evolutionist professor claims spontaneous generation

[AV1611VET]

Do you want to use that as a serious argument for christianity?

No.

As an atheist's nightmare.

Do you hope we fall on our knees and pray to Jesus after that clip?

I hope you fall on your knees and pray to Jesus without that clip.

 

[AV1611VET]

If I hadn't gotten there already, that clip alone might be enough to evaluate the Biblical literalist position as "not serious".

I have a feeling the Biblical literalist position is considered "not serious" ever since the scientific method came about.

(The closest I came to this was finding out that the "Jesus riding a Tyranosaur" illustration was not a parody, but created by a YEC ministry to "illustrate" the Garden of Eden. Sheesh.)

Ya -- that's borderline sacrilegious, if you ask me.

But it does make a powerful point.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I have a feeling the Biblical literalist position is considered "not serious" ever since the scientific method came about.

That would seem to be the case.

(On Jesus and the Dino):

Ya -- that's borderline sacrilegious, if you ask me.

That's why I thought it was mocking YECs rather than created by them.

But it does make a powerful point.

Not to anyone not raised with a literalist or non-inerrantist (or how ever you'd like to call it) view of the OT.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not to anyone not raised with a literalist or non-inerrantist (or how ever you'd like to call it) view of the OT.

Jesus was, in very fact, in the Garden of Eden.

But not as Jesus of Nazareth, you understand.

We think Melchisedec was the preincarnate Christ.

 

[sfs]

I have a feeling the Biblical literalist position is considered "not serious" ever since the scientific method came about.

The Biblical literalist position has been considered 'not serious' as long as the Bible has been in existence. Even earlier, in fact, since New Testament writers don't always take the scriptures that became the Old Testament literally.

 

[dlamberth]

Jesus was, in very fact, in the Garden of Eden.

But not as Jesus of Nazareth, you understand.

We think Melchisedec was the preincarnate Christ.

If we go literally, Jesus was born 2000 years ago.
Otherwise we are just making stuff up to fit our imagination.

 

[AV1611VET]

If we go literally, Jesus was born 2000 years ago.
Otherwise we are just making stuff up to fit our imagination.

As we're fond of saying:

Jesus is in the Old Testament concealed, and in the New Testament revealed.

 

[dlamberth]

As we're fond of saying:

Jesus is in the Old Testament concealed, and in the New Testament revealed.

Literalism has it's limits, it appears .

 

[Hans Blaster]

Jesus was, in very fact, in the Garden of Eden.

Seems unlikely. The book itself was written hundreds of years before Jesus was born. (Also the word "Jesus" does not appear in the entire story, nor even the entire OT, unless you are using a translation that uses the same name for Jesus and Joshua, which are different in English translations.)

But not as Jesus of Nazareth, you understand

We think Melchisedec was the preincarnate Christ.

who is "we"? How far does this notion exist in Christianity? What's a Melchisedec?

 

[AV1611VET]

Seems unlikely. The book itself was written hundreds of years before Jesus was born. (Also the word "Jesus" does not appear in the entire story, nor even the entire OT, unless you are using a translation that uses the same name for Jesus and Joshua, which are different in English translations.)


who is "we"? How far does this notion exist in Christianity? What's a Melchisedec?

These next thirteen reasons answer those riddles and confirm that Melchizedek was the pre-incarnate Word of God.

1. The name Melchizedek is really a title which means “King of righteousness”
2. Melchizedek is the King of Salem which is to say the King of Peace
3. Melchizedek has no mother nor father nor descendants
4. Melchizedek has no beginning of days, nor end of life (this means He is immortal)
5. Melchizedek is made like unto the Son of God
6. Melchizedek abides a priest continually and Jesus has a priesthood that is said to be unchangeable
7. Melchizedek’s priesthood is said to result in perfection
8. Melchizedek was without sin
9. Melchizedek was a heavenly high priest; not an earthly one
10. It is witnessed that Melchizedek lives forever
11. Melchizedek is said to have no descent and is yet a descendant.
12. He [i.e. Melchizedek] of whom these things are spoken…is our Lord who sprang out of Judah
13. Melchizedek is an eternal Being who receives tithes from Heaven

Source: 13 Reasons Why Melchizedek Was Actually The Preincarnate Word Of God

 

[Hans Blaster]

These next thirteen reasons answer those riddles and confirm that Melchizedek was the pre-incarnate Word of God.

Not interested in riddles.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not interested in riddles.

It shows.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It shows.

It was probably the dozens of your previous word games, etc., that I disdained that clued you in right?

 

[dlamberth]

These next thirteen reasons answer those riddles and confirm that Melchizedek was the pre-incarnate Word of God.

1. The name Melchizedek is really a title which means “King of righteousness”
2. Melchizedek is the King of Salem which is to say the King of Peace
3. Melchizedek has no mother nor father nor descendants
4. Melchizedek has no beginning of days, nor end of life (this means He is immortal)
5. Melchizedek is made like unto the Son of God
6. Melchizedek abides a priest continually and Jesus has a priesthood that is said to be unchangeable
7. Melchizedek’s priesthood is said to result in perfection
8. Melchizedek was without sin
9. Melchizedek was a heavenly high priest; not an earthly one
10. It is witnessed that Melchizedek lives forever
11. Melchizedek is said to have no descent and is yet a descendant.
12. He [i.e. Melchizedek] of whom these things are spoken…is our Lord who sprang out of Judah
13. Melchizedek is an eternal Being who receives tithes from Heaven

Source: 13 Reasons Why Melchizedek Was Actually The Preincarnate Word Of God

Are you suggesting that the Soul of Jesus and the Soul of Melchizedek are one and the same Soul?

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you suggesting that the Soul of Jesus and the Soul of Melchizedek are one and the same Soul?

I'm stating that we believe Melchisedec was a preincarnate appearance of Jesus Christ.

One of many.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I'm stating that we believe Melchisedic was a preincarnate appearance of Jesus Christ.

One of many.

Who is "We". The link you gave makes it look like a fairly narrow slice of literalists might endorse this position.

 

[AV1611VET]

Who is "We".

The subset of the human race that believes Melchizedek was a preincarnate appearance of Jesus Christ.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The subset of the human race that believes Melchizedec was a preincarnate appearance of Jesus Christ.

Both of you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Both of you?

Let's see some of that scientific method stuff work for you, Hans.

You know?

The part that's supposed to investigate before formulating an opinion?

Or can the scientific method take a hike on this one?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Let's see some of that scientific method stuff work for you, Hans.

You know?

The part that's supposed to investigate before formulating an opinion?

Or can the scientific method take a hike on this one?

You won't specify who this group is, and so far, the only persons that are clearly in it are you and the person who wrote that article you linked. What sub-set of Christians hold the Malchesidek thing? Is it hard to answer the question? I'm not looking for a detailed list, just some idea which kinds we're talking about and perhaps how numerous they are. Let me help you: not Catholics. Does that help you get started?