how to assimilate all of evolution into a literal 7 day creation

[drich0150]

The problem with your approach is that you don't believe the account of Genesis is the truth, and rather than try to figure out the meaning behind the text, you question its validity.

did you even read the OP? how can you pretend to have enough insite to a discussion if you do not even read the opening post? how do you what is even being discussed here?

What if I could tell you, you could answer these questions without changing one letter of the creation narrative (genesis 1-5) and square everyting with what has already been written and even assimilated the whole of the evolution into the 7 day creation.. Now understand this is not gap theory nor any other anything that is not already in the bible. Again this does not thing to add or take anything from the bible away. I simply point out how and where we have been reading genesis wrong for a very long long time.

The above was cut and pasted from the OP it is literally the whole second paragraph. which now completely undermines your whole post. The rest of what you have to say is moot because everything I do quares itself with a literal 7 day creation... Maybe you should have asked some questions if you did not understand, rather than assume what I have here is automatically against the bible.

Maybe it is a non traditional reading of the bible that rings true and allows everything I said it would without changing a word of the bible like I say it does. If you can't understand or work out how then ask a question.

Well, let me explain to you the difference between chapter one and chapter two of Genesis, briefly, because they are indeed two different accounts, deliberately so, because they are given from two different perspectives, because it speaks of two different persons,

Chapter one is given from the perspective of the one that would later be revealed as Yeshua. It gives a general scope of commands he issued on each day.

Whereas chapter two is a more detailed account given from another perspective of the one named "Yehovah", who is first mentioned in this chapter, which is the angel that appeared to Abraham and Moses later in time, where this chapter begins on day six of creation, because that is when the generations of earth began, since that is when man was created,

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Yehovah God made the earth and the heavens. (Genesis 2:4 [MODIFIED-ESV])

So the mountains are eternal and everlasting, just as it says?
That would be at minimum......ancient or very old

has there ever been a time without them? can there be a time without them? Even if there were no one here to identify them would they cease to exist?

 

[drich0150]

Evidently you didn't study the word "allegory" as part of your studies of allegory becasue is it a story written as a real event that has deeper significance than the literal understanding of it. This use of allegory is what Scripture is about cover to cover. It's about God using man to create allegory or deeper meaning for man, beyond the literal understanding. And allegory can be used to describe actual events, so the literal event is not required to be non-fiction.

IDK sport.. the onl one who seems to be confused about the word allegory is you: Even these guys merriam and webster seem to think the word allegory had a different meaning.
Definition of allegory
plural allegories
1: the expression by means of symbolic fictional figures and actions of truths or generalizations about human existence

• a writer known for his use of allegory

; also : an instance (as in a story or painting) of such expression

• The poem is an allegory of love and jealousy.

fictional figure=/= "real event" allegory is more of a say whatever you need to in a simly way to help define a big more complex concept. which is the opposite of what you think is going on.

 

[drich0150]

The temptation and fall can be real events
and Adam and Eve allegory.
Who is making up your rules for you?

again See Defin of ALLEGORY

 

[SkyWriting]

IDK sport.. the onl one who seems to be confused about the word allegory is you: Even these guys merriam and webster seem to think the word allegory had a different meaning.
Definition of allegory
plural allegories
1: the expression by means of symbolic fictional figures and actions of truths or generalizations about human existence

• a writer known for his use of allegory

; also : an instance (as in a story or painting) of such expression

• The poem is an allegory of love and jealousy.

fictional figure=/= "real event" allegory is more of a say whatever you need to in a simly way to help define a big more complex concept. which is the opposite of what you think is going on.

The majority of definitions do not mention fictional.
Though a few do.

 

[drich0150]

There are two elements you have to deal with: The tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil and the Serpent. Damage to the brain's frontal lobe is known to impair one's ability to think and make choices. The ability to choose between right and wrong, good and evil is exactly what makes us human and more evolved than the animals or other primates.

The curse of Adam and Eve refers to the hard word, heat of the day sweat of your brow will you eat bread. because God cursed the earth to fight man to yield 'fruit.' Then God cursed woman/eve in childbirth and want to control her husband but the husband will have authority over her.

The person was asking If my OP reds correctly how do these curses transmit to day 6 man and not just remain with day 2 man/adam...

 

[drich0150]

The majority of definitions do not mention fictional.
Though a few do.

So... i looked up 6 they all refer to fictional characters/stories.. do you have any examples where they do not? Do you have any non fictional allegorical stories? I googles nonfictional allegorical stories and got nothing..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/allegory
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/allegory
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/allegory
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/allegory
http://examples.yourdictionary.com/allegory-examples.html
https://www.britannica.com/art/allegory-art-and-literature

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

That is called gap theory/where you introduce all of evolution into in the beginning and let there be light. Not what I was doing here because you have to introduce too much that is not written if you take the evolutionary position. My read changes nothing period. you can adjust the time line as needed.it allows people who want 7 days and the a fall their 7 day then a fal it also allows 100 bazillion years if that is needed.

where gap theory fails.. you need all of the stuff creation provides in order for their have been evlution. You need sun you need plants you need oceans.. Gap theory does not provide that. gap theory would only work for the big band to the beginnings of the earth. But life could not happen with light/sun.
actually the rest is still part of creation. which my account does not change one letter of.
again I don't understand the need for comments like this.
You are preaching to the quire. do you not understand the intention of this thread?
this sould be in your own thread...


You can't have read the op if this is directed at me. Too often time Christian hating conflict will seek out key words in an argument and write in a stereotypical manner which makes us look either disinterested or foolish. Disinterested meaning you can be bother to address the subject topically or you just want to take over the subject by introducing a whole new topic.. That what it feel like you have done here.

All I am doing is providing background information to show that I believe the Bible to be absolutely accurate in its science and history, although not exhaustive. I don't hold the evolutionist position. Nothing happened through time and chance. Everything was created by the infinite-personal God. But science does tell us that the geology of the earth is billions of years old. Because God lives in eternity where our measurement of time does not exist. It is quite possible that He created the universe at a point billions of our earth years ago. What I am saying is that there is nothing in science that contradicts the Bible when we really think about it. Therefore an earth geology billions of years old is quite feasible both for secular scientists and Christian ones.

Then we have the history of the Bible. It has to be absolutely correct for us to be saved, because a real Adam and Eve, existing at a definite point in space and time is an essential component in God's plan of salvation. Make them just allegorical figures and the whole point of man having a close loving fellowship with God at the start and then falling through disobedience, resulting in the world turning from normal into abnormal, falls down. If that falls down, the rest of God's plan for salvation falls down as well, and the act of becoming a Christian turns into just a useless and pointless religion.

However, I did not write these posts just for your benefit, or to direct them at you. I just provided background information for all the other readers of the thread for them to think about and either agree or disagree.

No. I will not start my own thread on all this just because you say so.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The person was asking If my OP reds correctly how do these curses transmit to day 6 man and not just remain with day 2 man/adam...

Paul talks about this in Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a pattern of the One to come."

 

[joshua 1 9]

Deu 30:19 "This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live"

 

[drich0150]

All I am doing is providing background information to show that I believe the Bible to be absolutely accurate in its science and history, although not exhaustive. I don't hold the evolutionist position. Nothing happened through time and chance. Everything was created by the infinite-personal God. But science does tell us that the geology of the earth is billions of years old. Because God lives in eternity where our measurement of time does not exist. It is quite possible that He created the universe at a point billions of our earth years ago. What I am saying is that there is nothing in science that contradicts the Bible when we really think about it. Therefore an earth geology billions of years old is quite feasible both for secular scientists and Christian ones.

Then we have the history of the Bible. It has to be absolutely correct for us to be saved, because a real Adam and Eve, existing at a definite point in space and time is an essential component in God's plan of salvation. Make them just allegorical figures and the whole point of man having a close loving fellowship with God at the start and then falling through disobedience, resulting in the world turning from normal into abnormal, falls down. If that falls down, the rest of God's plan for salvation falls down as well, and the act of becoming a Christian turns into just a useless and pointless religion.

However, I did not write these posts just for your benefit, or to direct them at you. I just provided background information for all the other readers of the thread for them to think about and either agree or disagree.

No. I will not start my own thread on all this just because you say so.

So... did you read the op?

I read your initial statement and this break down and do you want to know what I discovered by reading this? We have the EXACT same goal. all the things you mention here I mention in the OP. The difference between you and me is you don't seem willing to discuss any of your finer points. You want to just talk past me and assume I am taking the counter positions to everything you say. when indeed I or rather you are in agreement with me as far as purpose goes.

We simply go about it two different ways. Now the reason I do not follow gap theory as I pointed it out to you, is because Atheists are very familiar with this argument and have very strong counters and it also does not answer the paradoxes created by the traditional reading. (stuff I point out in the OP)

So when teaching the kids who have to go against these sound arguments gap theory falls apart quickly. However the reading I put in the OP can not be refuted as it answers all of the paradoxes and does not create any new one not only that it allows for a literal seven day creation. Not only that it does not force a time line on anyone. for the YEC this all could have happened 6000 years ago for the evolutionist this all could have happened 100 bazillion years ago and nothing in the bible need change. No one is forced to accept anything only that if you need for a literal genesis 1-5 origins you can have a literal interpretation and it not change any of what the bible says nor what evolution is about.

 

[drich0150]

Paul talks about this in Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a pattern of the One to come."

read verse 12 forward to the end of the chapter

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rom+5&version=ERV

The question asked me and my subsequent answer has nothing to do with what is said in romans 5.

I was asked in day two man/adam created on day 2 sinned in the garden and was expelled out into the world of day 6 man (man made in the image of God) how did the curse then transfer from day two adam to day six man who lived outside the garden...

Romans 5 is about how one man 'Adam let sin into the world' and how one man Jesus will absolve the world of sin.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

So... did you read the op?

I read your initial statement and this break down and do you want to know what I discovered by reading this? We have the EXACT same goal. all the things you mention here I mention in the OP. The difference between you and me is you don't seem willing to discuss any of your finer points. You want to just talk past me and assume I am taking the counter positions to everything you say. when indeed I or rather you are in agreement with me as far as purpose goes.

We simply go about it two different ways. Now the reason I do not follow gap theory as I pointed it out to you, is because Atheists are very familiar with this argument and have very strong counters and it also does not answer the paradoxes created by the traditional reading. (stuff I point out in the OP)

So when teaching the kids who have to go against these sound arguments gap theory falls apart quickly. However the reading I put in the OP can not be refuted as it answers all of the paradoxes and does not create any new one not only that it allows for a literal seven day creation. Not only that it does not force a time line on anyone. for the YEC this all could have happened 6000 years ago for the evolutionist this all could have happened 100 bazillion years ago and nothing in the bible need change. No one is forced to accept anything only that if you need for a literal genesis 1-5 origins you can have a literal interpretation and it not change any of what the bible says nor what evolution is about.

I went back and read your OP. You make some really interesting points and I must print it out and read it more thoroughly to get the full appreciation of what you are saying. I apologise for misunderstanding you. I see that we are fairly well on the same page, and you have considered and meditated on this far more deeply than I have. So I will print it out, read it carefully and make further comment in due course.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

So... did you read the op?

I had some very interesting thoughts on the bus to work this morning, and I can't resist sharing them with you.

First, there is a difference between rationalism and rationability. The first is faith in humanist. rational thinking. The foundation is that the answer comes from man himself. The second is the ability to apply reasoning and rational thought on a foundation external to man. So, rationability on the foundation of God's inerrant Word is the right use of our reasoning faculty.

Having said that...

There is a thesis and an anti-thesis - in other words, if something is true, then the opposite is not true. For example, the sky is blue - true; therefore the sky cannot be green. If you go up, you cannot go down at the same time.

Apply that reasoning to creation: Thesis - An infinite-personal God created the universe in it in six days. Anti-thesis - the universe is gadzillion years old and therefore could not have been created in six days.

But.. Are we sure that one is true and the other not-true? If we consider that our God has infinite power, then it is true that He could create a whole universe in such a way that when carbon dating is used, the rocks really do show an age of so many gadzillion years. Therefore in terms of God being infinitely powerful, then the universe could have been created in six days, and yet be carbon dated to mega gadzillion years. Both creation and science are then correct.

I firmly believe that carbon dating is correct and accurate. An athiest would use that to say the universe was not created in six days and favour science over the Bible. A non-reasoning Christian may take the opposite view and say that the universe was created in six days and that science is wrong.

But I say that both are correct, because God, being of infinite power, can create a universe in such a way that when the rocks are carbon dated, they appear to be mega gadzillion years old.

Take this example. You are sitting at your desk, and God comes along and creates a rock out of thin air and puts it on your desk. You then take that to a scientist who carbon dates it as being 50 gadzillion years old. Who is correct? Both. Because the rock is actually 50 gadzillion years old, but you know that God created it instantly out of thin air right in front of you and put it on your desk!

I think we grossly underestimate the infinite power of God. When I apply reasoning to this, I am more likely to believe that God created the world in six days as He described it in Genesis, and that scientific dating methods are also correct. God is quite able to instantly create geology of starts and planets instantly and yet can be measured scientifically as mega gadzillion years old.

What are your comments?

 

[drich0150]

I had some very interesting thoughts on the bus to work this morning, and I can't resist sharing them with you.

great!

First, there is a difference between rationalism and rationability.

ok
Rationalism is a beliefs and thought should be independent of religion/religious origins.
rationability is the ability to be rational.

The first is faith in humanist. rational thinking. The foundation is that the answer comes from man himself. The second is the ability to apply reasoning and rational thought on a foundation external to man. So, rationability on the foundation of God's inerrant Word is the right use of our reasoning faculty.

I see what you are trying to do but your not going to get there from here with a rational person as you have to demonstrate the source material Eg the bible as being what you claim it to be..
Having said that...
let pretend that you can or I independently of you have come to the same conclusion about the bible, but know otherwise your argument ends here with someone else.

There is a thesis and an anti-thesis - in other words, if something is true, then the opposite is not true. For example, the sky is blue - true; therefore the sky cannot be green. If you go up, you cannot go down at the same time.

this is true for small minded black and white thinkers..

Apply that reasoning to creation: Thesis - An infinite-personal God created the universe in it in six days. Anti-thesis - the universe is gazillion years old and therefore could not have been created in six days.

rational thinker... what if God created the world in 6 days a gazillion years ago? is there anything in the creation narrative of the bible that world prevent this? Per the OP no.

But.. Are we sure that one is true and the other not-true?

for those being taught that science is the only way.. yes only one can be true.

If we consider that our God has infinite power, then it is true that He could create a whole universe in such a way that when carbon dating is used, the rocks really do show an age of so many gadzillion years.

well yes.. but why? Why would god create the natural universe in such away as to require himself to only be able to supernaturally move through it and leave no finger prints?

Therefore in terms of God being infinitely powerful, then the universe could have been created in six days, and yet be carbon dated to mega gadzillion years. Both creation and science are then correct.

or again God could have simply put creation at the beginning of those 6 days. and let things mature on their own. This is the act of the creator of the natural universe would do. You create a "sand box" that compliments the tools and the toys yo want to work in it.. Why build a sand box that can only be accessed through non conventional means? why have cretion fight you or naturally resist your will if indeed creation is your will personified? Hence the term SUPER-Natural??
Meaning outside of what is natural? God does not move supernaturally unless he is establishing who he is or who a prophet is in relation to Him. If you are correct this would go against how God moves supernaturally, leaving no record no finger prints nothing to conclude or nothing to be gained from this work.
Yes God could do those things, but why? why only this example? why was it never mentioned? why does it look like He does not exist? how does not looking like there is no God help us or Him?

I firmly believe that carbon dating is correct and accurate.

i believe carbon dating is bunk. Or how it is taught as an absolute when it is just a guessing game. we know it can be influenced by how much carbon 14 was absorbed by the organic material when it was alive. for example things living in a climate that saw little sun would appear older than it should. The rate of decay in carbon 14 dating should be the same but how much carbon 14 was absorbed can wildly be all over the place giving off false readings.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbon-dating-gets-reset/

An athiest would use that to say the universe was not created in six days and favour science over the Bible. A non-reasoning Christian may take the opposite view and say that the universe was created in six days and that science is wrong.

how could they? they can only say it was not created in 6 days 6000 years ago.. and if you are honestly reading the bible, it does not say creation happened 6000 years ago either.. it simply says adam and eve were expelled 6000 years ago. rather the fall of man happened 6000 years ago which began the genealogies in which we use to count back that 6000 years. the 7 days of creation could have been the first 7 days of that gadzillion years they need. Nothing in the bible says it can't be. which is how a God who built this natural universe would put a gazillion years worth of carbon 14 on a rock or whatever they would use.

But I say that both are correct, because God, being of infinite power, can create a universe in such a way that when the rocks are carbon dated, they appear to be mega gadzillion years old.

If you need God to work only supernaturally through your universe.. then I am not here to take any of that away. My reading per the OP allows you to retain a YEC pov. I simply ask we remove the time line placed on gen1-3 as it is artificially placed per the explanation in the OP. Once you do that anything is possible. Your 6000 old earth my bazillion year old earth. no of it matter any more. The only thing I do offer that YEC creationism does not is the answer to the incestual paradoxes a traditional reading leaves behind.

Take this example. You are sitting at your desk, and God comes along and creates a rock out of thin air and puts it on your desk. You then take that to a scientist who carbon dates it as being 50 gadzillion years old. Who is correct? Both. Because the rock is actually 50 gadzillion years old, but you know that God created it instantly out of thin air right in front of you and put it on your desk!

Again you and I are two different people. 1 I would not persume to know from when and where got the rock. a simple transporter would create the same effect. (rock materializing out of thin air.) I would not now if God just poofed a rock or use bazillion old dirt (the earth is full of it) or if God just transported a rock from the yard and set it on my desk.

I think we grossly underestimate the infinite power of God.

You mean like a God who could create a world in 7 days have that recorded and then also have his son frame out and build a garden paradise for a man created on day 2, while completing everything else in the garden no later than mid day 3, then preserving that man and woman in that garden paradise for a 100 bazillion years while everything outside the garden 'matures?'

When I apply reasoning to this, I am more likely to believe that God created the world in six days as He described it in Genesis, and that scientific dating methods are also correct. God is quite able to instantly create geology of starts and planets instantly and yet can be measured scientifically as mega gadzillion years old.

What are your comments?

You still don't seem to understand the op if you think this last paragraph is any different than any of my own conclusions... Seems to me you are stuck on the title and assume we are trying to assimilate creation into the evolution narrative which the opposite is in fact true.

Let me simplify and reword my position:
When I apply reasoning to this, I am more likely to believe that God created the world in six days as He described it in Genesis, and that scientific dating methods are also correct. (more or less) God is quite able to instantly create a garden where day two man/adam is to live as an immortal up until the fall which happened about 6000 years ago. which natural puts the geology of starts and planets instantly and yet can be measured scientifically as mega gadzillion years old.

Not only that... nothing in the bible prevents this reading. Only tradition and religious rite demands the bible be read the traditional way which demand or creates several paradoxes.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

great!
ok
Rationalism is a beliefs and thought should be independent of religion/religious origins.
rationability is the ability to be rational.
I see what you are trying to do but your not going to get there from here with a rational person as you have to demonstrate the source material Eg the bible as being what you claim it to be..
Having said that...
let pretend that you can or I independently of you have come to the same conclusion about the bible, but know otherwise your argument ends here with someone else.

this is true for small minded black and white thinkers..
rational thinker... what if God created the world in 6 days a gazillion years ago? is there anything in the creation narrative of the bible that world prevent this? Per the OP no.
for those being taught that science is the only way.. yes only one can be true.
well yes.. but why? Why would god create the natural universe in such away as to require himself to only be able to supernaturally move through it and leave no finger prints?
or again God could have simply put creation at the beginning of those 6 days. and let things mature on their own. This is the act of the creator of the natural universe would do. You create a "sand box" that compliments the tools and the toys yo want to work in it.. Why build a sand box that can only be accessed through non conventional means? why have cretion fight you or naturally resist your will if indeed creation is your will personified? Hence the term SUPER-Natural??
Meaning outside of what is natural? God does not move supernaturally unless he is establishing who he is or who a prophet is in relation to Him. If you are correct this would go against how God moves supernaturally, leaving no record no finger prints nothing to conclude or nothing to be gained from this work.
Yes God could do those things, but why? why only this example? why was it never mentioned? why does it look like He does not exist? how does not looking like there is no God help us or Him?

i believe carbon dating is bunk. Or how it is taught as an absolute when it is just a guessing game. we know it can be influenced by how much carbon 14 was absorbed by the organic material when it was alive. for example things living in a climate that saw little sun would appear older than it should. The rate of decay in carbon 14 dating should be the same but how much carbon 14 was absorbed can wildly be all over the place giving off false readings.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbon-dating-gets-reset/

how could they? they can only say it was not created in 6 days 6000 years ago.. and if you are honestly reading the bible, it does not say creation happened 6000 years ago either.. it simply says adam and eve were expelled 6000 years ago. rather the fall of man happened 6000 years ago which began the genealogies in which we use to count back that 6000 years. the 7 days of creation could have been the first 7 days of that gadzillion years they need. Nothing in the bible says it can't be. which is how a God who built this natural universe would put a gazillion years worth of carbon 14 on a rock or whatever they would use.


If you need God to work only supernaturally through your universe.. then I am not here to take any of that away. My reading per the OP allows you to retain a YEC pov. I simply ask we remove the time line placed on gen1-3 as it is artificially placed per the explanation in the OP. Once you do that anything is possible. Your 6000 old earth my bazillion year old earth. no of it matter any more. The only thing I do offer that YEC creationism does not is the answer to the incestual paradoxes a traditional reading leaves behind.

Again you and I are two different people. 1 I would not persume to know from when and where got the rock. a simple transporter would create the same effect. (rock materializing out of thin air.) I would not now if God just poofed a rock or use bazillion old dirt (the earth is full of it) or if God just transported a rock from the yard and set it on my desk.
You mean like a God who could create a world in 7 days have that recorded and then also have his son frame out and build a garden paradise for a man created on day 2, while completing everything else in the garden no later than mid day 3, then preserving that man and woman in that garden paradise for a 100 bazillion years while everything outside the garden 'matures?'


You still don't seem to understand the op if you think this last paragraph is any different than any of my own conclusions... Seems to me you are stuck on the title and assume we are trying to assimilate creation into the evolution narrative which the opposite is in fact true.

Let me simplify and reword my position:
When I apply reasoning to this, I am more likely to believe that God created the world in six days as He described it in Genesis, and that scientific dating methods are also correct. (more or less) God is quite able to instantly create a garden where day two man/adam is to live as an immortal up until the fall which happened about 6000 years ago. which natural puts the geology of starts and planets instantly and yet can be measured scientifically as mega gadzillion years old.

Not only that... nothing in the bible prevents this reading. Only tradition and religious rite demands the bible be read the traditional way which demand or creates several paradoxes.

I like your reasoning and it is just as good as mine. The Bible could very well support you and me, and that's quite okay. I believe God loves diversity and He did not make us carbon copies of each other. This is why I love discussing stuff on CF, because you and others challenge my thinking and ideas, and so it should be.

You see, I believe in God's absolute sovereignty. He can use any method He likes to achieve what He wants to achieve and He doesn't need our permission. If He decided to go "poof!" and the whole universe in its mature form was created out of nothing (not even thin air!) then He can do it that way if He decides to.

Actually, the Bible says that He spoke the universe into being. He used the words of his mouth to instantly create a universe out of absolutely nothing. To our finite minds that is totally, well, we can't even wildly imagine how that could happen. But the Bible says it did.

Anyhow, I have yet to print out your OP and have a good read of it, and so I will adjourn until I have done that.

 

[drich0150]

I've been wanting to do a youtube cartoon that explains the OP f you or anyone else knows someone who can help with that, that would be great.

 

[SkyWriting]

Each person has to have either their blood spilled or that of an atoning sacrifice. for each sinners life there must be a death.
that is the wage of sin. for the work of sin death is the reward death is what is earned/owed.
If we lived then? ah.. yeah!
if we were thrown over board with Joah yes!
frm a dull wedding reception yes again!

ahhhh. scrap book theology... meaning nothing without select interpretation yet again!

Those stories were analogies for real life. The represent other things.

 

[drich0150]

Those stories were analogies for real life. The represent other things.

would you faith be lost if they were real things real people accurate stories?

 

[SkyWriting]

would you faith be lost if they were real things real people accurate stories?

My faith is based on answered prayer, found in my signature file.
Scripture is not that important.

 

[drich0150]

My faith is based on answered prayer, found in my signature file.
Scripture is not that important.

yikes..

Do you now how mormonism started? do you know how islam started?

It started with personal revelation of two different men who did not care too much for the bible. They thought so highly of themselves they thought God despite what he has already done, wanted to take His followers in a completely new direction.

Here's the thing, if you worship the God of the bible, then it is only by the bile can you find and identify God. otherwise what you worship, what you are interacting with may not be God.

Now don't fool yourself into thinking that God the Father is the only 'father' reaching out to people and genuinely interaction with them.

If you can't wrap your head around what God is or has done i the bible then you must reexamine who it is you are worshiping as it most likely is not the God of the bible. If your father tells you something that contradicts scripture then your father is not the God of the bible.