How did me get different races of people?

[tacdon]

If everyone came from Noah's sons how are there, so many different types of people?

 

[JoshuaDaryl]

tower of Babel more than likely

 

[revrobor]

The Tower of Babel is correct.

 

[th1bill]

If I can not be accused of being pretentious. Men were separated at the Tower but it goes beyond for a satisfying answer. No intelligent and studied Christian will fall into the trap of proclaiming Evolution to be a lie. Rather, he or she will explain that, indeed, Micro-evolution, a.k.a. Adaptation, is proven fact. On the other hand, Macro=evolution is a theory, that after about a century and a half has fallen through the cracks.

When Noah his sons and their wives departed the Ark, they were the only race on the Earth. However they did not all remain in that redion but, rather, they spread across the Earth. The Earth is filled with examples of this adaptation. There are butterflys that are the same critter but because they live in different regions of the Earth, they look completely gifferent because f the colors needed for camouflage. Then there is the blind Cave Fish. He has the remnants of eye sockets but no etes... he doesnot need eye in absolute dark.

Noah's descendants moved to different regions and they adapted to survive.

God bless.

 

[JoshuaDaryl]

If I can not be accused of being pretentious. Men were separated at the Tower but it goes beyond for a satisfying answer. No intelligent and studied Christian will fall into the trap of proclaiming Evolution to be a lie. Rather, he or she will explain that, indeed, Micro-evolution, a.k.a. Adaptation, is proven fact. On the other hand, Macro=evolution is a theory, that after about a century and a half has fallen through the cracks.

When Noah his sons and their wives departed the Ark, they were the only race on the Earth. However they did not all remain in that redion but, rather, they spread across the Earth. The Earth is filled with examples of this adaptation. There are butterflys that are the same critter but because they live in different regions of the Earth, they look completely gifferent because f the colors needed for camouflage. Then there is the blind Cave Fish. He has the remnants of eye sockets but no etes... he doesnot need eye in absolute dark.

Noah's descendants moved to different regions and they adapted to survive.

God bless.

Bill, while I agree with micro evolution, aka adaptation to a point, I can not believe that is what has caused racial changes, some which have nothing to do with survival. Race goes far beyond melanin. Also take into consideration that we have more than a thousand years of documented human migrations, and no racial changes. How many pale skin, red, and blond headed europeans who have moved into Australia, or Americas deep south, do you know, who now are either black, or at least red (not sun burn red LOL) We have been waiting more than 400 years for the change, and except for where they married into other races and complexions, they are still lilly white. The more logical answer would be a combination of where God led the different tribes after the tower, and then Id say God changed the races of the following generation at birth,

 

[Profane]

Bill, while I agree with micro evolution, aka adaptation to a point, I can not believe that is what has caused racial changes, some which have nothing to do with survival. Race goes far beyond melanin. Also take into consideration that we have more than a thousand years of documented human migrations, and no racial changes. How many pale skin, red, and blond headed europeans who have moved into Australia, or Americas deep south, do you know, who now are either black, or at least red (not sun burn red LOL) We have been waiting more than 400 years for the change, and except for where they married into other races and complexions, they are still lilly white. The more logical answer would be a combination of where God led the different tribes after the tower, and then Id say God changed the races of the following generation at birth,

It takes much longer then a mere four hundred years.

 

[Nord Christian]

Adaptation I do believe to be true. Don't think there's any scripture pointing out as to why some people have darker skin, hair or eyes than other peoples from other parts of the world. Or why some have smaller or larger features
than another.

We've seen adaptation over time taking place in such species as bears and birds. The polar bear's coat was once brown, like the grizzly. It changed color once it went northward. Some birds beaks have changed shape over time as well.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

"Race" come about because of the various environments on earth and the fact that people do not all live in the same kind of environment, over time people adapt to their environment.

The story of Noah does not really make sense in the context of where races came from. Because that would mean all of our genetic diversity happened in a short span. Anyways humans have not been sharing the same skin color for a long time, even before the supposed date of Noah's flood.

 

[th1bill]

Great! This looks like iron sharpening iron and some very good replies, thanks to everyone. Let's deal with the last first and if my failing brain misses a point, please I am in the final stage of MS, so call me on it. The race issue must be dealt with from the flood Noah and family survived because God said they are the only eight people that survived. To believe anything else is to call God a sinner and in Texan, "That ain't so!"

Josh, valid point! I made te post short and therefore not complete. The, much, denied truth is that we serve, if we serve, an Awesome God. However, dealing with the average unbeliever it will not drive the conversation to go theological in the beginning. And as much as it stings the average person calling themselves Christian, I am being generous when I say that better than 98% of the Church Membership are not saved. (This statement is based on a survey in the mid-eighties of the American Church.)

Now, all things are in the hand of God and that must never be forgotten. The Earth will not continue in it's path without it being the Will of God. If God sent the people away from the Tower of Babel, and He did do that, He has the power to adapt the, very, people He sent out. He, likely, did not but He could cause that adaptation in a human heart beat if e chose to do it. I also lean towards several generations for the Micro Evolution/Adaptation to take place but that only be true if that is what God/Jesus chose to do.

God bless and again, good stuff.

 

[JoshuaDaryl]

Found this interesting


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Shem (disambiguation).
Shem
Shem02.jpg
Shem, son of Noah
Born 1557 AM
(date disputed)[note 1]
Children Elam
Asshur
Arphaxad
Lud
Aram
Parents Noah


Shem Ham and Japheth by James Tissot 1904.
Shem (Hebrew: שֵם, Modern Shem Tiberian Šēm ; Greek: Σημ Sēm; Ge'ez: ሴም, Sēm; "renown; prosperity; name"; Arabic: سام Sām) was one of the sons of Noah in the Hebrew Bible as well as in Islamic literature. He is popularly regarded as the eldest son, though some regard him as the second son. According to some Rabbinic traditions, Shem was born without a foreskin (aposthia); which may indicate a basis for circumcision that predates the covenant of Abraham. There is however, no explicit indication of this in the Genesis text. [1][2] Genesis 10:21 refers to relative ages of Shem and his brother Japheth, but with sufficient ambiguity to have yielded different English translations. The verse is translated in the KJV as "Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder, even to him were children born.". However, the New American Standard Bible gives, "Also to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, and the older brother of Japheth, children were born."
Genesis 11:10 records that Shem was still 100 years old at the birth of Arphaxad, two years after the flood; and that he lived for another 500 years after this, making his age at death 600 years.
The children of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram, in addition to daughters. Abraham, the patriarch of the Hebrews and Arabs, was one of the descendants of Arphaxad.
Islamic literature describes Shem as one of the believing sons of Noah. Some sources even identify Shem as a prophet in his own right and that he was the next prophet after his father.[3] In one Muslim legend, Shem was one of the people that God made Jesus resurrect as a sign to the Children of Israel.[4]
The 1st-century historian Flavius Josephus, among many others, recounted the tradition that these five sons were the progenitors of the nations of Elam, Assyria, Chaldea, Lydia, and Syria, respectively.
The associated term Semitic is still a commonly used term for the Semitic languages, as a subset of the Afro-Asiatic languages, denoting the common linguistic heritage of Arabic, Aramaic, Akkadian, Ethiopic, Hebrew and Phoenician languages.
According to some Jewish traditions (e.g., B. Talmud Nedarim 32b; Genesis Rabbah 46:7; Genesis Rabbah 56:10; Leviticus Rabbah 25:6; Numbers Rabbah 4:8.), Shem is believed to have been Melchizedek, King of Salem whom Abraham is recorded to have met after the battle of the four kings.
In a few of the many extra-biblical sources that describe him, Shem is also credited with killing Nimrod, son of Cush.[citation needed]
Shem is mentioned in Genesis 5:32, 6:10; 7:13; 9:18,23,26-27; 10; 11:10; also in 1 Chronicles 1:4.


Geographic identifications of Flavius Josephus, c. 100 AD; Japheth's sons shown in red, Ham's sons in blue, Shem's sons in green.
Contents [hide]
1 Proposed lineages from Shem
1.1 Descendants in Genesis 10 and 11
1.2 Europeans
1.2.1 Germanic
1.2.2 Hellenistic (Greek)
1.2.3 Indo-Iranians
2 Racial connotations
3 Genealogies according to "Book of Jasher"
4 See also
5 Footnotes
5.1 Notes
5.2 References
6 External links
Proposed lineages from Shem[edit]
Descendants in Genesis 10 and 11[edit]
According to the Bible, Genesis 10:22-31

22 The children of Shem: Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad and Lud and Aram.
23 And the children of Aram; Uz and Hul, and Gether and Mash.
24 And Arphaxad begat Salah and Salah begat Eber.
25 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one [was] Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided;
and his brother's name [was] Joktan.
26 And Joktan begat Almodad, and Sheleph, and Hazarmaveth, and Jerah.
27 And Hadoram, and Uzal and Diklah,
28 And Obal, and Abimael and Sheba,
29 And Ophir, and Havilah, and Jobab: all these were the sons of Joktan.
30 And their dwelling was from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar a mount of the east
31 These [are] the sons of Shem, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, after their nations.
Excerpts from Genesis 11:10-26—
Shem [was] an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood ...
Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah ...
Salah lived thirty years, and begat Eber ...
Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg ...
Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu ...
Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug ...
Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor ...
Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah ...
Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran ... and Haran begat Lot
Europeans[edit]
Some believe that from Shem descend the whole of the European peoples. Ernest L. Martin writes, "...[The] Shemite tribes (people who were descendants of Shem and including some peoples who came from Abraham) later colonized the whole of southern Europe and replaced the people of Javan and his four descendants. Javan's people were pushed mainly into the northern areas of Europe where in turn they migrated farther east into Asia (along with Gomer the firstborn son of Japheth and his descendants)." [5]
Germanic[edit]
Some scholars have claimed that the Anglo-Saxons are the descendants of Shem. "Alfred, king of the Anglo-Saxons [b. 849 A.D.] was... the son [descendant] of Sem [Shem]" (Church Historians of England, vol. 2, p. 443). Proponents of this theory also claim that Alfred the Great was a descendant of Shem because he claimed to descend from Sceafa, a marooned man who came to Britain on a boat after a flood.[citation needed]
Le Petit, a writer in 1601 mentioned King Adel, said to be descendant of Shem, ruler of Britain having 3 children that migrated to India.
Further, it is said[who?] that Tuitsch a German patriarch is none other than Shem himself (see Assyrian-German theory).
Hellenistic (Greek)[edit]
A text from the Islamic world claims that the Greeks derived from Shem: Tabari II:11 “Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks;...”
In the Chronicles of George the Monk and Symeon Logothetes, the following genealogy occurs: "To the lot of Shem fell the Orient, and his share extended lengthwise as far as India and breadthwise (from east to south) as far as Phinocorura, including Persia and Bactria, as well as Syria, Media (which lies beside the Euphrates River), Babylon, Cordyna, Assyria, Mesopotamia, Arabia the Ancient, Elymais, India, Arabia the Mighty, Coelesyria, Commagene, and all Phoenicia."[6]
Indo-Iranians[edit]
According to Abulgazi, Shem's original land was Iran while Japheth's was the country called "Kuttup Shamach," said to be the name of the regions between the Caspian Sea and India.[7]
Hisham Ibn Al-Kalbi, a 19th-century Arab historian, states that al-Hind and al-Sind are of Ophir, the son of Joktan.[8] Isidore of Seville (c. 635) had also made Joktan the ancestor of the natives of north-west part of South Asia; his material was based on earlier enumerations made by Jerome and Josephus, who had stated that Joktan's descendants "inhabited from Cophen, an Indian river, and in part of Asia adjoining to it."
Racial connotations[edit]
According to the Bible, there is no mention of the races of the sons of Noah. People assume the races of the sons of Noah based on the areas that were given to them.
Some writers have associated Noah's sons with different skin colors or alleged races. For instance the Jewish text Pirqei R. Eliezer, depicts God as dividing the earth among Noah's sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth,[note 2] and attributing different skin colors to them (literally, "blessing" them with different skin colors): light colored skin for the Japhetites, medium dark or brown for the Semites, and very dark or black for the Hamites.[citation needed]
Bar Hebraeus speaks of Noah dividing the world among his three sons, with Ham getting the Land of the Blacks (sūdān), Shem the Land of the Browns (sumra), and Japheth the Land of the Reds (łuqra).[9][full citation needed]
Josiah Priest (1788–1851) believed that Shem, because he was a descendant in the Adamic line, and because "Adam" means reddish in Hebrew, that Shem too was of the "reddish race". Further, he believed that because Christ was a descendant in the line of Shem, that Christ was of "copper-colored stock".[10]
According to an Armenian tradition, "Shem had the region of the tawny, Japhet that of the ruddy, and Ham that of the blacks".[11]
Genealogies according to "Book of Jasher"[edit]


The genealogy of Shem to Abraham according to the Holy Bible, showing the origin of the Moabites, Israelites, Ammonites, Ishmaelites, Edomites, Midianites, Assurites, Leturites and Leumites.
A rabbinic document that surfaced in the 17th century, claiming to be the lost "Book of Jasher" provides some names not found in any other source. Some have reconstructed more complete genealogies based on this information as follows:
Shem. Also Sem Literal meanings are named or renown (father of the Semitic races - Shemites). The sons of Shem were:
Elam "eternity" (sons were Shushan, Machul and Harmon)[12] - (Elamites and Khuzestanis)[13]
Asshur "a step" or "strong" (sons were Mirus and Mokil)[14] - (Assyrians)
Arphaxad (sons were Shelach, Anar and Ashcol)[14] - Chaldeans, Hebrews (Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Ishmaelites, and Qahtanites)
Ziezi - son of Shem and a grandson of Noah. His name is mentioned in the excerpt Ziezi ex quo vulgares meaning "Ziezi, of whom the Bulgars" but being regarded by some as the first European reference to the Bulgars as a people. (Bulgars and Thracians—though modern scholarship classifies neither as Semitic; the former being Turkic and the latter Indo-European)
Lud "strife" (sons were Pethor and Bizayon)[15] - (Ludim, Lubim, Ludians, Ludu, Lydians, and other related groups in Asia Minor—generally classified today as Indo-European).

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Great! This looks like iron sharpening iron and some very good replies, thanks to everyone. Let's deal with the last first and if my failing brain misses a point, please I am in the final stage of MS, so call me on it. The race issue must be dealt with from the flood Noah and family survived because God said they are the only eight people that survived. To believe anything else is to call God a sinner and in Texan, "That ain't so!"

It's not calling God a sinner. There is nothing wrong with questioning whether or Global Flood happened or not (its a good question because we don't find evidence of some global flood that wiped out all of mankind minus a family in the days of ancient civilizations, therefore the human population was not reduced to only 8 people). One has to wonder why civilizations that date back before the supposed Noah's flood were not wiped out. Or how so many millions and millions of species could exist if a global flood happened several thousand years ago.

It would be calling God a liar if I said that his intention was for the story of Noah and the Flood to be 100% historically accurate, and that was its main purpose. If you know, there are more interpretations of the Flood story behind it being a historical event (it being a myth or a local flood are different interpretations).

An understaning of the concept of the world that the writer(s) of Noah's flood story is imporant as well. Back then the "world" did not have the same meaning as we think of it. To us, earth/world refers to the entire planet, all the continents, and also all the people inhabiting the world. However back then the "world" for people was used in a more local sense. They didn't know that the earth was a globe, they didn't know about all the continents of the earth (especially the later "new world"), and they also did not know about every location that humanity was living in (and at this time humanity was already in separate areas, indians living in the Americas, aboriginals in Australia, etc). So when in the story it refers to humanity being wiped out, that does not mean it is referring to every single being on every single continent dying via drowning.

 

[JoshuaDaryl]

It's not calling God a sinner. There is nothing wrong with questioning whether or Global Flood happened or not (its a good question because we don't find evidence of some global flood that wiped out all of mankind minus a family in the days of ancient civilizations, therefore the human population was not reduced to only 8 people). One has to wonder why civilizations that date back before the supposed Noah's flood were not wiped out. Or how so many millions and millions of species could exist if a global flood happened several thousand years ago.

It would be calling God a liar if I said that his intention was for the story of Noah and the Flood to be 100% historically accurate, and that was its main purpose. If you know, there are more interpretations of the Flood story behind it being a historical event (it being a myth or a local flood are different interpretations).

An understaning of the concept of the world that the writer(s) of Noah's flood story is imporant as well. Back then the "world" did not have the same meaning as we think of it. To us, earth/world refers to the entire planet, all the continents, and also all the people inhabiting the world. However back then the "world" for people was used in a more local sense. They didn't know that the earth was a globe, they didn't know about all the continents of the earth (especially the later "new world"), and they also did not know about every location that humanity was living in (and at this time humanity was already in separate areas, indians living in the Americas, aboriginals in Australia, etc). So when in the story it refers to humanity being wiped out, that does not mean it is referring to every single being on every single continent dying via drowning.

you could not be more wrong. Please before posting such blatantly false garbage do some research. It only takes a matter of seconds to google secular evidence for world flood, and millions upon millions of hits will pour in of evidence supporting a global flood. Even the fact that prior to the flood there was only one super continent, there was ONLY ONE GIANT CONTINENT, which has been scientific fact for as long as I know, I was taught that in school back in the 1980s. I will not debate with a non believer the dates, or whether or not Noah and his family put critters on the ark, as that is like casting my pearls before swine (Gods words not mine) But as far as a global flood is concerned secularly there is no doubt, it is a fact, and is now the accepted origins of the grand canyon, and the ice age. To say God goes around telling lies in the Bible is blasphemy, do not even go, well its a story, God realizes unlike Hollywood that the vast majority of people are no smarter than a sack of spuds, and will believe anything, just look at those 2 12 year old girls who stabbed their frien 19 times and left her for dead, over a scary storey, so why would God make up things

 

[JoshuaDaryl]

Matthew 7:7-8
New King James Version (NKJV)
Keep Asking, Seeking, Knocking

7 “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

you could not be more wrong. Please before posting such blatantly false garbage do some research. It only takes a matter of seconds to google secular evidence for world flood, and millions upon millions of hits will pour in of evidence supporting a global flood. Even the fact that prior to the flood there was only one super continent, there was ONLY ONE GIANT CONTINENT, which has been scientific fact for as long as I know, I was taught that in school back in the 1980s. I will not debate with a non believer the dates, or whether or not Noah and his family put critters on the ark, as that is like casting my pearls before swine (Gods words not mine) But as far as a global flood is concerned secularly there is no doubt, it is a fact, and is now the accepted origins of the grand canyon, and the ice age. To say God goes around telling lies in the Bible is blasphemy, do not even go, well its a story, God realizes unlike Hollywood that the vast majority of people are no smarter than a sack of spuds, and will believe anything, just look at those 2 12 year old girls who stabbed their frien 19 times and left her for dead, over a scary storey, so why would God make up things

You are right that there was a super continent but what does that have to do with a global flood? And the secular world does not believe in a global flood because they find evidence contrary to it. Just open up a secular science/history book and your going to find no mention of a global flood or it causing the Grand Canyon. Also I'm not calling God a liar. I do think that the biblical flood could have been inspired by an actual large local flood.

 

[Bluelion]

It's not calling God a sinner. There is nothing wrong with questioning whether or Global Flood happened or not (its a good question because we don't find evidence of some global flood that wiped out all of mankind minus a family in the days of ancient civilizations, therefore the human population was not reduced to only 8 people). One has to wonder why civilizations that date back before the supposed Noah's flood were not wiped out. Or how so many millions and millions of species could exist if a global flood happened several thousand years ago.

It would be calling God a liar if I said that his intention was for the story of Noah and the Flood to be 100% historically accurate, and that was its main purpose. If you know, there are more interpretations of the Flood story behind it being a historical event (it being a myth or a local flood are different interpretations).

An understaning of the concept of the world that the writer(s) of Noah's flood story is imporant as well. Back then the "world" did not have the same meaning as we think of it. To us, earth/world refers to the entire planet, all the continents, and also all the people inhabiting the world. However back then the "world" for people was used in a more local sense. They didn't know that the earth was a globe, they didn't know about all the continents of the earth (especially the later "new world"), and they also did not know about every location that humanity was living in (and at this time humanity was already in separate areas, indians living in the Americas, aboriginals in Australia, etc). So when in the story it refers to humanity being wiped out, that does not mean it is referring to every single being on every single continent dying via drowning.

That is out right preaching against Gods word and goes against the statement of Faith for this section, please stop, because frankly I don't want to here God's word slandered and will be force to report.

We believe here that Gods word is true and with out error, If you have a different view go to unorthodox?

 

[AmericanChristian91]

That is out right preaching against Gods word and goes against the statement of Faith for this section,

We believe here that Gods word is true and with out error, If you have a different view go to unorthodox?

I'm not going against the statement of faith for this section. Nor am I saying that the Bible is full of errors when it comes to truth about God.

Just because a story in the bible is not 100% historically accurate, does not mean that it is not apart of God's word or not truth. God does sometimes teaches to us through stories that are not exactly accurate when it comes to history.

If the Genesis creation story's main focus is theological and not 100% accuracy when it comes to material origins, does that mean it is false and it is not God's word? No, because that would just show the original intention was not to be some science or history book. It would not fall into the "truth" category if "truth" has to equal 100% historical accuracy, however it would be another kind of "truth" (a truth more focused on the nature of God and Man).

And im not the only baptist with this interpretation of certain parts of the bible. I'm not going against baptist beliefs, so it would not be write to report me.

 

[Profane]

That is out right preaching against Gods word and goes against the statement of Faith for this section, please stop, because frankly I don't want to here God's word slandered and will be force to report.

We believe here that Gods word is true and with out error, If you have a different view go to unorthodox?

God gave us brains so that we might use them.

 

[th1bill]

It's not calling God a sinner. There is nothing wrong with questioning whether or Global Flood happened or not (its a good question because we don't find evidence of some global flood that wiped out all of mankind minus a family in the days of ancient civilizations, therefore the human population was not reduced to only 8 people). One has to wonder why civilizations that date back before the supposed Noah's flood were not wiped out. Or how so many millions and millions of species could exist if a global flood happened several thousand years ago.

It would be calling God a liar if I said that his intention was for the story of Noah and the Flood to be 100% historically accurate, and that was its main purpose. If you know, there are more interpretations of the Flood story behind it being a historical event (it being a myth or a local flood are different interpretations).

An understaning of the concept of the world that the writer(s) of Noah's flood story is imporant as well. Back then the "world" did not have the same meaning as we think of it. To us, earth/world refers to the entire planet, all the continents, and also all the people inhabiting the world. However back then the "world" for people was used in a more local sense. They didn't know that the earth was a globe, they didn't know about all the continents of the earth (especially the later "new world"), and they also did not know about every location that humanity was living in (and at this time humanity was already in separate areas, indians living in the Americas, aboriginals in Australia, etc). So when in the story it refers to humanity being wiped out, that does not mean it is referring to every single being on every single continent dying via drowning.

This is one of the black and white issues that divides the sheep from the goats. God/Jesus calls us to believe as a small child and the World is busy going where no Saved Man can be found, doubt is a serious symptom of this condition.

I will never deny that, from the World's perspective, the story of Noah and the Flood makes no sense. Christians (the saved kind), on the other hand are not given to question God. When I was 27 I had my first son and as he grew he idolized me and believed everything I told him... he knew I would not lie to him. This is the model Jesus calls us to follow if we are saved.

The Bible, all of it is the inspired Word of God and if it says the entire world was flooded, the entire world was flooded. The, errant, idea of a localized flood is the folly of the Lost Man. For that to occur one needs to build some amazing fortress walls around the middle east to contain the thousands of feet of the water to cover Mount Ararat.

You contend there is no evidence for the Flood but I say differently, the reading of truth is, incorrectly, influenced by our personal biases. I would suggest you begin an in depth study at equip.org with Hank yo find what the Christian Scientist has to say on this.

I already, after better than twenty years of ministry, know the preferred rebuke for my scriptural position, "Jesus taught, all we need do is to believe Him to be the Christ." I, kinda, wish it were that simple but Jesus taught a good deal more than that, he did inspire every word of the Bible. You see, Jesus also taught we are to believe as the small child and He taught and still teaches that we are to obey His commands.

Here, it gets, obviously, tricky, not complex, but one need to focus. {f just believing is all of it... Satan is saved and that cannot be true. This and the other false teachings are rooted in the pocket book, sadly. If ministers tickle the ears, the numbers on Sunday morning soar. If that same minister teaches the truth of Hell Fire and Brimstone, the Faithful will remain but their per capita number will, just, soar.

Please brother, do a Spiritual Inventory.

 

[th1bill]

God gave us brains so that we might use them.

You know,
God did, indeed give each of us brains and then He gave us His Holy Word and if we choose to stand and to rebuke God, t just might be that we will not like the result.

 

[Profane]

You know,
God did, indeed give each of us brains and then He gave us His Holy Word and if we choose to stand and to rebuke God, t just might be that we will not like the result.

Literal interpretations of the bible are the result of man, not God.... he gave us brains so that we might use them, if you rebuke the tools God himself has given us to understand the world he created, how can you not be certain it won't be you; and not others, that won't reap the consquences of such an affront to God?

There was no global flood, so either God is wrong, or the certain stories in the bible where never meant to be taken literally, I choose to believe that God wasen't wrong.