Aren't you forgetting that the author was not a human, but the creator of the entire universe and life itself? If He doesn't have all the answers then who does?
Upvote
0
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.
What did this ancient writer(s) of these two pieces of Genesis, know about biology, know about astronomy, know about geology, etc?
So this writer(s) say if they were literally resurrected today, should they immediately enter our academia and reteach us all? Educate us all?
No there are not.There are mountains of evidence for evolution.
This is not true at all.It is corroborated by research in every field.
another lie...Scientists are basically unanimous these days.
Where do people get this nonsense?The only ones who won't give in, after 150 years, are the fundamentalists.
But you do not even know what you disagree with, you do not even know what you agree with.So for me, and many others I'm sure, it's either theistic evolution or we simply can not believe in Christianity.
But it is you who is telling us we can't believe in creation.This is why Christians should stop telling people they can't believe in evolution.
So is it the word of God or not, that is the question? If not, we might just as well toss it on the fire. If it is then we'd better take note of what it says, whether or not it agrees with man's (fallible) ideas.That isn't really accurate, NotByChance. Divinely inspired as it may be, the Bible was written by human beings, essentially males.
I agree, but God would have made sure that what was written down was accurate and truthful before He allowed it to be associated with His name would He not?I think it dubious that God simply dictated it word for word to purely passive scribes who took it all down exactly as God said.
The bible is correct.So is it the word of God or not, that is the question? If not, we might just as well toss it on the fire. If it is then we'd better take note of what it says, whether or not it agrees with man's (fallible) ideas.
I agree, but God would have made sure that what was written down was accurate and truthful before He allowed it to be associated with His name would He not?
There are mountains of evidence for evolution. It is corroborated by research in every field. Scientists are basically unanimous these days. The only ones who won't give in, after 150 years, are the fundamentalists.
So for me, and many others I'm sure, it's either theistic evolution or we simply can not believe in Christianity.
This is why Christians should stop telling people they can't believe in evolution. Is a person's belief in evolution going to send them to Hell, as long as they believe that Jesus has saved them and they have accepted him? No! As long as the central belief is there, it doesn't matter what a person thinks about the origin of the earth. It's like whether a person believes in post-Trib or pre-Trib. Who the hell cares?
If Christians keep pushing the view that people can't believe in both Christianity and evolution, many potential Christians will be lost. They will be pushed away from the church as it becomes increasingly anachronistic. The will say, "I believe in evolution; of course I can't be a Christian." But that's only because Christians themselves have promoted this view. They have a damn grudge match with evolution. Christianity and evolution need not be mutually exclusive.
I believe in evolution, and in my view, if God was involved, it is an absolutely beautiful phenomenon. It is the work of a master artist, a supremely brilliant engineer. A single-celled organism gave way to all of the life we see on earth around us. It's amazing! Praise be to God for this glorious master work that shows us his incredible ingenuity.
It isn't an either-or situation with the Bible. Either the Bible is all inerrant or it's all errant and worthless. Either-or thinking is unrealistic and neurotic. Reality is a shade of grey. The Bible is a complex synthesis of both myth and fact, and even myths have some real degree of reality to them. So, reading the Bible is no easy task. Regarding original sin, I view this concept as far more in Augustine than in Scripture, which, in many passages, contradicts this notion. But that is another matter. Getting back on track. Yes, when we read the Bible, we have to cherry pick. For example, do you follow all the OT laws? Do you avoid eating pork? Are you willing to sell your daughter into slavery, as per Exod. 21?Problem being....you have to change the bible is several places as you filter it through the nonsense of evolutionism.
For example the bible teaches .....Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned....
Did you see the through one man part? How does evolutionism account for that?
Then you get all excited by making the statement "A single-celled organism gave way to all of the life we see on earth around us."....despite the crystal clear fact the bible doesn't even come close to teaching this.
It isn't an either-or situation with the Bible. Either the Bible is all inerrant or it's all errant and worthless. Either-or thinking is unrealistic and neurotic. Reality is a shade of grey. The Bible is a complex synthesis of both myth and fact, and even myths have some real degree of reality to them. So, reading the Bible is no easy task. Regarding original sin, I view this concept as far more in Augustine than in Scripture, which, in many passages, contradicts this notion. But that is another matter. Getting back on track. Yes, when we read the Bible, we have to cherry pick. For example, do you follow all the OT laws? Do you avoid eating pork? Are you willing to sell your daughter into slavery, as per Exod. 21?
Well, how about giving credit where credit is due. I have a Ph.D. in theology. I initially thought of doing my doctorate in biblical studies, because I am very good with languages, but decided on theology instead. However, our department required all graduate students to pass major preliminary exams in OT, NT, church, theology, and ethics. So I did a fair amount of graduate study in biblical studies.Hoghead, I can tell from what you wrote you don't really understand much of the bible. But don't worry, I don't understand it completely.
But when it comes to your OT laws...perhaps you ought to read around this verse......
It contained all kinds of four-footed animals and reptiles of the earth, as well as birds of the air.
....
There are mountains of evidence for evolution. It is corroborated by research in every field. Scientists are basically unanimous these days. The only ones who won't give in, after 150 years, are the fundamentalists.
So for me, and many others I'm sure, it's either theistic evolution or we simply can not believe in Christianity.
This is why Christians should stop telling people they can't believe in evolution. Is a person's belief in evolution going to send them to Hell, as long as they believe that Jesus has saved them and they have accepted him? No! As long as the central belief is there, it doesn't matter what a person thinks about the origin of the earth. It's like whether a person believes in post-Trib or pre-Trib. Who the hell cares?
Hi Resha, good to chat again!
Resha wrote-
But the two are very different. Christianity is based on the life of a single human being thousands of years ago.
Well, how about giving credit where credit is due. I have a Ph.D. in theology. I initially thought of doing my doctorate in biblical studies, because I am very good with languages, but decided on theology instead. However, our department required all graduate students to pass major preliminary exams in OT, NT, church, theology, and ethics. So I did a fair amount of graduate study in biblical studies.
Also, I don't follow your above comment about four-footed animals.
I am well aware of that passage. My point is that we do read Scripture selectively, cherry pick. We have to. We actually have a biblical warrant to do so, as per the passage you just referred to. Thanks for reminding me of that. It adds to my case that divinely inspired as it may be, Scripture is still the work of humans. Therefore, it can and should be questioned. The NT does a pretty good job of dumping the OT laws, showing that they really aren't what God wants. As far as I am concerned, Christ throws all the "laws of Moses" right out the window.Hoghead said....For example, do you follow all the OT laws? Do you avoid eating pork?
Start here Acts 10:10
I am well aware of that passage. My point is that we do read Scripture selectively, cherry pick. We have to. We actually have a biblical warrant to do so, as per the passage you just referred to. Thanks for reminding me of that. It adds to my case that divinely inspired as it may be, Scripture is still the work of humans. Therefore, it can and should be questioned. The NT does a pretty good job of dumping the OT laws, showing that they really aren't what God wants. As far as I am concerned, Christ throws all the "laws of Moses" right out the window.
Both of these approaches are lacking, I think. The laws were written with specific intentions -- to benefit the people. Understanding how they do that is important to thinking about whether they can be applied directly to our society or ways in which our society behaves that support or conflict with them. This is how it makes sense to say that Christ fulfills the law. It neither goes away, nor is mechanically applied.
I mean, who today thinks that we shouldn't sow fields with two kinds of crops? That would undermine crop rotation. But the passage wasn't intended to undermine crop rotation. They didn't have that technology. That law limited the ability of landowners to establish horizontal monopolies. We have horizontal monopolies, today. They're destructive to society. But both the ignoring of the passage and the mechanical application of it don't help in constructing a biblical case opposing them.
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?