Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes he did. Read the Church Fathers. The reason people had such a hard time recognising the man after his healing was due to him not having eyes before. Jesus healed others who were blind and there was never any controversy. This man's blindness was completely different.Jesus did not make new eyes out of clay in John 9. He made mud and anointed the man's eyes, meaning he blessed them.
Evolution is bunk. There is an abundance of evidence for harmful mutations but when it comes to beneficial mutations, the cupboard is bare. They are pure fantasy.Elvis has left the building.
I see. Oral history. Well believe it if you like. It sill doesn't support your point.Yes he did. Read the Church Fathers. The reason people had such a hard time recognising the man after his healing was due to him not having eyes before. Jesus healed others who were blind and there was never any controversy. This man's blindness was completely different.
Because that would mean God left evidence that the universe existed much longer, evidence that would confuse and deceive us. IOW God would be a liar. Which of course he is not.
Truth is truth regardless of how it is transmitted.I see. Oral history. Well believe it if you like.
I believe it does.It sill doesn't support your point.
Your "Elvis" post was quoting someone else's post, not mine.I was using "Elvis" as a metaphor for you.
You are describing a lying God. You are saying he has created a world that appears ancient but which has actually only been around 6000 or so years. IOW, a world designed to deceive us.God describes Adam and Eve as adults. That is evidence that they were.
God describes the garden of Eden as aged and fully formed.
This is evidence that they were fully formed. (aged)
God describes trees in the garden as producing fruit.
What is describes as the first week, by some, is described as fully aged.
Nothing in scripture suggests or even hints that creation is young.
SO where is this "lying" idea comming from?
You are describing a lying God. You are saying he has created a world that appears ancient but which has actually only been around 6000 or so years. IOW, a world designed to deceive us.
So what? That's not the point. I have no issue with those verses. It's the verses that insinuate via genealogy that the earth is only about 6000 years old that I must insist not be taken literally.Scripture describes the mountains as
So what? That's not the point. I have no issue with those verses. It's the verses that insinuate via genealogy that the earth is only about 6000 years old that I must insist not be taken literally.
Do you admit that the earth is billions of years old and not 6000?Nothing important in scripture is found in only one book.
This saves us a lot of time figuring out what is important.
you get the idea.
As I said before, it is only from a naturalistic position that it would seem deceptive. From a supernatural creation position, there is no deception, because we KNOW what the true age is as revealed by God. Natural science CANNOT be trusted to test the supernatural.You are describing a lying God. You are saying he has created a world that appears ancient but which has actually only been around 6000 or so years. IOW, a world designed to deceive us.
So, Stars are condensed frozen Hydrogen?
LOL no, not "frozen". FUSION. And when I said "cooled", I was using the term very liberally, in a "relative-to-their-beginning" sense.
Stars are hot clouds of Hydrogen gas, being squashed back together under their own gravitational force, which fuses together the Hydrogen atoms, giving off radiation, light, heat, and other various kinds of energy.
At their core, stars are just Hydrogen atoms being smashed back together, following an original "dispersion" of super-heated hydrogen gas.
You picked out one word from my entire explanation and tried to make it sound ridiculous... that's kind of pathetic.
So what? That's not the point. I have no issue with those verses.
It's the verses that insinuate via genealogy that the earth is only about 6000 years old .
Lucifer was Satan's name - given to him by God - before he became the devil.
This is an example of how folklore and myth can shape people's way they approach things. Here in this modern age with printed scripture for over 400 years and with the internet at our disposal people still cling to myth over knowledge that Satan's proper name is Lucifer.
Lucifer is a Latin word and in the Latin text it is used for both Satan and Jesus. It is just a regular word and it means light bearer but we would rather believe the myth and legend that it's Satan's proper name given to him before his fall. I would rather call Jesus Lucifer .
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?