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.
Assumed authority doesn't convert untruth into truth or inconsistent into consistent.
The bible never puts a date on "in the beginning" so do not add to scripture = sin.
The evidence is overwhelming for an old earth
Yes, blood atonement is a Pagan influence in Judausm as well. In fact it was common among many religions. In the minds of primitive man something of great value must be exchanged to persuade the Gods. Man finds it difficult to swallow his pride and accept forgiveness born of love, experienced by forgiving in return.
God is a person not a law.
That's Paul's gospel but he can't be blamed, he never knew Jesus.That is an interesting story you have made up - but it glosses over a lot of "details" in a free will universe.
Laws that have no real penalty other than "forgiveness" become "no law at all".
Rom 3:31 Paul asks the question as to whether the Gospel does in fact destroy the Law of God by wiping out the penalty - and Paul's answer is "God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God" Rom 31:31.
The solution that you have "made up" only destroys the Law of the universe - it does not "establish it".
Turns out - God knew what He was doing. But those who simply "make stuff up" are trying their hand at besting God when it comes to His solution and the Gospel - but they will never be able to match Him let alone "best" Him.
God's Word is Law - and as Romans 3 points out - the Gospel establishes that LAW by paying the debt of sin that the LAW of God demands.
The Universe is under universal LAW - and the domain of our Creator - the King and Ruler of the entire universe.
Hence the lake of fire for sinners.
Yep, and your only evidence for such a claim is that you don't like it. Jesus spoke more about Gehenna fire than anyone else.That's Paul's gospel but he can't be blamed, he never knew Jesus.
The lake of fire was made up by people who have no better ideas that threats of fear and torture. Hell is a fabrication.
I'm certain Jesus never taught about the traditional concepts of Hell for the simple reason that it doesn't exist. He taught life and death. Hell or Gehenna, which has multiple explanations in Jewish Encyclopedia, is a control device, generally taught by people who want others to go there. LOL!Yep, and your only evidence for such a claim is that you don't like it. Jesus spoke more about Gehenna fire than anyone else.
NIV, NASB, YLT, NET... "FILL the Earth". The Hebrew word in Gen 1:28 does not require "replenish".
The humans -male and female- created on the 6Th day were created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28) but they were not of the Adamic lineage.Adam and Eve were created by God after the 7 th Day of Rest....Genesis 2:5-8 ....and there was no man to till the ground....And the Lord God formed man (Adam)from the dust of the ground...8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.IMO, acknowledging the reality humans other than those created in the image of God existed alongside Adam and his descendants, answers a great many questions about the creation story of Genesis that can not be rationalized any other way.
God said that he will not use another flood ....Homo sapien-sapien (modern man) however is a different story. Our history is a litany of continuous and ongoing violence from the time Cain slew Able, right up until modern times. Now we have developed the weapons to destroy the Earth itself and all the creations therein.. Which will constitute a violation of Gods everlasting covenant with Noah (The Noahic Covenant), in which God promises never again to destroy the earth because of the wickedness of mankind.
IMO, acknowledging the reality humans other than those created in the image of God existed alongside Adam and his descendants, answers a great many questions about the creation story of Genesis that can not be rationalized any other way. Even though the Scripture says Adam and Eve had more sons and daughters, other than the three sons who are named in the Genesis narrative.. The question remains, "Who did Cain marry" whom God banished and cursed ?! He couldn't have married any of Adam's descendants, now could he ?!
There is also the obvious question and problem of who Seth married ? Did he marry one of his own sister ?! Forget about the later biblical prohibition against incest, what about the problem of genetic diversity ?! One couple, a man and a woman, can not constitute a viable breeding population of humans. It's scientifically impossible. Interbreeding between Adam's descendants would have eventually led to a dead end. Adam's offspring would have succumb to genetic abnormality, infant mortality and congenital disease.
In a few more years, there won't be any more tigers in captivity. The captive tiger population has been interbred to the point, the remaining tigers are no longer viable candidates for reproduction. The same outcome would result in a small and isolated population of humans that interbred. There had to be a diverse and unrelated human population available in order for mankind to be "fruitful, to multiple and fill the earth".
Theologians have come up with all kinds of extraneous and erroneous theories to try and answer the question. Everything from proposing God suspended natural law with some miracle, to Adam's descendants having sex with angels. IMO, none of which is explicitly described anywhere in the Genesis narrative.
The existence of non-adamic man, also explains the mystery in the story of the Biblical Flood, where the patriarch Noah (after having followed God's instructions to the letter, and survived the flood), then becomes a drunk and lays naked before God. What is that all about ??? Obviously there was a problem between Noah and God. The problem isn't specifically addressed in the narrative, but it is alluded to in the flood story itself.
What did Noah think when he released a dove and it returned with an "olive twig plucked off a tree" in its' beak ?! Noah would have realized instantly, that twig didn't come off any tree that had been under the waters of the flood. He would have also realized intuitively the flood could not have been a global event, but could only have been local in nature.. and somewhere out there, the descendants of Cain had also survived the flood.
In Noah's mind, the flood and its destruction, had been totally without meaning, so he plants a vineyard and becomes a drunk. Mystery solved.
What Noah didn't understand, was that God had correctly destroyed the segment of humanity that was the problem. It was the descendants of Adam and Cain that had filled the earth with violence and needed to be destroyed... not primordial man. There is no archeological evidence to substantiate any claim homo-sapiens were warlike, or violent creatures. No skeletal remains have ever been found showing evidence of homo-sapiens murdering each other with weapons. It simply doesn't exist.
Homo sapien-sapien (modern man) however is a different story. Our history is a litany of continuous and ongoing violence from the time Cain slew Able, right up until modern times. Now we have developed the weapons to destroy the Earth itself and all the creations therein.. Which will constitute a violation of Gods everlasting covenant with Noah (The Noahic Covenant), in which God promises never again to destroy the earth because of the wickedness of mankind.
Exactly. But why does God instruct Adamic man to REPLENISH the earth ? You skipped right past that one and didn't explain it at all. The word "Replenish" means to fill again, something that was once full, but is now diminished.
The Hebrew language (like many other languages, including English) has multiple definitions for the same word. In Hebrew, a word can have a common definition, a secondary more literary definition, and a formal Talmudic definition (many of which include multiple meanings for the same word as well).
So saying the definition "replenish" is not required in a biblical text, is a matter of interpretation, or opinion..
IMO, acknowledging the reality humans other than those created in the image of God existed alongside Adam and his descendants, answers a great many questions about the creation story of Genesis that can not be rationalized any other way. Even though the Scripture says Adam and Eve had more sons and daughters, other than the three sons who are named in the Genesis narrative.. The question remains, "Who did Cain marry"
In Noah's mind, the flood and its destruction, had been totally without meaning, so he plants a vineyard and becomes a drunk.
Or, the fragments of the more ancient Adamic story, pieced together for Genesis from Mesopotamian lore, are about an incarnate Adam and Eve,
The humans -male and female- created on the 6Th day were created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28) but they were not of the Adamic lineage.Adam and Eve were created by God after the 7 th Day of Rest....
Or, the men who wrote Genesis didn't know any better and the shamans of religion created a fetish or golden calf out of those writings preventing any new truth from being accepted.There are a great many pagan alternatives to the truths of God's Word -- I think all Christians on the board would agree to that point.
Just not in the actual Bible.
in the actual Bible Adam and Eve are created in Gen 1:26-28
26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
Genesis 2 tell us about the account of a man (ADAM) who was created by God and placed in a Garden ....In Gen 2 - we get "more detail" including the detail of the name of the man and the woman created in Gen 1:26,
details on marriage, details on the tree of knowledge, the tree of life, details about man (IN A GARDEN) being created first ... etc.
1 Tim 2
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived; but the woman, being deceived, was in the transgression.
Adam was first formed - from the dust of the ground and from "prior parents"
Eve was formed from Adam's rib - not at all possible in blind faith evolutionism.
I think people should question the scientific method of carbon dating. Did you know there was a mythbuster episode that proved carbon dating to be false/ as in its not accurate. They put a piece of sweaty cloth in an oven at low heat for 3 days, when they carbon dated the piece it showed up as being over 600 years old. So for instance, some fossils contain more carbon than others not because of age but because of the heat, rain, and minerals in certain regions.If the flood did not produce the fossil record, then what did in context of a young earth view? I have heard it said that God could have created coal when He formed the world. But coal comes from organic remains, pressurized over long periods of time. Also, coal seams contain fossils, such as the imprints of leaves and other organic structures. If God created this, he is essentially making detailed evidence of something alive that never lived. Would God do this?
I think people should question the scientific method of carbon dating. Did you know there was a mythbuster episode that proved carbon dating to be false/ as in its not accurate. They put a piece of sweaty cloth in an oven at low heat for 3 days, when they carbon dated the piece it showed up as being over 600 years old. So for instance, some fossils contain more carbon than others not because of age but because of the heat, rain, and minerals in certain regions.
There is no proof that carbon dating is dead on accurate yet people seem to throw reason out the window when a super "smart" person just says so. So in theory you have to have faith that scientists are telling the truth making people slaves to scientific reason.
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?