived and when they had children are not experts. They are unbelievers. If people claim Jesus really lived 80 years, that is not believing the record.Experts are still not sure what the biblical genealogies meant or how they were used. Instead of claiming some dogmas about them, we should be open to various possibilities. They are no article of faith or of any creed.
Yes, I know you believe that. But the thread isn't titled 'What do Christians who don't accept evolution believe?' I was explaining what Christians who do accept evolution believe, since the poster seemed to be confused about that, and since I'm one of those Christians. Why you felt it necessary to inject your beliefs here, when you've already stated them dozens of times in this thread, I don't know.Adam was a special creation in a special time as was woman. Evolution had nothing to do with it or billions of years.
Fortunately, you don't get to decide who's an unbeliever. (You do, however, get to violate forum rules by saying that evolution-accepting Christians aren't really believers.)Anyone not believing often and clearly stated facts about how long people lived and when they had children are not experts. They are unbelievers.
Its not an article of faith, so believing or not believing the years are literal and precise and inspired has nothing to do with anything. And it seems to me you are unable to grasp the concept of open-mindedness. Its belief or unbelief, true or false, black or white, to you.Anyone not believing often and clearly stated facts about how long people lived and when they had children are not experts. They are unbelievers. If people claim Jesus really lived 80 years, that is not believing the record.
It's not just a matter of figures of speech. Rejecting the literal truth of some narrative statements in the Bible dates back to the church fathers, e.g. Gregory of Nyssa rejecting the historical truth of the plagues of Egypt, since to believe in their historicity would be both unreasonable and impious.I believe it is an oversimplification, and an obvious one, to assume that biblical statements are either true or false as written. If someone says "I will love you until the end of time", this cannot be characterized as a false statement solely on the basis of the fact that the person will not live till the end of time. Something tangible is being communicated here, even though through use of literary device.
We can accept evolution. We cannot accept the bible and evolution. The bible says God made us. Truth should be interjected as often as possibleYes, I know you believe that. But the thread isn't titled 'What do Christians who don't accept evolution believe?' I was explaining what Christians who do accept evolution believe, since the poster seemed to be confused about that, and since I'm one of those Christians. Why you felt it necessary to inject your beliefs here, when you've already stated them dozens of times in this thread, I don't know.
False either-or precisely because you are assuming that the creation account is literal. How is this not obvious? Do I not "accept" the moral truth communicated in a fable even knowing it is not a story that is literally true?We cannot accept the bible and evolution.
Interestingly, for example Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine and Philo interpreted Genesis allegorically.It's not just a matter of figures of speech. Rejecting the literal truth of some narrative statements in the Bible dates back to the church fathers, e.g. Gregory of Nyssa rejecting the historical truth of the plagues of Egypt, since to believe in their historicity would be both unreasonable and impious.
Yes it has to do with believing what the bible records. If the bible says Abraham dies at 175 years old, that is when he died. If the bible says Jesus lived 33 years that is how long He lived. If the bible says Simeon was old then that does not mean he was actually a toddler. If the bible says someone was stricken in years, that does not mean they were newborn. We do not get to fiddle with the numbers.Its not an article of faith, so believing or not believing the years are literal and precise and inspired has nothing to do with anything
It is not open minded to reject Scripture and what is implicitly and repeatedly states. That is closed minded.. And it seems to me you are unable to grasp the concept of open-mindedness. Its belief or unbelief, true or false, black or white, to you.
Example?Also, do you know these "precise" years are different in different textual families?
So you do not know... I thought so. Knowing such things would make you more careful and open-minded, knowing that its not so cut-and-dry and that not everything is a belief-or-rejection choice.Example?
No, we just read what it says. If God forms you from the dust of the earth, then breathes life into you, and transports you to a prepared garden He had already planted, that does not mean that Adam came from a monkey. You do not get to misuse the word assuming here.False either-or precisely because you are assuming that the creation account is literal.
Not applicable to Scripture. The whole bible refers back to Genesis right on up till the last chapter. No fable involved. Only belief. Or not.How is this not obvious? Do I not "accept" the moral truth communicated in a fable even knowing it is not a story that is literally true?
That is not substitute for posting what you claimed. Cat got your tongue?So you do not know... I thought so. Knowing such things would make you to be more careful and open-minded, knowing that its not so cut-and-dry.
There has never been a shortage of ignoramuses and would be geniuses in historyInterestingly, for example Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine and Philo interpreted Genesis allegorically.
You cannot accept the Bible and evolution. That's because you've adopted some bizarre doctrine of how Biblical texts have to work in order to function as scripture, a doctrine quite inconsistent with much of Christian history.We can accept evolution. We cannot accept the bible and evolution.
I agree. You think that statement requires that God miraculously created us in an instant? Why? Do you think God created you?The bible says God made us.
I wanted to know if you know about it. I can see you don't, which means you never cared enough to study such things - which actually explains your strict, fundamentalist positions in these areas.That is not substitute for posting what you claimed. Cat got your tongue?
No one can. No more than a dark room can also be bright.You cannot accept the Bible and evolution.
No, that is because I chose to try and believe what is clearly statedThat's because you've adopted some bizarre doctrine of how Biblical texts have to work in order to function as scripture, a doctrine quite inconsistent with much of Christian history.
He did not create me the same week He made the stars. Nor did He fashion me like a Potter fashions a vessel from materials that came from earth. Nor did He cause me to sleep deeply and take a bone from me from which the first woman was created. The focus here is Genesis and creation. Not how God is present and working in the womb todayI agree. You think that statement requires that God miraculously created us in an instant? Why? Do you think God created you?
Alluding to some great point that you twice failed to produce is worthless.I wanted to know if you know about it. I can see you don't, which means you never cared enough to study such things - which actually explains your strict, fundamentalist positions in these areas.
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?