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.
which is why I purposed what I did in the OP as it allows for a literal 7 day creation exactly as written in the Bible and for the addition of evolution without changing a word of it.-The unbelief (especially in the creation accounts) of The Bible by people who are christian or at least identify as christian must be at an all time high.
I certainly believe the truth of the Bible. That we will have everlasting life..
However, in heaven, we are not given in marriage...
Matthew 22:29-30
King James Version
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
In the garden.. God told Adam and Eve to populate the earth..
Can you see the difference?
Genesis 1:28
King James Version
28 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.
those who are loosing their children after sending them to a school that will not pass them if they do not accept the current scientific model. Everyone in a dying church who members are all dying out as there are no new or children growing up to replace them. Anyone who can not personally reconcile but feels a need to the difference between the Bible and the current accepted scientific model.Who wants The Bible to coexist with science lies
The exact same story that was given to them is also given to us. what you guys always assume is because I give another interpretation to the same story that I change the story some how.. When in fact I have not changed a literal word.
Pragmatism is a lousy way to do hermeneutics.those who are loosing their children after sending them to a school that will not pass them if they do not accept the current scientific model. Everyone in a dying church who members are all dying out as there are no new or children growing up to replace them. Anyone who can not personally reconcile but feels a need to the difference between the Bible and the current accepted scientific model.
If this is not you then know nothing I said here is addressed to you. if this is you then I'm here to answer any questions you may have.
it kinda doesn't matter, as they misunderstood or rather had a incomplete understanding of a great number of things including Jesus and his role of the messiah. They were looking for someone to liberate them from roman rule, and rule over them as a warrior king/priest like David. Clearly they were wrong in their understanding, or if you prefer had an incomplete understanding of the messiah. So what would make you think their understanding of origins would be complete here when their understanding of the messiah durning the time of Christ was also incomplete??How did the original audience understand it?
Pragmatism is a lousy way to do hermeneutics.
I think you made my point. Those who came later had misunderstandings of what the Messiah would do. There’s nothing that says the original audience misunderstood.it kinda doesn't matter, as they misunderstood or rather had a incomplete understanding of a great number of things including Jesus and his role of the messiah. They were looking for someone to liberate them from roman rule, and rule over them as a warrior king/priest like David. Clearly they were wrong in their understanding, or if you prefer had an incomplete understanding of the messiah. So what would make you think their understanding of origins would be complete here when their understanding of the messiah durning the time of Christ was also incomplete??
It doesn’t work exegetically.If it works exegetically what does it matter which philosophy inspires the work/effort to bring revelation?
Can you provide book chapter and verse to support your assertion? Can you demonstrate that the first or earlier jews knew that Jesus would come to bring salvation to the lost in the way he did, and then at what point did this transition to the messiah being the man from God who would free them from roman oppression?I think you made my point. Those who came later had misunderstandings of what the Messiah would do. There’s nothing that says the original audience misunderstood.
Finally we are getting somewhere..It doesn’t work exegetically.
That’s laughable that you want this. Your OP is this wild speculation that has zero support from scripture, but you want now want scripture. Got it.Can you provide book chapter and verse to support your assertion? Can you demonstrate that the first or earlier jews knew that Jesus would come to bring salvation to the lost in the way he did, and then at what point did this transition to the messiah being the man from God who would free them from roman oppression?
If not then how can you make this claim as the Bible is silent on what the first jews understood about the messiah.
[Staff Edit] There is absolutely nothing atheistic about evolution. Indeed, very few teachers of evolutionary biology are atheists for the simple reason that evolution has to do with science, and scientific evidence that God does not exist is in very short supply.
[Staff Edit]
Not sure what your point is here.For the past four years, I have had an active ministry to a fellowship of atheists and have gotten to know them very well. All but two of them had been active members of radicalized Christian fundamentalist churches, and NONE of them had been members of evangelical churches who left the theory of evolution in the science classroom where it belongs.
So, someone wrote this... Nice.... what's your point?"So that what we say may be understood quite concretely, let us now bring the argument to bear upon actual passages in Scripture. To what person of intelligence, I ask, will the account seem logically consistent that says there was a "first day" and a "second" and "third", in which also "evening" and "morning" are named, without a sun, without a moon, and without stars, and even in the case of the first day without a heaven? And who will be found simple enough to believe that like some farmer "God planted trees in the garden of Eden, in the east?" and that He planted "the tree of life" in it, that is a visible tree that could be touched, so that someone could eat of this tree with corporeal teeth and gain life, and, further, could eat of another tree and receive knowledge "of good and evil"? Moreover, we find that God is said to stroll in the garden in the afternoon and Adam to hide under a tree. Surely, I think no one doubts that these statements are made by Scripture in the form of a type by which they point toward certain mysteries. . . But there is no need for us to enlarge the discussion too much beyond what we have in hand, since it is quite easy for everyone who wishes to collect from the holy Scriptures things that are written as though they were really done, but cannot be believed to have happened appropriately and reasonably according to the narrative meaning."
-- Origen, On First Principles
Do you think that will ever change? Do you think the impact of Darwins theory will ever allow the church to maintain a YEC world view? Meaning do you think that the educational system will not force children to choose between the "facts" of science and the 'faith' of religion?
That 70% of children we loose out of the church every year is bleeding the church dry, and my OP is a way to combat that.
which is why I use what was said in the op to allow both faith in the science needed to pass a test and the ability to retain faith in God as the 7 day creation is still possible no matter what they say about evolution.
Not every kid can live with that. Most are taught to only put their faith in scientific fact. and as a result are made to choose faith in God or faith in 'science.' and Genesis 1-3 is the battle ground where their fate is decided most of the time.
which is exactly the reason why we should not be doubling down on our and our father's understanding of this part of the Bible. we are not equipping our children in a way to maintain their faith.
it ebb and flows.
So, you are saying that the man that God created and breathed into the breath of life and gave him a soul... was not Adam?.... did you read the op? the command in gen 1 was given to man created day 6. "man made in the image of God." Day 6 man is not Adam and Eve. Gen 2:3 forward has Adam being created out of mud on day three given a soul and placed in the garden...
Not sure what your point is here.
Is it that "teaching the 6 day creation theory is driving people away from the belief of God"?
If so, what does Jesus walking on water, feeding the 5000, turning water instantly to very good wine, healing blind, healing deaf, healing crippled, defeating death and returning to earth, walking through walls, floating up into the sky... what do all of these supernatural events do to people's understanding of science..and belief in the bible and Christ?
I hardly believe that one can believe all of the numerous, recorded miracles of Christ, on which your and my salvation depends....yet, at the same time dismiss the biblical view that this same Christ created the universe exactly how He said that He did.
So someone very influential in the history of Christian thought wrote this a very long time ago, which contradicts the claim that the creation account was understood as describing a literal and recent six day creation for thousands of years.So, someone wrote this... Nice.... what's your point?
So is human understanding of how sacred texts should be interpreted.Science is fluid. Ever changing and always being challenged..
You should get your information about evolution from those who are actually involved in studying it. Evolution is no more atheistic than Special Relativity, and the idea that the scientific world is leaving naturalistic evolution behind is utterly wrong. Try talking to real Christian biologists.This is why the atheistic, Darwinian idea of evolution is still only a theory and the scientific world is leaving it..
you asserted the original jews who received the prophesy of the messiah knew this prophesy spoke of the coming salvation Christ would provide on the cross to everyone. I'm asking for book chapter and verse.That’s laughable that you want this. Your OP is this wild speculation that has zero support from scripture, but you want now want scripture. Got it.
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?