Does Aging Prove Genesis Is True?

[Colter]

Mr. Colter—- as an evolutionist—-what exactly do you believe————-especially regarding mankind?
As a follower of Jesus——that is a very general statement. Lots of people follow Jesus but have reservations as to who He really is.

I am not challenging you in any way just interested in your comments to my questions.

I believe Jesus is who he said he was, that he is the creator of life which was planted on earth and evolved via a fostered evolution into life as we know it. I think Jesus had to contend with erroneous expectations about who he was to be and what he was to do as well as a wildly exaggerated, racial centric history of the so-called Israelites.

I believe that the teachings of Jesus have been further contaminated by conjecture and speculations on the part of preexisting fixed ideas after Jesus left (erroneous ideas of Judaism married erroneous ideas of Paganism) to form inconsistent, conflicted Christianity.......further complicated by still more sectarian doctrine formation an division.

I Believe that much of Judaism represents evolutionary religion that shares developmental similarities to many other religions in the world.

The original, pre-cross gospel of Jesus has for the most part been lost but will one day be proclaimed again.

 

[-57]

Well, first of all, evolutionism is not a word, evolution is the word. Second of all, one man bringing sin into the world has nothing to do with human ability to adapt to our surroundings. Fjnally, I never said he used evolution to create people, I said God provides for man to be capable of evolving. In the future, please attempt to provide a reasonable and logical argument if you want to debate with me.

The bible is very, very clear that God didn't use evolutionism to create Adam and Eve. To suggest so would be doing serious unjustice to what the text says.

In your post you said" I also strongly believe in the tenets of evolution"...and the tone of your post sounds like you believe God formed man from a sub-primate rather than the dust.
As my post pointed out when I actually quoted the bible sin and death came because of one man...Adam. If evolutionism was what happened then God messsed up the Genesis account when He didn't say "from the animals I created man".

 

[-57]

The work before the cross is where the original gospel can be found. The cross represents pig headed religious people's inability to see beyond the petrified doctrines.

It appears 1 Cor 1;23 applies to you
...but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles

 

[Colter]

It appears 1 Cor 1;23 applies to you
...but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles

Yes, I'm aware of that. I'm not a diciple of Paul or his version.

 

[Colter]

The bible is very, very clear that God didn't use evolutionism to create Adam and Eve. To suggest so would be doing serious unjustice to what the text says.

In your post you said" I also strongly believe in the tenets of evolution"...and the tone of your post sounds like you believe God formed man from a sub-primate rather than the dust.
As my post pointed out when I actually quoted the bible sin and death came because of one man...Adam. If evolutionism was what happened then God messsed up the Genesis account when He didn't say "from the animals I created man".

When the Hebrew priest wrote the creation story in Banylon they made no claim of divine inspiration, it was a pseudo biographical story meant for the child like mind of the men if that age. We now know that the earth is billions of years old and has been host to many epochs of evolutionary history.

 

[-57]

When the Hebrew priest wrote the creation story in Banylon they made no claim of divine inspiration, it was a pseudo biographical story meant for the child like mind of the men if that age. We now know that the earth is billions of years old and has been host to many epochs of evolutionary history.

Matt, Mark, Luke or John made no claims of inspiration....but we can know and trust that they are.

But then again from someone who defines themself as a Christian Church Seeker....I can tell you you're looking in the wrong place.
Even in post 164....you demonstrate that by denying the cross.

 

[Colter]

Matt, Mark, Luke or John made no claims of inspiration....but we can know and trust that they are.

But then again from someone who defines themself as a Christian Church Seeker....I can tell you you're looking in the wrong place.
Even in post 164....you demonstrate that by denying the cross.

I've never denied that the cross happened, ever. I just have a different interpretation of it than Paul did. God was already forgiving, he has always been forgiving, he doesn't change, it's mans understanding that changes.

If the Jews would have believed in the original gospel they would be preaching it from Jerusalem today.

 

[-57]

I've never denied that the cross happened, ever. I just have a different interpretation of it than Paul did. God was already forgiving, he has always been forgiving, he doesn't change, it's mans understanding that changes.

If the Jews would have believed in the original gospel they would be preaching it from Jerusalem today.

So you have a different interpretation than Paul has? For being a christian church seeker one has to wonder why you deny Paul.

Secondly, Paul had the same interpretation that Jesus had as described by Matt, Mark, Luke and John.

 

[Colter]

So you have a different interpretation than Paul has? For being a christian church seeker one has to wonder why you deny Paul.

Secondly, Paul had the same interpretation that Jesus had as described by Matt, Mark, Luke and John.

Because I belive in the original gospel Jesus had hoped the Jews and Gentiles would both allow into their hearts. The Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven. Paul never knew Jesus, he brought his own ideas to the religion he started about Jesus.

 

[-57]

Because I belive in the original gospel Jesus had hoped the Jews and Gentiles would both allow into their hearts. The Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven. Paul never knew Jesus, he brought his own ideas to the religion he started about Jesus.

I read your post and ask myself...what the heck is he talking about. Perhaps you could present one of those original Pauline ideas that he started that were incorrect about Jesus.

 

[Colter]

I read your post and ask myself...what the heck is he talking about. Perhaps you could present one of those original Pauline ideas that he started that were incorrect about Jesus.

Paul advanced the idea of theoretical salvation, that Jesus volunteered to be a human sacrifice for the sins of mankind. The theory that Gods cold heart could not be moved to forgive until one almost equal to himself was tortured and killed for the cause of Sin. That wasn't the original gospel of Jesus. Paul disappeared for 3 years and brought back his own conclusions.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Paul advanced the idea of theoretical salvation, that Jesus volunteered to be a human sacrifice for the sins of mankind. The theory that Gods cold heart could not be moved to forgive until one almost equal to himself was tortured and killed for the cause of Sin. That wasn't the original gospel of Jesus. Paul disappeared for 3 years and brought back his own conclusions.

Except that wasn't Paul's idea: it is the entire theme of the Bible and Jesus Himself taught it. Salvation by the death of Jesus is the Gospel and the core of the Christian faith.

 

[Colter]

Except that wasn't Paul's idea: it is the entire theme of the Bible and Jesus Himself taught it. Salvation by the death of Jesus is the Gospel and the core of the Christian faith.

It's true that the Pagan theory and practice of blood sacrifice for sins had been around already and in many religions. Jesus never taught blood sacrifice in his gospel, he taught a change of heart and rebirth of the spirit if need be. In the original gospel salvation was by faith in God who is the Father of all mankind. Jesus had labored to bring the Jews into his gospel of the kingdom of heaven, but tragically they rejected the gospel and of coarse killed Jesus.

Realizing his gospel would be rejected and the Jews left desolate, guided by the Father, Jesus made preparations for the light to go west.

Jesus never actually said his unjust death was a sacrifice to atone for sins, that's an interpretation among people in the Gentile world who already entertained those theories in thier religions.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

It's true that the Pagan theory and practice of blood sacrifice for sins had been around already and in many religions. Jesus never taught blood sacrifice in his gospel, he taught a change of heart and rebirth of the spirit if need be. In the original gospel salvation was by faith in God who is the Father of all mankind. Jesus had labored to bring the Jews into his gospel of the kingdom of heaven, but tragically they rejected the gospel and of coarse killed Jesus.

Realizing his gospel would be rejected and the Jews left desolate, guided by the Father, Jesus made preparations for the light to go west.

Jesus never actually said his unjust death was a sacrifice to atone for sins, that's an interpretation among people in the Gentile world who already entertained those theories in thier religions.

John 1:29
The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

Luke 18:31-33
Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished. For He will be handed over to the Gentiles, and will be mocked and mistreated and spit upon, and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will rise again.”

John 6:54-56
He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

John 3:14-15
As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

Isaiah 53:6
All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him.

 

[Colter]

The prophets had a message, their message was rejected and they were mistreated.

God the Son came down, his gospel was rejected, he was mistreated and killed.

Sacrifice theory claims it was Gods will that the prophets and the Son be rejected.


Matthew 21:33-46 reads:

“Hear another parable: There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower and he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit and the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.” Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone which the builders rejected


The saving message was the original gospel, not killing the messenger as a sacrifice.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

The prophets had a message, their message was rejected and they were mistreated.

God the Son came down, his gospel was rejected, he was mistreated and killed.

Sacrifice theory claims it was Gods will that the prophets and the Son be rejected.


Matthew 21:33-46 reads:

“Hear another parable: There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower and he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit and the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.” Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone which the builders rejected


The saving message was the original gospel, not killing the messenger as a sacrifice.

I'm going to believe the scriptures over you if you don't mind.

Isaiah 53:10
But the Lord was pleased to crush Him...

 

[Colter]

I'm going to believe the scriptures over you if you don't mind.

Isaiah 53:10
But the Lord was pleased to crush Him...

That's understandable and easier. I'm going to trust Jesus.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

That's understandable and easier. I'm going to trust Jesus.

John 6:53
So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves."

 

[Colter]

John 6:53
So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves."

I don't think Jesus was accurately remembered in this quote, however it still doesn't say "kill me as a sacrifice for your sins." The core of the original gospel was a change of heart as opposed to the yoke of ritualism, theoretical salvation. Jesus didn't go around Israel ministering to the sick and poor, telling them "hey, I'm sinless, kill me and drink my blood, isn't that good news?" The Pagan world did already practice such rituals.


Anyway, Jesus constantly sought to lead his audience into the original gospel of the kingdom which truly was "good news." He also repeatedly warned that rejecting his gospel was a huge mistake for the Jewish people.


29Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous. 30And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31So you testify against yourselves that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ sins. 33You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape the sentence of hell?

34Because of this, I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify, and others you will flog in your synagogues and persecute in town after town. 35And so upon you will come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36Truly I tell you, all these things will come upon this generation.

Lament over Jerusalem
(Luke 13:31-35)

37O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling! 38Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39For I tell you that you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’c”

 

[ClothedInGrace]

I don't think Jesus was accurately remembered in this quote, however it still doesn't say "kill me as a sacrifice for your sins." The core of the original gospel was a change of heart as opposed to the yoke of ritualism, theoretical salvation. Jesus didn't go around Israel ministering to the sick and poor, telling them "hey, I'm sinless, kill me and drink my blood, isn't that good news?" The Pagan world did already practice such rituals.


Anyway, Jesus constantly sought to lead his audience into the original gospel of the kingdom which truly was "good news." He also repeatedly warned that rejecting his gospel was a huge mistake for the Jewish people.


29Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous. 30And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31So you testify against yourselves that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ sins. 33You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape the sentence of hell?

34Because of this, I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify, and others you will flog in your synagogues and persecute in town after town. 35And so upon you will come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36Truly I tell you, all these things will come upon this generation.

Lament over Jerusalem
(Luke 13:31-35)

37O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling! 38Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39For I tell you that you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’c”

Of course the quotes of Jesus you disagree with were not accurately remembered...