How long has man been created.

[LightSeaker]

What they may do, does not negate the fact that Luke 12:49-53 is true.

It's true not only for Christians...but for most any spiritual tradition.

.

 

[JS-POG]

What do you see when you look at the sun or the moon?

I see a circle!

I agree with you. However, Genez's argument was that the by "circle", the Bible was indicating that back then man knew that the earth was "round" as a sphere when this is simply not the case. Historical records alone tell us that man believed the world to be flat. A circle is flat, just like it looks when you look at it - like the moon or sun. My argument is that if the intention was to reveal some astrological truth about the earth being round as a globe or sphere, they would have said so. Something tells me that our agency is precious to us and that it simply wasn't man's time to know what the true shape of earth was yet - at least until we fought for this knowledge through a scientific means. It seems that all truths we are given require some sacrifice on our part.

 

[GenemZ]

I agree with you. However, Genez's argument was that the by "circle", the Bible was indicating that back then man knew that the earth was "round" as a sphere when this is simply not the case. Historical records alone tell us that man believed the world to be flat. A circle is flat, just like it looks when you look at it - like the moon or sun. My argument is that if the intention was to reveal some astrological truth about the earth being round as a globe or sphere, they would have said so. Something tells me that our agency is precious to us and that it simply wasn't man's time to know what the true shape of earth was yet - at least until we fought for this knowledge through a scientific means. It seems that all truths we are given require some sacrifice on our part.

The Bible got it right. Men got what it was saying wrong. Don't confuse the fact that the ignorance of man negates the Bible. Men assumed the world was flat, and therefore assumed it was round like a pan. Just like certain scientists today assume that fossils are our ancestors, and therefore assume that we evolved from them. Its the assumption pertaining to the data that brings on the error, not the data itself.

God knew that men would eventually learn that the world is a circle, like the other planets. The fact that they did not have this knowledge in ancient days reveals that man's understanding did not interject its own bias into the Scriptures. How did man know if the flat earth were not rectangular or square? Why pick the circle? If man thought the world is flat? Why not simply say the the Lord's throne sits above the earth, and leave it at that?

3000 years ago, what would you call that?

 

[GenemZ]

It's true not only for Christians...but for most any spiritual tradition.

So, why were you complaining about those jerks who you indicated gave Christianity a bad name?

 

[LightSeaker]

So, why were you complaining about those jerks who you indicated gave Christianity a bad name?

Because they are of my spiritual family.

.

 

[GenemZ]

Because they are of my spiritual family.

One can say that those who push down and aside what is written in God's Word, in preference for a theory (which is only a theory). That states God did not make Adam's body from the dust of the earth? But used a chimp to get Adam's body to come into being... is a jerk. At least he is a jerk to many who are in the same spiritual family. Is he not a jerk to many as well? No? Should we not have unity and stop having such jerks which are causing divisions?

1 Corinthians 11:18-19
"In the first place, I hear that when you come together
as a church, there are divisions among you,
and to some extent I believe it.
No doubt there have to be factions among you to
show which of you have God's approval."

And, I might add. Those who do not have God's approval, do receive strong approval from their peers. Approbation lust is a sin.




.
​

 

[An Arch Angel]

The Bible got it right. Men got what it was saying wrong. Don't confuse the fact that the ignorance of man negates the Bible. Men assumed the world was flat, and therefore assumed it was round like a pan. Just like certain scientists today assume that fossils are our ancestors, and therefore assume that we evolved from them. Its the assumption pertaining to the data that brings on the error, not the data itself.

God knew that men would eventually learn that the world is a circle, like the other planets. The fact that they did not have this knowledge in ancient days reveals that man's understanding did not interject its own bias into the Scriptures. How did man know if the flat earth were not rectangular or square? Why pick the circle? If man thought the world is flat? Why not simply say the the Lord's throne sits above the earth, and leave it at that?

3000 years ago, what would you call that?

This is utter nonsense and a misrepresentation of the bible purpose.
You are misleading people. The bible was assembled by the Catholic Church and never meant to be used this way.

You raise the bible to an idol like status, Jesus (is) sad. Idolizing is the very thing Jesus was against. We are not lowering it.

People back then looked at the sky and saw every thing was round. They lived in a climate where the circle of life and death was constantly playing out around them. Now you portray the bible as the first time it was seen. Your "flat Earth" anology is a joke.

 

[Assyrian]

3000 years ago, what would you call that?

Looks like a ball to me, even more so when you see it rotating.

 

[An Arch Angel]

Fact, Genez.

The RCC assembled the bible.

I choose to go with the people who assembled the bible. The Church fathers have the authority to speak about the bible. The RCC is the final authority on the bible today. Not with people (that wanted power like luther) that came to believe something different after a few hundred years. "Luther" even has the same name as the devil himself. you speak for Lucifer.

It is funny how you (genez) bring interpretation to a debate that needs evidence. You bring no data what so ever.

Can you bring anything other than the bible.
You need to for two reasons.

1) I am a Christian and believe god created man.
2) when making an assertion you need more than one piece of evidence.

 

[GenemZ]

Looks like a ball to me, even more so when you see it rotating.

You can see the moon rotating as you watch it?

Illegal substances were a norm in certain cults back then. They never got the shape of the world right. They might have saw it rotating.

I will say it again... Football? Rugby ball? What kind of ball are you talking about? Back then it could have been various odd shapes. After all, the root word, "ballo" meant to throw or hurl.

Circle would never fit the same description of a foot ball. I believe that is why the Bible uses circle. Ball can vary in shapes. The word "sphere" is no where to be found in Scripture in regards to shape. It was not a word for that purpose. And, does a sphere have to mean its in the shape of a circle? Spheres can be oblong and oval. A circle? Its self descriptive.

Circle: a plane curve generated by one point moving at a constant distance from a fixed point.​

You're just going in circles. Admit it. To the ancients? Circle was a perfect word of choice.


Just like Adam's body was said to be made up of the dust of the earth. Today, we would say his body was made up of the minerals found in the earth. They had no concept of minerals back then. But, "dust of the earth" (not simply all of earth) was what God said back then the human body consists of. Go to a health food store and look on a bottle of high quality multi minerals with trace minerals. Where are all these to be found? They are found in fertile soil. How did Moses know?


How did Moses know that the human body consists of the same elemenst found in the earth? Is house dust containg the same elements? No. So? How did Moses know?


Lucky metaphor strikes again.






.

 

[GenemZ]

This is utter nonsense and a misrepresentation of the bible purpose.
You are misleading people. The bible was assembled by the Catholic Church and never meant to be used this way.

What is the purpose? You do not say. Are you Catholic?

You raise the bible to an idol like status, Jesus (is) sad. Idolizing is the very thing Jesus was against. We are not lowering it.

Matthew 4:4
"Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not
live on bread alone, but on every word that
comes from the mouth of God.'"
​

Jesus said we are to live by every word. Do you know how many times Jesus said, "it is written" throughout his ministry? A great many times. Won't he do the same today if we are to speak with him?

People back then looked at the sky and saw every thing was round. They lived in a climate where the circle of life and death was constantly playing out around them. Now you portray the bible as the first time it was seen. Your "flat Earth" anology is a joke.

I see, I have hit a nerve.


By the way? How many animals have nerves?


Hmmmmmm? Could that mean we all then came from a common ancestor? That is? If evolution is the means by which we all got here? Or, do you mean to tell us that all these species that have nerves evolved to having nerves independently from one another? What are the odds of that? A million years, and millions of species all 'somehow' ended up with having nerves? Not to mention, hearts, livers, bones, teeth, eyes, ears, and brains, too?

Amazing! Let's all get down on our knees and give thanks to Evolution!

Why did I get left behind? God? Why did you favor Adam?






.





.

 

[mpok1519]

?
We've turned a perfectly sound discussion about how long homo sapiens have existed, and it has evolved into arguing about the definition of "circle".

lol

God does exist; and His sense of humor never ceases to amaze me.

 

[mpok1519]

Fact, Genez.

The RCC assembled the bible.

I choose to go with the people who assembled the bible. The Church fathers have the authority to speak about the bible. The RCC is the final authority on the bible today. Not with people (that wanted power like luther) that came to believe something different after a few hundred years. "Luther" even has the same name as the devil himself. you speak for Lucifer.

It is funny how you (genez) bring interpretation to a debate that needs evidence. You bring no data what so ever.

Can you bring anything other than the bible.
You need to for two reasons.

1) I am a Christian and believe god created man.
2) when making an assertion you need more than one piece of evidence.

Yeah; people worship a book moreso than they worship God these days.

And for Genez, reciting repetitive scripture from talk origins.com and going with their cockeyed 'theories' IS evidence and support.

 

[GenemZ]

Fact, Genez.

The RCC assembled the bible.

I choose to go with the people who assembled the bible. The Church fathers have the authority to speak about the bible. The RCC is the final authority on the bible today.

Was it not your church that hounded Galileo? Final authority?

Just because I found a buried treasure, does that mean I understand and can dictate how to have fiscal responsibility?

Not with people (that wanted power like luther) that came to believe something different after a few hundred years. "Luther" even has the same name as the devil himself. you speak for Lucifer.

Did your church tell you that?

If this were 1950? Would your church tell you evolution is truth as to how we got man? Trouble is? Truth never changes.

Your church has changed where it stands, and will continue to do so as to try and gain back some members its been losing to living churches over the years.

It is funny how you (genez) bring interpretation to a debate that needs evidence. You bring no data what so ever.

Can you bring anything other than the bible.
You need to for two reasons.

1) I am a Christian and believe god created man.
2) when making an assertion you need more than one piece of evidence.

The Bible is not good enough for you? How am I to believe God created man otherwise? I know one could end up believing in intelligent design if he were a clear thinker without knowing God. But? To claim God created man? One must use the Bible as the evidence.

The essence of the problem is as follows...

1 Corinthians 2:14
"The man without the Spirit does not accept
the things that come from the Spirit of God,
for they are foolishness to him,
and he cannot understand them,
because they are spiritually discerned."


​

My problem... and that of many other Christians here, is that our evidence is not to be seen by just anybody. Especially, those who claim to be Christian because they grew up in a home with believers who made them attend religious classes and church services.




.

 

[mpok1519]

ok, once again.

I say theres evidence of fossils, and all kind of concrete evidence to suggest homo sapiens have been around for around 120,000 years.

Now, we have Genez, using scripture, to tell us what the definition of circle is, and how that very use of the word circle in the Bible denotes evidence of earth's atmosphere in a scientifically objective way (not really).

---------

I still have no idea really what Genez is trying to prove.

 

[mpok1519]

My problem... and that of many other Christians here, is that our evidence is not to be seen by just anybody. Especially, those who claim to be Christian because they grew up in a home with believers who made them attend religious classes and church services.

.

You confuse evidence with scriptural suggestive interpretation. Theres a difference between data, and poetry.

 

[GenemZ]

Yeah; people worship a book moreso than they worship God these days.

And for Genez, reciting repetitive scripture from talk origins.com and going with their cockeyed 'theories' IS evidence and support.

Never seen that link. I do my own thinking... something you can not fathom being done.

Tell us? How can one worship God without the Bible?

Isaiah 55:8
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,
saith the LORD."
​

That is why we need the Bible. All you can do is to worship a god of your own imagination. One who thinks like you can. Not surprising how your god agrees that certain parts of Scripture do not mean what they say it means.

Proverbs 3:5
"Trust in the LORD with all thine heart;
and lean not unto thine own understanding."

Its no wonder you despise having to live by the Bible. Pick what pleases you, and reject what does not.

Matthew 16:24
Then Jesus said to his disciples,
"If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself
and take up his cross and follow me."
​

​

For some, they fear denying their peers of whom they seek approval. To accept what God's Word, would make them cross with him.

Mark 10:6-8
But at the beginning of creation God 'made
them male and female.'
'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother
and be united to his wife, and the two will become
one flesh.'
So they are no longer two, but one."
​

Jesus was quoting Adam in that passage. You know. That factitious character God had to make up? Because man back then could not grasp the idea of having been transformed from a chimp?

You know. Because this same people who could conceive of God transforming a serpent into a legless creature in a second of time? as found in Genesis? Nor, how God transformed Moses staff into a snake?... And, made Balaam's donkey speak with a human voice? Not to mention, how God said he transformed king Nebuchadnezzar into having features of an animal?

Nahhhh. Since they could not grasp such concepts?

God had to resort to saying he made Adam's body from the elements of the earth. Why? Because ancient men back then could not handle such a reality as having come from a chimp. They would have just not been able to grasp the concept.

Well?

 

[mpok1519]

yet agan, you provide no data on anything.

Not surprising.

and no, people didnt come form chimps. chimp-like, yes, but by all means, not a chimp at all.

You confuse worshipping God with worshipping the Bible. People have idolized the Bible to a point they're just plain confused. This is what you have done.

But yes, I agree that the Bible is metaphorical bc how else do you explain to such primitive people certain concepts that would be difficult to grasp by the conventional methods of science of the times? But no, the "serpent" didnt have legs before the "fall". Moses staff did not turn into a snake that at the other staff snakes. And no, Nebuchadnezzar didn't really turn int an animal; he already was one, metaphorically.

 

[An Arch Angel]

Was it not your church that hounded Galileo? Final authority?

Just because I found a buried treasure, does that mean I understand and can dictate how to have fiscal responsibility?




Did your church tell you that?

If this were 1950? Would your church tell you evolution is truth as to how we got man? Trouble is? Truth never changes.

Your church has changed where it stands, and will continue to do so as to try and gain back some members its been losing to living churches over the years.


The Bible is not good enough for you? How am I to believe God created man otherwise? I know one could end up believing in intelligent design if he were a clear thinker without knowing God. But? To claim God created man? One must use the Bible as the evidence.

The essence of the problem is as follows...

1 Corinthians 2:14
"The man without the Spirit does not accept
the things that come from the Spirit of God,
for they are foolishness to him,
and he cannot understand them,
because they are spiritually discerned." ​

My problem... and that of many other Christians here, is that our evidence is not to be seen by just anybody. Especially, those who claim to be Christian because they grew up in a home with believers who made them attend religious classes and church services.




.

The bible is fine. I told you it is one piece for me too.

However, when discerning if I am following the snake or Christ’s truth I need more. The devil would quote the bible better then any human thumper. Christ would offer the truth of what is. The devil would try and lock the truth in a box (apple or book), stagnate the truth to the point that the truth is no longer valid and thus a lie.

Christ hides nothing. Macroevolution is his method. The DNA is and organic program written by the hand of God himself. If you are familiar with the terms “stressors”/reactants as they relate to chemistry, at what point does a chemical reaction (or set of) go out and “hunt” for reactants to drive the reaction in a particular direction.
The mutation rates and closeness of the worlds life forms scream out “we are one in Christ” and ‘we are one … from one … Christ”.


You come from one cell in birth, why not from one cell came the birth of man?


Again,

The RCC is the best authority because they assembled the bible. Check your history section. They, the RCC, need to be respectful and humble so they will not state it as I do. I came up with the "LUTHER" part with the help of the bible.

Yes, and my church did far worse then, and today. That does not negate the fact they assembled the bible.

The truth does change because we change, if you don’t know that, once again I say, you should not be defending the bible. The RC recognizes this and this is demonstrated by their actions.

I chose the RCC over a bible based church. I was an atheist scientist. I now understand why the Holy Spirit touched me. Were you not a Christian before?


Again,
You can from one cell when you were born, Why couldn't man have come from one cell also.

 

[GenemZ]

yet agan, you provide no data on anything.

Not surprising.

and no, people didnt come form chimps. chimp-like, yes, but by all means, not a chimp at all.

You got the picture.

You confuse worshipping God with worshipping the Bible. People have idolized the Bible to a point they're just plain confused. This is what you have done.

You are confused about not being confused. You really have no clue as to what the Word of God is for.

But yes, I agree that the Bible is metaphorical bc how else do you explain to such primitive people certain concepts that would be difficult to grasp by the conventional methods of science of the times?

Have they located a selective deafness and blindness gene yet? When they do? I hope you find help. For I already CLEARLY showed you how ancient man could have EASILY received and accepted that man had come from a chimpinski. For the Bible contains several examples of what you claim they had no capacity for.


So much for that.


Hope they find and learn to manipulate that gene. .......