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.
As for questioning, I think its ok to ask questions. Much like you. Not that I worship the idea that ideas have to exist "in tension" to have merit, which is a construct of modern academia. But, if you are going to question, this should apply to both ends of the spectrum. Eg., the fear of the Lord is a pretty good beginning for questioning. Similarly, rejecting the surface text that says "six days", I think a little nervousness should be acceptable, at the very least.
My premise is one should question whether the whole idea of retroactive curse being a "must" is worthy of the question, Is this hubris? For that matter, the absolute denial of Paul's statement that death entered by one man, at the fall is worthy of the question -- again, Is that hubris?
The concept of "six days" did bother me at one time, until I felt I was answered sufficiently, through prayer and study. I feel no qualms about not taking it literally anymore. I'm definitely not on board with the retroactive curse idea, though - it's not an issue if you've rejected a literal creation story.
Hubris, to me, accepting a truth and denying the search. It's saying, "thank you God for perfect understanding" and then resisting anything that conflicts. It is closing your mind off to God's further influence. (I'm certainly not accusing you of this, btw.)
Clearly?
I guess death being cast in the lake of fire after the millenium is just a nice thought of no possible application.
Once again you completely avoid dealing with the idea of eternal life and paradise. This is becoming a habit for the TE crowd. Too bad. Again and again, the idea of evolution in paradise is associated with the idea that there is no eternal life. ...And God saw that it was fair to midlin'....
As for Left Behind, not only do I use the words "millenium" and "revelation", but I have been known to use the word "rapture" on occasion. I suppose that is indictment enough. Perhaps this is why you assiduously avoid conceding the smallest point to any YEC, lest you also be irretrievably tainted.
shernren said:Whoa! There will be people "living out their years"? The implication is of course that this number of years must be finite! No way! And there will be people dying at a hundred? (Believe it or not, the Left Behind gang have taken this prophecy literally and posited a world in which cultists during the Millenium literally drop dead on their hundredth birthdays!)
Mmmm. Isaiah be not such a safe book for you brother.
For goodness sakes, when will I ever be able to make an offhand comment about something I find amusing in a conversation with you, without you turning it into an insinuation that I'm trying to run you off the face of Christendom in the name of intellectual purity?
So the wolf and the lamb will feed together? But the old man will live out his years? And we will be glad and rejoice forever?
What I am pointing out with this passage is that if you thought we were weird, the very author you're quoting is weirder. No TE here would so much as go near the idea of humans dying in heaven; Isaiah is perfectly happy to describe an eternal heaven with grazing wolves and mortal humans. Do you really think he's any help to your case?
You have yet to answer that except to refer to a limited time when people still die.
Excuse me, but something went by me there. Where did shernren (or isaiah) refer to "a limited time" when people still die?
Hopefully Shernren understood that the millenium was a limited time. But that is clearly what he was referring to, intentionally I guess. It usually sounds like the conditions of the millenium are to represent eternity in these posts.
I have long thought that evolution in pre-history would likely be associated with evolution for eternity.
To demonstrate that there is a distinction, read Rev. 20, which ends with the following:
Rev 20:14
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
I don't much about millennium teachings. They were never part of my religious upbringing. But the bit I have heard suggests that the millennium is seen as part of the future history of this earth.
The Isaiah passage clearly refers to the new heaven and new earth. I have always associated that phrase with eternity.
That thought has never occurred to me.
And that is followed by "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth ..." in Rev. 21:1---a clear echo of Isaiah 65:17
Ok, so, what happens then with people in eternity?
Ok, so, what happens then with people in eternity?
Come now, let's admit how we feel about Tim LaHaye and those who talk of raptures and real, bodily eternal life.
Let's admit that the idea of dying in a future paradise is more salient than any notion of real eternal life in your posts.
Reply if you like, I'm done.
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?