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.
I have spare time due to illness and chatting on a forum isn't too draining, most of the time. I do think this is an important subject that the church today need to sort out, so I think it is worth being involved in the debate in my own small way. The question you raise is one I think about thoughJust out of curiosity 1whirlwind and Assyrian: do you not have jobs? I mean, you spend an amazing amount of time here on CF debating issues that are of questionable value compared to other Christian activities, such as going to church and participating in small group and prayer activities, or just helping out fellow human beings.
There is only so much time that we have on this earth- and then it's over.
.
I have spare time due to illness and chatting on a forum isn't too draining, most of the time. I do think this is an important subject that the church today need to sort out, so I think it is worth being involved in the debate in my own small way. The question you raise is one I think about though
Go to church? You mean a building where I would sit on a pew and hear one or two lines of Scripture?
As for being with fellow human beings and groups....what do you think we are doing now? Also, I need not be with others to pray. I do that all the time.
God controls my life. He gave me artistic talent and with it I paint portraits for a nice amount of money, although it isn't steady income. He also opened the way to a job where I work four days a week from 8:00-3:00 for my daughter. Perhaps one or two hours is occupied and then I'm free to do as I wish for the remainder of the day as long as I answer phone calls. That allows me to obtain a steady salary that covers health insurance as well as building social security (I never worked during previous years...too much time on the tennis courts.)
I am exactly where I am supposed to be and doing exactly what I am supposed to be doing. It's a wonderful feeling.
.
Thank you for clarifying that, Whirlwind. Now that we know you're not anti-science, let's go on to your next issue in the statement above.
Evolution from ape to man ... You speak in an absolute sense here, yet seem to be ignoring the results of science. The methods of science have revealed that men and other primates share substantially similar genetics. I seem to recall something like 98% commonality with chimpanzees (but I'm just working from memory on that so the exact number may be slightly different). At any rate, our physical bodies share a great deal in common with other primates. This genetic similarity allows certain diseases to cross between men and some primates.
We also know with absolute certainty that genetic material can be altered and that such alteration occurs naturally as part of God's natural laws. Men have also altered genetic material for specific purposes, such as herding sheep. Are you familiar with Shetland sheepdogs or Border collies? Both these dogs were bred by man specifically for working sheep.
So, in many ways the theory of evolution has been proven. Granted there are still many unknowns. Any legitimate geneticist would admit as much. That's true of all science, by the way. Every aspect of every discipline is open to question.
As with the Bible, you can expect people to argue their favorite theories, but evidence is what carries the argument. Sure, there are bad apples, as evidenced by "global warming", but ultimately the "fakers" are relegated to the trash heap, as happened with the global warming hoax.
Yes, and not just in terms of the credibility of out faith, we are speaking with our fellow believers, children or our father in heaven. Which is why we need to keep reminding ourselves that our words whould be full of grace and seasoned with salt. I love when I can discuss this with creationists in friendship and fellowship, unfortunately many creationists ministries preach fear and condemnation and sincere creationists trust them and buy into the message. It can lead to pretty heated discussions, but I think the fear and condemnation from creationist ministries needs to be challenged as well as their rejection of science, which sadly does detract from the credibility of scripture and the gospel.Don't get we wrong- I appreciate your insights, and think we probably share the same logic when it comes to spiritual matters.
And this is an important issue- but it has been very divisive, which, sadly, detracts from the credibility of our faith.
.
Thanks. Puts another perspective on the debate. Didn't mean to get too personal.
I don't feel right if I haven't gone to at least one church service a week; usually I try and go to two. I appreciate what you're saying, though- a service can be pretty boring and stifling at times- everything man does has imperfections, church included.
I like delving into these issues, and I like the interaction that is possible here- sharpens the brain and I find makes it far easier to identify the issues and then discuss them in other groups.
And in many countries of the world where I've been- this is the only interaction with Christians that is possible; subjects our faith to scrutiny- which is why I always get uncomfortable when people get too dogmatic or hostile. The creation vs evolution debate is like that- satan can easily use it to divide Christians where no division is necessary, and use it to put our faith into disrepute with Christian-seekers.
.
Sure it is consistent with creationism, but that that is not the same as being inconsistent with evolution. Remember you haven't shown that the bible say organisms only produce their own kind, and we have seen from mishpachah that what starts of as a single family can grow into a clan, a tribe, a whole nation, the nation consisting of many tribes each made up of clans, and each clan made up of families, all from one original family or mishpachah.To my eyes, it fits perfectly with creation. Each creation is only equipped to produce of it's kind. As Mom and Dad are...so is the offspring. That would limit greatly one species producing another species would it not?
Nothing. But it is a good question. You see when two populations of the same species have been separated over generations they start to diverge. Different genetic changes build up in each population. At first this will lead to problems in reproduction like we see between horses and donkeys, where they can reproduce but the offspring tend to be sterile. As the species diverge further it is no longer possible even to produce infertile offspring. A classic example of this are ring species, where populations are able to interbreed with a neighbouring population, and the neighbour able to interbreed with their neighbour further along and so on, but the first group are not able to interbreed with more distant population. So A is interfertile with B, B is interfertile with C, C is interfertile with D, but A is not interfertile with D.Now, you may see us being the same species as an ape but...I don't. As disgusting as this subject is...should a man mate with an ape or an ape with a human what would happen? A hairy little baby or...nothing? (sorry, that was really gross.)
Beast, behemah, means livestock. Its seed refers to its offspring. God is promising lots of themJeremiah 31:27 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.
That has nothing to do with restocking cattle.
No, the two account use the terms beast of the earth and beast of the field, but God does not tell us there is a difference any more than he tells us there is a difference in God and LORD God. Just because you read a difference in to the two terms, just because you think having two terms means there has to be a difference, it doesn't mean the bible says there is one.He tells us there is a difference in beasts by specifying "of the field" or "of the earth."
Ah, so you interpret the whole Jonah being swallowed by a whale story as a parable? I have come across that interpretation, but never from a creationist before. So you don't think there was actually whale?In Jonah...what are the cattle? What is the great city? Both are to be seen spiritually.Jonah 4:11 And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?The great city is Babylon...a world-wide city. Cattle are controlled, fed, led by the nose creatures...creatures counted as worth to be bought and sold by those with the mark or the number. They blindly follow their master as we follow our Master when He gives us eyes and ears to dispell the blindness.
You say the difference in vocabulary between beast of the earth and beast of the field mean they are different, one refers to animals the other beastly people. By your argument, the use of God and LORD God in the two chapters must mean these are two different deities. I agree they aren't two different gods and that the account doesn't tell us they are two different gods, I am using it to show you that the account doesn't say there were two different types of beast either.I don't see the two accounts telling us there is a different God.
Then why not take the beasts in both chapters figuratively?The beasts being symbolic of people was revealed as was the spiritual meaning of many things....11 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
As I pointed out before, having terms that are different doesn't mean you can't have terms that are synonyms, like illness and sickness.Yes, but they aren't the same as having a demon.
If God can't inspire the use of synonyms, do you think the LORD God can?The vocabulary is that of God.
Sometimes. And sometimes the same word are used in different ways in different contexts. Faith sometimes means trust and belief, sometimes it means being faithful and trustworthy, and sometimes it refer to the the message we believe. You know whirlwind, the word of God is living and active and much harder to pin down than we often realise. But even if one word can mean the the same thing everywhere it is used, it doesn't mean you can't have different words being used to mean the same thing.Words matter, words have meaning, words are important, certain words are explicitely used throughout the Bible and carry the same meaning from Genesis to Revelation.
How is Jesus saying Moses wrote about him and different from the fact Luke wrote about Jesus, and how does it mean either of them wrote Genesis?I disagree. It is a valid argument. Jesus tells us Moses wrote of Him
Yes it describes Moses writing all the laws in the book of the Law, he wrote down songs and poems, and a list of stops on their journey. How does that mean Moses wrote Genesis?and Moses is mentioned as being the one God instructed to write throughout the Torah.
No, I don't think you are being facetious. But you are not answering my question either. So far you have been explaining the meaning of 'the generations of the heavens and the earth' I am asking what was meant by 'these'. The passage isn't saying 'the generations of the heavens and the earth' are 'the generations of the heavens and the earth'. It is pointing to some text in scripture and calling it 'these' and saying 'these are the generations...' I am asking what the text is being referred to as 'these'?Ah, I see. Another interesting question.
Deuteronomy 32:1 Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of My mouth.The heavens are those that have ears to hear and allow Him to speak through them. They speak His words, "words of My mouth," as they teach those of the earth.
Old habits and all thatI'll try but...I promise nothing!As well as being stubborn, I am forgetful. I can work on stubborn but forgetful is tough.
Those are all arguments from chapter 1, not God making Adam from clay in chapter 2, so I take it there is nothing in the imagery of God making Adam form clay that contradicts evolution.We are created on the sixth day in His image, in His likeness, to have dominion over all creatures, and those creatures were all to produce after "their kinds." "And, it was very good."
Sorry, I corrected that paragraph but the computer ate my edits. Here is what it should have said:Where is it contradicted by scripture? I do have a very metaphorical interpretation but I ask you to forget that if you don't agree and just see what is written. Evolution is not even hinted at.
I am not talking chronologically when I talk about a second argument, I am referring to the structure of your argument. (1) Your interpretation is not an interpretation it is what is written, and (2) scripture would needs to specifically teach evolution to correct you.That isn't a second argument. I asked to be shown any scripture concerning evolution from the beginning of the thread. You continue to compare this with geocentrists but it isn't applicable. The Scripture stands...it was their concept that was in error. The Scripture continues to stand...evolution isn't mentioned. So to me, if there is anyone that needs to alter their thinking...wouldn't it be evolutionists?
Probably because I have a completely unscientific mind...understanding and accepting all of this for what it is isn't a problem. Seeing the metaphorical language for the beautiful lessons they contain is something I cherish. And, I see them as literal descriptions of the real event but spoken in a poetic manner. Oops, did I already break my non-promise?
You can say he literally reckons a thousand years as a day. But reckoning a thousand years as a day is itself not literal, it is symbolic. The same as Jesus literally called himself a grapevine. He really did. That is what he actually said. But calling himself a tree is not literal it is metaphorical.The day is literally to God as a thousand years. That IS His literal reckoning of a day.
So you can't find a contradiction between God creating us in his image and using evolution to create us in his image, since instead you switch to other arguments we have already looked at.He could do whatever He wishes. However, He tells us man was created in Our image, in Our likeness on the sixth day...not evolved over the millennia to eventually become in Our image.
And why are there three question marks in one smiley?(who is "Our?")
It is written days, you interpret each as a thousand years, that is not literal.Not when it's written as it is.
The reference to God creating the smith does not mention him having a pre-existent soul, nor does John 3:5 say anything about life before the womb.
The only births happening are in this age. Satan wasn't born of woman so has never been in a flesh body. He, as the other fallen angels cannot enter the kingdom in the eternity. They are doomed.John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.Men must pass through this life, be born of water (through the birth process...the bag of waters) and then they must also be born of the Spirit to be spiritually alive, to enter His kingdom.
Yes, bless his holy name. Beautiful insight ww. You know the bible uses the picture of God as a potter to describe both God making people and nations, and God's continuing work in their lives. Interesting though, you could read that in God forming Adam from clay too. Adam, man, is the human race and Genesis 2 is not just talking about God originally forming the human race, but how he continues to form us all and we all listen to the serpent, sin and fall short of his glory.He shapes us, forms us, to do His will. He leads, guides and directs our lives if we are His elect. In other words, we have a destiny and He paves the way for it to be fulfilled...no mater what it is. I know you must have experienced that working in your life. I don't believe in coincidence!
Then why do you have to switching arguments?Whether the points hold or not is in the eye of the teller. You may not see the velcro but...it's there and holds firmly.
YayPart 2 coming up.....
.
OK this is yet another argument, not the dominion argument you were trying to support. To answer the cannibalism argument (nice onecontinued....
True...it is the "kind argument," but to my mind, our Father creating creatures that we eventually evolved from and then ordering us to rule over them and then later giving them to us to consume seems rather ungodly. It's like seething a kid in it's mother's milk. Sure, we evolved from you but so what....we can be canibals...God said so.
Scriptural reference? Nah. Start a new thread on the topicOur soul/spirits were created in the beginning (the beginning was before this age began). Our flesh bodies were created on the sixth day.
Unfortunately it hasn't a leg to stand on.I can't provide anything else for the dominion argument....it has to stand as is.
Actually I like the gap theory, when geology began to show just how old the earth is, Christian looked for other ways to understand Genesis 1, the Gap theory was the first of the explanations they came up with. Now it isn't the only way to interpret Genesis and I think some of the later interpretations the church came up with are better, but searching for a new way to understand Genesis when science contradicted Ussher's 4004 BC creation, was exactly the approach the church should have takenThere 'ya go. Evolution is wrong because what I'm saying is documented in Scripture.
Always nice to take the scenic route.Oh, I'm just meandering...it happens every now and then.
Umm, no, you started using ideas from the Gap theory to back up your dominion argument.True as that is...it still has to do with the subject and...you brought it up.
They had two problems, there wasn't enough room on their ship for all the species in case of a flood, and species have this embarrassing tendency to diverge into new species, not what they wanted with kinds.Well then, they deserted a perfectly functional ship. Shame on them.
Unfortunately the Gap Theory explanations I have heard tend to quote passage that are actually talking about the Babylonian conquest of Judah.Well, the Bible does teach about the previous age and the Bible doesn't teach evolution. Isn't this a problem for some? Or, perhaps evolution happened in the previous age as we aren't told about how that world age came about. A point though would be the creation of man. Man wasn't in the previous age as a flesh being. He/we were there but in spiritual bodies. Animals were flesh. Did they evolve in that age? I don't know. .
Exactly.True, we all discuss what Scriptures tell us but the beginning point is what is written. It is what people read into the Words that were wrong...not the Words themself.
It stops us being led astray... unless we already are astrayBeing stubborn doesn't make one unable to distinguish truth.
Sure they can, it just means evolution is the process God created and used to make all the different forms of life on earth.But it DOES speak of creation. Both cannot be truth.
So we should be geocentrists too?Well, there is the problem for Scripture does contradict these things.
I though you said to ask God what it means?No, by explain I mean the written word, without interpretation, tells us of the creation.
But your understanding of it isn't written. It isn't written you should take the beasts of the earth literally, unlike the beast of the field which are men, that the beasts of the earth are created on the sixth day, which isn't a literal day it is a thousand years. It isn't written you should wrap up all this mixture of literal and figurative, in a Gap Theory interpretation of God creating men's souls before he made their bodies. It isn't written that kind means species only ever produce their own species or that this contradicts evolution. It isn't written you should interpret God forming Adam from clay both metaphorically and literally.What is written is written.....Genesis 1:26-31 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Clearly it didn't, since they had to walk out of Egypt.What they represent could and did.Metaphorical wings wouldn't carry their weight.
So God being a potter and making me from clay is literal too? My mother and father lied to me about all that biology stuff? Please come up with a reason why God using the potter as a metaphor for making Adam contradicts God using evolution. Don't just claim that it does. I have said before it is not a metaphor for evolution, it is a metaphor for God making us. But that doesn't mean God didn't use evolution.I can't explain how a television works either but I know it does. And, I need not explain creation for it is written. Man is made of clay. That is creation of man from earth...not a metaphor for evolution.
God isn't lying just because we misunderstand him. He wasn't lying when the geocentrists misunderstood him and he isn't lying when creationists misunderstand him today.Would our Father lie to us as He was teaching and correcting?
It would only be bogus if he gave us a supposed genealogy and didn't tell us. The gospels have loads of passages telling us what people though about Jesus, all their various mistaken suppositions that he was Elijah or one of the prophets, or John the baptist had risen from the dead. Clearly wasting papyrus was not an issue and they do seem genuinely interested in telling us what other people thought of Jesus even they got it wrong.If that were true would you not have to ask yourself...Assyrian, why did Luke bother to write it in the first place? Why write a bogus "as was supposed" genealogy and take up all that space in the Bible. What would be the point?
Be sure to ask a mathematician.
Okay, next time I'll give them a chance to describe a circle in say...oh, ten or more words. I wonder if I'll hear "flat" being mentioned?
But you can't point to the specific battles where one Israelite defeated an enemy army of 1000, and two Israelites defeated a force of 10,000. Nine hundred and eighty seven would be specific, a thousand isn't.The thousand sounds very specific in certain verses Assyrian. I can't attribute it to simply meaning overwhelming numbers.
That's the difference between your interpretation and what is written.I think it does.Because He tells us He created animals and then He created man...in His image.So why couldn't God have used the homind species we find in the fossil record in his creation of mankind?
If you love the poetry in scripture you should learn the various forms it uses, including poetic parallelism. It is like being married, if we love our wife or husband we really need to try to understand what they are going on about when they talk to us.I don't knock it. I love it. Because I wrote, "The difference in form and create is meaningful. He doesn't throw words around to simply be poetic," doesn't mean I'm knocking it. Whether those words are poetic or literal they carry meaning.
Prov 6:16-19 There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him:You are mistaken for God specifically listed "seven things" and in those seven the two in question count as two. They are not the same.
Interesting, you ignore the fact God is specifically addressing the Ammonites here, and take it as a general warning about judgement for all of us too. Of course it works on that level too, but you can't use that to ignore what God specifically tells the Ammonites about how he will judge them in the land of their origin where God created them.We know where we are judged and in the above He tells us they/we will be judged where we were created. Our origin would be the place of our beginning, our creation...not our birth.
Nativity means where the nation was born, land of their habitation means means the land where they live. Which tells us God created the Ammonites in the land where their nation was born, the land they lived in, the kingdom of Ammon.The word "origin" isn't in any of the King James translations. In [Ez 16:3] it is rendered as nativity and in [29:14] it is "land of their habitation." Neither one have to do with where they were created.
That they were going to be taken into exile.
Prophecy?
I thought we had wondered off a bit all right. I was showing that the past tense used in Genesis to describe the seventh day do not necessarily the seventh day has already taken place, because the bible often uses the past tense to describe things that are yet to come.Okay but...what was the question about this?
I just watched an interesting movie (I have the day off today)....Ben Stein's "Expelled; No Intelligence Allowed." It shows Evolution gone wild in the academic world complete with interviews with such as Dawkins and his dismissal of all things having to do with God.
All Christian scientists should spend some time with it....very informative!
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?