How's that?

[Windlord]

How and Who are impossible to separate.

Uhuh. Suuure.

The Who says how in Genesis.

Actually, the Author of Genesis tells us an epic tale to drive home several points about who built the Earth.

Deny the Who and the how is of no consequence.

Here you are equivalating yourself to the Who. Very dangerous.

[/quote]
I believe the Who made it in six days. Because the Who says so in scripture. [/quote]

The Who didn't write Scripture. He inspired it. But he did not write it. Scripture also says that the world is flat with a dome for the heavens, do you believe that too?

And two of the things the Who made during that time, is man and woman in HIS image. His image is a lower life form?

Is man a lower life form than God?

The Who finished His work at the end of the sixth day. Finished it.

So did God make man before the Animals, or After them?

Lower life form suggests the Who left something unfinished

Well I think it is fairly obvious that he left something unfinished in one sense. After all, if it was finished, there would be no need for Christ now would there?

when He finished His work and declared if done and good.
That's just the way it is, eh?

Ah, the great danger of YEC. To assume that God agrees with you, and anyone who disagrees with you also disagrees with God and is thus doomed to hell. I'm sure God would like his scepter back some day.

Peace,

Windlord.

 

[Adalbert]

Nope.

Peace,

Windlord.

Genesis 2:7
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://bible.cc/genesis/2-7.htmYahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Of course you were kidding.
[/FONT]

 

[Windlord]

Genesis 2:7
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Of course you were kidding.
[/FONT]

Nope. YEC take this literally rather than figuratively, despite all the evidence, both in scripture itself, as well as in the scientific world around us.

Peace,

Windlord.

 

[Adalbert]

Uhuh. Suuure.



Actually, the Author of Genesis tells us an epic tale to drive home several points about who built the Earth.



Here you are equivalating yourself to the Who. Very dangerous.

I believe the Who made it in six days. Because the Who says so in scripture. [/quote]

The Who didn't write Scripture. He inspired it. But he did not write it. Scripture also says that the world is flat with a dome for the heavens, do you believe that too?



Is man a lower life form than God?



So did God make man before the Animals, or After them?



Well I think it is fairly obvious that he left something unfinished in one sense. After all, if it was finished, there would be no need for Christ now would there?



Ah, the great danger of YEC. To assume that God agrees with you, and anyone who disagrees with you also disagrees with God and is thus doomed to hell. I'm sure God would like his scepter back some day.

Peace,

Windlord.[/quote]
Spin!
And after that, scripture is not science and was never meant to be. If you want science, go to the koran.
You do not believe the creation story as it is told in Genesis.
That is not an odd thing to me, since the bible is secondary to tradition.

Here's a good read for you:
Enjoy!

No hint of criticism is made of the fact that Sacred Tradition requires belief in dogma which is not contained in Sacred Scripture. But there is present here a hint that exegetes in the past (and still today) may read the New Testament as though it had been written in the light of the Tradition, and thus distort the teaching of Sacred Scripture (and by implication perhaps also the function of the Tradition). Implicit in this is the recognition of the substance-gap between Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

http://mbrem.com/bible/traditn.htm

 

[Adalbert]

Nope. YEC take this literally rather than figuratively, despite all the evidence, both in scripture itself, as well as in the scientific world around us.

Peace,

Windlord.

there is no evidence is scripture that says creation is figurative.
I take the creation story, and the creation of man and woman literally.
You don't? I'm not troubled!

 

[Windlord]

Spin!
And after that, scripture is not science and was never meant to be.

My sentiments exactly. Which is why I have to wonder why YEC take it as science?

If you want science, go to the koran.

Take your own advice. If you want to treat the Bible as Scientific evidence, go to the Koran instead.

You do not believe the creation story as it is told in Genesis.

Just like you don't believe in Jesus' Parables, right?

That is not an odd thing to me, since the bible is secondary to tradition.

Not quite. The Bible is a part of Sacred Tradition. Unfortunately, some treat it as if it were the whole, which it clearly is not, even from the standpoint of the Bible itself.

Here's a good read for you:
Enjoy!

No hint of criticism is made of the fact that Sacred Tradition requires belief in dogma which is not contained in Sacred Scripture. But there is present here a hint that exegetes in the past (and still today) may read the New Testament as though it had been written in the light of the Tradition, and thus distort the teaching of Sacred Scripture (and by implication perhaps also the function of the Tradition). Implicit in this is the recognition of the substance-gap between Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

http://mbrem.com/bible/traditn.htm

In the words of C.K. Chesterton.

"Reformers, while right about what is wrong, are also usually wrong about what is right."

Peace,

Windlord.

 

[Windlord]

there is no evidence is scripture that says creation is figurative.
I take the creation story, and the creation of man and woman literally.
You don't? I'm not troubled!

You might want to consider this.

Point one, in Babylonian Religion the World was created out of Chaos, and the Gods were Chaotic. But in the Genesis Account the World is created out of a sense of Order.

Second, and more important point, it is not a coincidence that every single day in the Creation Hymn parrellels the Babylonian Dieties that those days are attributed to. Case in point, the first day of the week, Sunday, is the day of Shamash, the Sun God of the Babylonians. Yet in the Creation Hymn, it is not Shamash who brings light at the beginning of the World, but rather it is Yahweh. Monday is the day of Shin, God of the Moon. Yet it is not Shin, who controls the Waters, but rather God. Tuesday is the day of Nergal, God of the Forest, and later God of War. But it is not Nergal who brings forth the Plants and Tree, but God. Wednesday is the day of Nabu, God of Scribes. But it is not Nabu who creates the Lights of Heaven, to rule over the Night and the Day, to create the Calender of the world, but rather God.

Thursday is the day of Marduk, Ruler of the Gods. But it was not Marduk who created the Birds of the Air, who are sacred to him, it was God. And God himself created the Fish of the Sea, the Whales as well. The Great sea monsters were enemies of Marduk, his rivals. But not so with God. Even they fall under his dominion. Friday is the day of Ishtar, Goddess of Fertility. But it is not Ishtar that creates the Animals, or Humankind. It is God.

 

[Lynn73]

there is no evidence is scripture that says creation is figurative.
I take the creation story, and the creation of man and woman literally.
You don't? I'm not troubled!

I take it literally. As you say,there's nothing there that would leads me to believe that it isn't. Let's face it, scriptural truths are going to be attacked until Christ returns.

 

[Adalbert]

I take it literally. As you say,there's nothing there that would leads me to believe that it isn't. Let's face it, scriptural truths are going to be attacked until Christ returns.

You're talking about scoffers. The bible mentions them.

 

[Adalbert]

You might want to consider this.

Point one, in Babylonian Religion the World was created out of Chaos, and the Gods were Chaotic. But in the Genesis Account the World is created out of a sense of Order.

Second, and more important point, it is not a coincidence that every single day in the Creation Hymn parrellels the Babylonian Dieties that those days are attributed to. Case in point, the first day of the week, Sunday, is the day of Shamash, the Sun God of the Babylonians. Yet in the Creation Hymn, it is not Shamash who brings light at the beginning of the World, but rather it is Yahweh. Monday is the day of Shin, God of the Moon. Yet it is not Shin, who controls the Waters, but rather God. Tuesday is the day of Nergal, God of the Forest, and later God of War. But it is not Nergal who brings forth the Plants and Tree, but God. Wednesday is the day of Nabu, God of Scribes. But it is not Nabu who creates the Lights of Heaven, to rule over the Night and the Day, to create the Calender of the world, but rather God.

Thursday is the day of Marduk, Ruler of the Gods. But it was not Marduk who created the Birds of the Air, who are sacred to him, it was God. And God himself created the Fish of the Sea, the Whales as well. The Great sea monsters were enemies of Marduk, his rivals. But not so with God. Even they fall under his dominion. Friday is the day of Ishtar, Goddess of Fertility. But it is not Ishtar that creates the Animals, or Humankind. It is God.

I rarely look for more than fifty percent of confirmation. You did a good 100.
Thank you.

 

[S Walch]

Also an incorrect statement by the cardinal:

"Animals don't have souls"

Actually, Genesis chapter 1 talks about animals having a nephesh - which is Hebrew for soul.

Having a nephesh/soul isn't what distinguishes us from animals.

 

[Advent Christian]

Hello all;
I must admit I have come to accept the seemingly unavoidable disagreement and conflict with in the body of Christ over the interpretation of scripture which is written through the direct control of God’s Spirit in such a manner as to be undistinguishable by those which know Him not. I will admit however that I find it disheartening to find Christians not only disagreeing with other Christians over enlightened interpretation, but also now going so far as to imply; no change that to some directly stating God did not deliver the message He actually meant. You see this view of God’s Word would bring me to one unanswerable contradiction. That would be, is God’s making a statement which is incorrect (be it through direct writings such as the 10 commandments or through that of spiritually inspiring His Writers) make Him deceitful, a liar or wrong? I can not speak for any but myself, but as for me, I know my God is true and 100% correct with all statements. I pray His peace of comfort, understanding and enlightenment of His Word indwells me as well as all who earnestly search His truth. As to those which desire to cause strife with in Christ’s body they reside in strange company, ones I preferred to remain separated of. To all my brothers and sisters here, God’s Word will guide you if you listen to Him; if we chose to listen to man we end up in locations both now and later which we do not desire. As always my love to all and May God Bless.

 

[Adalbert]

Also an incorrect statement by the cardinal:

"Animals don't have souls"

Actually, Genesis chapter 1 talks about animals having a nephesh - which is Hebrew for soul.

Having a nephesh/soul isn't what distinguishes us from animals.

Nephesh comes from the root naphash, a verb occurring only three times in the Old Testament (Ex. 23:12; 31:17; 2 Sam. 16:14), each time meaning "to revive oneself" or "to refresh oneself." The verb goes back to the basic meaning of breathing.

So, you are correct. My dog breathes, etc. Without that breathing, he's dead.

 

[Adalbert]

Hello all;
I must admit I have come to accept the seemingly unavoidable disagreement and conflict with in the body of Christ over the interpretation of scripture which is written through the direct control of God’s Spirit in such a manner as to be undistinguishable by those which know Him not. I will admit however that I find it disheartening to find Christians not only disagreeing with other Christians over enlightened interpretation, but also now going so far as to imply; no change that to some directly stating God did not deliver the message He actually meant. You see this view of God’s Word would bring me to one unanswerable contradiction. That would be, is God’s making a statement which is incorrect (be it through direct writings such as the 10 commandments or through that of spiritually inspiring His Writers) make Him deceitful, a liar or wrong? I can not speak for any but myself, but as for me, I know my God is true and 100% correct with all statements. I pray His peace of comfort, understanding and enlightenment of His Word indwells me as well as all who earnestly search His truth. As to those which desire to cause strife with in Christ’s body they reside in strange company, ones I preferred to remain separated of. To all my brothers and sisters here, God’s Word will guide you if you listen to Him; if we chose to listen to man we end up in locations both now and later which we do not desire. As always my love to all and May God Bless.

The ONE, OMNIPOTENT, OMISCIENT, OMNI-PRESENT GOD.
That's all.

 

[ConfederateHeraldry]

Are Catholics turning into Evolutionists or what?

Gary

**************************************888

 

[ConfederateHeraldry]

Also an incorrect statement by the cardinal:

"Animals don't have souls"

Actually, Genesis chapter 1 talks about animals having a nephesh - which is Hebrew for soul.

Having a nephesh/soul isn't what distinguishes us from animals.

If animals are not redemable through Jesus Christ then the words of "soul"(s) obviously are not the same for man.

Gary

*************************************888

 

[Adalbert]

If animals are not redemable through Jesus Christ then the words of "soul"(s) obviously are not the same for man.

Gary

*************************************888

Check out the meaning of soul, and the applied meaning. Exegesis vs. eisegesis.
Reading out of scripture vs. reading into scripture. The latter has the greater practice.

 

[S Walch]

If animals are not redemable through Jesus Christ then the words of "soul"(s) obviously are not the same for man.

Gary

*************************************888

Animals have souls - Scripture says they do, and man does as well.

The only difference between Men and animals is that we have a nesamah/neshamah - That which He says He breaths into us in Genesis 2.

To say that animals don't have souls is to go against was scriptures specifically says.

 

[Adalbert]

Animals have souls - Scripture says they do, and man does as well.

The only difference between Men and animals is that we have a nesamah/neshamah - That which He says He breaths into us in Genesis 2.

To say that animals don't have souls is to go against was scriptures specifically says.

So, in essence it is breath/spirit/nephesh, that makes us a living soul. God breathed the breath of life into the nostrils of the created man. And he became a living soul. A man, not a lower life form, an animal.
It's settled for me anyways. Christians should believe what scripture says.
“We ought to obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29b)

 

[Windlord]

I rarely look for more than fifty percent of confirmation. You did a good 100.
Thank you.

I haven't got a clue what your talking about. Please elaborate.

Peace,

Windlord.