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.
Your speculation is interesting, BUT, that is not what the bible teaches.Rising Tree said:It seems that we have reached the following conclusions:
Keep the responses coming. This is slowly starting to make sense.
- We have resolved that the word "day" can mean a literal day or a figurative age. It also seems possible that Paul wrote in accordance to his time, where mythological beings and historical beings are treated as one and the same. Any more thought on this one?
- We seem to agree that it did suddenly come in at one point. Here's how I can illustrate that: Growing up, I used to have computer games where I loved to design things. One of them was a race car game, where of course I had the chance to design race tracks. I designed endless scores of them but rarely played on a given track more than a few times before becoming bored and moving onto the next one. However, one day I designed one that was simply the ideal racetrack. It was simple but entertaining, it had few thrills but was challenging, and was short but played like a fairly long track. IIRC, I enjoyed this track so much that I never designed another one; I spent the remaining life of the game almost exclusively racing that one track. Maybe that's how God dealt with humans, as he may have caused all kinds of species to evolve, but none that could have a genuine relationship with him, until we came along. Then things changed.
- Those who have addressed this issue believe that Abraham is the oldest historical figure in the bible. This makes sense. For one, Matthew, the literalist gospel, starts Jesus' genealogy with Abraham. Also, God made his Covenant of Israel with Abraham; why would he not start with Noah or someone earlier?
http://www.christianforums.com/t30497seebs said:Heh. I don't recall the social nudity thing, no. Sounds like a fun debate.
I do not doubt this. However, the early churches were not perfect; otherwise, Paul would not have needed to write his letters to them from time to time.Ark Guy said:Seebs, the early christians took Genesis as literal.
To claim otherwise is just plain and simple ignorance.
We've been over this time and time again. Examples of the early christian and biblical verses have been presented.
Ark Guy said:Seebs, the early christians took Genesis as literal.
To claim otherwise is just plain and simple ignorance.
We've been over this time and time again. Examples of the early christian and biblical verses have been presented.
Augustine
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of ani-mals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a dis-graceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.
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?