How long has man been created.

[Assyrian]

It was not a ad hominin. I was just pointing out that being a Christian is no guarantee that the Holy Spirit is guiding all Christians. You seemed to be unaware of that truth. Christians who walk in pride grieve the Spirit who does live in them, like he lives in all who believe in Christ. He is grieved because they have cut themselves off from knowing Christ. These can only know about Christ.

C'est la vie.

An ad hom is attacking the person rather than dealing with their arguement. Your constant resort to this tactic is pretty tedious genez. If you have a bad argument, claiming the other person doesn't appreciate it because of their pride and because they don't have the Holy Spirit to guide them like you think you do, is just making excuses for a bad argument.

Of course we can all be blinded by pride and arrogance, the problem is when you try to use this as an argument, you come across as thinking only other people to can be blinded by their pride, and in condemning them you are blissfully unaware that you may be as blinded by your own arrogance yourself. You are also wandering into an even more dangerous area thinking all your opinions come to you from the Holy Spirit and you can call on God as you witness to validate everything you think.

 

[Assyrian]

You can see the moon rotating as you watch it?

Not from earth. We always see the same face of the moon. But from from the moon you will see that the earth is rotating, the positions of the continents changing every time you look at it, they move across you field of view getting wider as they move to the center and narrow again as they slip out of view.

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

The ancient Greeks though the earth was a circular disk

The Babylonians had a similar view but with islands sticking out of the circular ocean. In India they seem to have thought it was dome shaped. It is quite an obvious conclusion to people in the ancient world, just climb to the top of a high mountain and you will see the earth laid out in a circle around you. Of course the ancient Egyptians thought the earth was rectangular. So did the earth church flat earther Cosmas Indicopleustes

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.

So, when do you think rugby balls were invented?

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.

They can?

A circle? Its self descriptive.

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

A plane curve, in other words, flat.

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

If you want to describe a flat earth.

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 containing the same elements? No. So? How did Moses know?

Lucky metaphor strikes again.

Glad to see you are not taking the creation of Adam from dust literally. But the metaphor would have been pretty obvious to desert nomads, they had seem dead bodies shrivel up and turn to dust. Being made of dust and returning to dust meant being mortal.
Gen 18:27 Abraham answered and said, "Behold, I have undertaken to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes.
Job 21:26 They lie down alike in the dust, and the worms cover them.
Psalm 22:15 my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to my jaws; you lay me in the dust of death.

 

[Blue sapphire]

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

Satan loves to motivate jerks to mock God's Word by their abuses of it. Jerks seek division. We are not to seek division. We are to seek truth. Seeking truth will bring division because believers are willing to compromise truth when they find the truth inconvenient. Its like Seventh Day Adventist denying that the Sabbath was only given to the Jews under the Law. Or, Catholics getting all upset when they are shown that the bread and wine are never said to become literal flesh and blood. Those are some obvious divisions caused by opposition to faith. Many other divisions are caused by what is to be found on a more subtle level.


Grace and peace, GeneZ

I have been trying to keep up with this thread....but it has been moving fast. However words such as "jerk" genz does not add to your reputation....you have some good points...let them speak for themselves....less these condesending words.

Doesn't the word "some people" say the same thing....and leaves out the inuendos.

As I said earlier .....people don't care how much you know....unless they know how much you care.

 

[Hentenza]

Mod Hat On


Thread moved to Origins Theology from Christian Apologetics.
​

 

[JS-POG]

I have been trying to keep up with this thread....but it has been moving fast. However words such as "jerk" genz does not add to your reputation....you have some good points...let them speak for themselves....less these condesending words.

Doesn't the word "some people" say the same thing....and leaves out the inuendos.

As I said earlier .....people don't care how much you know....unless they know how much you care.

I agree. such words are not the words of the Savior, but rather words of emotion and contention.

 

[JS-POG]

An ad hom is attacking the person rather than dealing with their arguement. Your constant resort to this tactic is pretty tedious genez. If you have a bad argument, claiming the other person doesn't appreciate it because of their pride and because they don't have the Holy Spirit to guide them like you think you do, is just making excuses for a bad argument.

Of course we can all be blinded by pride and arrogance, the problem is when you try to use this as an argument, you come across as thinking only other people to can be blinded by their pride, and in condemning them you are blissfully unaware that you may be as blinded by your own arrogance yourself. You are also wandering into an even more dangerous area thinking all your opinions come to you from the Holy Spirit and you can call on God as you witness to validate everything you think.

Great points! It appears that Genez has treated everyone here this way. How many people need to confront Genez about this until he realizes that he' s in the wrong - perhaps not philisophically, but definitely spiritually? I have yet to see one person who disagrees with him be treated with respectful speech at his own right. Apparently, just by reading this thread, he has a reputation throughout the website for speaking in this condescending manner - is this what you've observed too?

 

[mpok1519]

haha, I agree - THE GREAT APOSTASY is still in effect I see. Apparently the scattered sheep have yet to hear the cry of their one true shephard still - this would explain the myriad churches and sects we see today. The Shephard was slain and the sheep scattered. Bickering has continued until this day.

thats how it was always; Sects from churches, churches from others, Methodists from Baptists, Lutherans from Catholics, Jesus split from Judaism, Judaism had its roots in very ancient tribal traditions, et al.

Religion has never unified people. If anything, its been the wolf that scatters the herd.

But, love, no matter how diverse or different one's beliefs, creed or faith, goes beyond all these things, and unifies us.

 

[Assyrian]

Great points! It appears that Genez has treated everyone here this way. How many people need to confront Genez about this until he realizes that he' s in the wrong - perhaps not philisophically, but definitely spiritually? I have yet to see one person who disagrees with him be treated with respectful speech at his own right. Apparently, just by reading this thread, he has a reputation throughout the website for speaking in this condescending manner - is this what you've observed too?

I see you've met

 

[An Arch Angel]

thats how it was always; Sects from churches, churches from others, Methodists from Baptists, Lutherans from Catholics, Jesus split from Judaism, Judaism had its roots in very ancient tribal traditions, et al.

Religion has never unified people. If anything, its been the wolf that scatters the herd.

But, love, no matter how diverse or different one's beliefs, creed or faith, goes beyond all these things, and unifies us.

Amen brotha.

Religion is of men,
God is love.
I am not a loving person by nature,
but I understand this.

 

[gluadys]

Really? In order to be a Christian I HAVE to believe in unprovable things? I HAVE to believe in things that we cannot prove exist. lol Riiiight. And the left side of my body just went numb from pure surprise.

You have this notion that in order to be a Christian, one MUST believe in fantastical things which have no support.

I do believe in Jesus' teachings....oh, but wait, thats not enough for you....good thing you're not God. =)

I'd be careful with this line of thought. Yes, of course, Christians believe in unprovable things. Christians believe in the existence of God, in the Trinity--now that's really fantastic--in the incarnation and resurrection and in the forgiveness of sins. Since you are Catholic you are expected to believe in the transformation of the eucharistic bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

These are all things that have no evidential support and which many non-Christians think are fantastical.

OTOH I don't expect these were the "fantasies" you had in mind.

 

[gluadys]

Actually if you read the Bible you so despise as a ridiculous bunch of poetry, you will see in Leviticus many references to cleanliness of utensils, cooking pottery vs bronze pots, not eating from dead animals etc. Thats hardly demon belief. Read the Bible all the way through, you might be surprised.
Remember Moses was very intelligent having been raised in the house of Pharoah in Egypt, one of the most advanced civilizations of the time, not a desert tribe as one person pointed to earlier. He was schooled in their medical fields, which were hardly accurate. So God inspired him to write the laws of the Torah, which just happen to focus alot on cleanliness, if you read them, you will see that. And you will also realize that Moses had to be inspired, otherwise he never would have written those laws, since the Egyptians had no clue on the matter.

That is another line of thought I would be careful with. The cleanliness that Leviticus is concerned with is mostly ritual cleanliness. It happens sometimes that ritual cleanliness and hygienic cleanliness coincide, but good hygiene was not the point.

 

[MattLangley]

Sure....and to get off the point a little.....I also find it interesting if man evovled...how is it there are no species of apeman still around....or all sorts of weird evolutionary beings that led to man.

Because they all evolved too, why would they cease to evolve when we do, that would make no sense. We can in fact trace the DNA of just about any life form we've decoded to common genetics with man, hence the term "common ancestor." We didn't evolve from apes, apes and us evolved from the same creatures, big difference.

No.... all men and women on this earth have that superior intelligence that animals do not have....the ability to reason and communicate with each other and also communicate with their Creator.

Except the more and more we studies chimpanzees and monkeys we see human like actions reflected, tool building, sacrificing for others, compassion. I guess if you ignore all of that then sure.

Just another nail in the coffin for the evolution of man.

If you ignore quite a bit of what we've learned then yes, there is no nail in the coffin for the evolution of man, why? because there is no other adequate explanation of genetics, bones (such as never finding dinosaur bones with humans etc... this blatantly disproves any attempt at creationists trying to use the "global flood" to explain fossil layers), as well as the study of cultures and animals that exist. There simply is no other adequate explanation which is why many nails have attempted to be nailed and all have failed the last 150 years. No you have not done what 150 years of scientific challenge has failed to do, even if it is quite arrogant of you to think so.

 

[MattLangley]

That is another line of thought I would be careful with. The cleanliness that Leviticus is concerned with is mostly ritual cleanliness. It happens sometimes that ritual cleanliness and hygienic cleanliness coincide, but good hygiene was not the point.

I don't know about anyone else but I can never believe that rounding the edges of my beard is divine insight... I'm sorry but if that's divinely important to our God then I need to reconsider if he's worth worshiping lol.

 

[mpok1519]

I'd be careful with this line of thought. Yes, of course, Christians believe in unprovable things. Christians believe in the existence of God, in the Trinity--now that's really fantastic--in the incarnation and resurrection and in the forgiveness of sins. Since you are Catholic you are expected to believe in the transformation of the eucharistic bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

These are all things that have no evidential support and which many non-Christians think are fantastical.

OTOH I don't expect these were the "fantasies" you had in mind.

I, don't know. Is it? Are they? Does it matter?

Symbolism is apparent to some, it hides from others.

 

[mpok1519]

That is another line of thought I would be careful with. The cleanliness that Leviticus is concerned with is mostly ritual cleanliness. It happens sometimes that ritual cleanliness and hygienic cleanliness coincide, but good hygiene was not the point.

Cleanliness is cleanliness though. For whatever purpose intended, it still serves the point of cleanliness by rite of action moreso than intention, right? Circumcision was for hygienic purposes; what other point would there be to convince others for it in such ancient times, other than some imaginative way to convince people that the procedure was good ( i mean, cmon, it hurts). the point was a form of physical practice of devotion I believe.

 

[gluadys]

Cleanliness is cleanliness though. For whatever purpose intended, it still serves the point of cleanliness by rite of action moreso than intention, right? Circumcision was for hygienic purposes; what other point would there be to convince others for it in such ancient times, other than some imaginative way to convince people that the procedure was good ( i mean, cmon, it hurts). the point was a form of physical practice of devotion I believe.

Circumcision is not necessary for good hygiene. And in any case that was never the reason given for it. It was and is the symbol of the covenant between God and Abraham and Abraham's descendants.

And yes, it hurts, but in the Jewish tradition it takes place on the 8th day of life. Does a boy remember that pain when he is 8 years old? I think not.

Many cultures practice circumcision, but the time is puberty, not infancy. And the pain is the point. To become a man one must be able to take the pain without complaint. Machismo and adult status in the community are what convince people it is "good". Not hygienic considerations which are irrelevant anyway.

Similarly, in cultures which practice so-called "female circumcision" --which is decidedly not hygienic--the reasons given for the practice are largely to do with ritual cleanliness.

 

[gluadys]

I, don't know. Is it? Are they? Does it matter?

Symbolism is apparent to some, it hides from others.

Symbols are symbols of something. We use symbolic language and ritual precisely to speak of those things we cannot see or investigate scientifically but yet believe are real. Things like the love of God.


The problem of a young earth perspective is that it doesn't handle symbolic language well. YECs tend to literalize the symbolic and paradoxically end up proposing fantastic scenarios as historic realities e.g. that fossils are evidence of the flood.

 

[An Arch Angel]

Symbols are symbols of something. We use symbolic language and ritual precisely to speak of those things we cannot see or investigate scientifically but yet believe are real. Things like the love of God.


The problem of a young earth perspective is that it doesn't handle symbolic language well. YECs tend to literalize the symbolic and paradoxically end up proposing fantastic scenarios as historic realities e.g. that fossils are evidence of the flood.

Exactly,

They ignore the deposition rates of the rock around the fossils too.

I once heard on Christian radio that geologist do not know where the “soil” went from the Grand Canyon. This disturbed me so much I wrote them and asked where they are getting their data.

What do you mean by paradox?

 

[Nobody1]

Just interested if anyone has tell me how long since Adam was created, according to the Bible....I believe this can be worked out.

I know it is close to 6000 years....but exactly how many years, was what I was interested in.

7,000 years.

Ussher missed on the timeline.

He should have used the Septuagint version.

 

[mpok1519]

Symbols are symbols of something. We use symbolic language and ritual precisely to speak of those things we cannot see or investigate scientifically but yet believe are real. Things like the love of God.


The problem of a young earth perspective is that it doesn't handle symbolic language well. YECs tend to literalize the symbolic and paradoxically end up proposing fantastic scenarios as historic realities e.g. that fossils are evidence of the flood.

But, the average ceationist or YEC also doesn't know a thing about paleontology; they don't know anything about rock sediment stratification and how you can coorelate that with radiometric dating. THAT bugs me, how nothing scientific is ever understood, YET fantasy and unicorns do quite well in place of logic and rationale.

The symbolism, however, is different to everyone and open to individual interpretation infinitely.

This is why I'd rather have science to explain things that need explaining, and leave the fantasy OUT of the classroom.