If evolution is true, we don't have problems.

[Ophiolite]

Not to mention that Jesus told us in the New Testament to believe the words of Mosses

This isn't disrespect for your beliefs; this isn't a snide attack on your typo; this is just an uncontrollable affection for puns.

Is it only mosses, or are the other bryophytes, such as liverworts and hornworts, also trustworthy?

 

[Speedwell]

. Hebrew poetry and parable had a pattern to it that Genesis does not have.

Do you think those are the only possible alternatives to a literal Genesis?

Most of the verses about sin and the effects of sin are not from Genesis but other books of the Bible.

If that is so why is a literal Genesis so critical? Especially as the doctrine of Original Sin is supported just as well by a non-literal Genesis.

 

[Strathos]

The first day does not occur until God made a light shine upon the turning earth. Before this it was formless and void. If there is a gap or not between those verses can be argued but it's a possibility. The text of Genesis is not abstract. Hebrew poetry and parable had a pattern to it that Genesis does not have. Most of the verses about sin and the effects of sin are not from Genesis but other books of the Bible.
The fact God created in 6 days is from Exodus and that Adam brought in sin is from the New Testament. Not to mention that Jesus told us in the New Testament to believe the words of Mosses. If creation and sin were only found in the first chapter of Genesis that argument would have more to stand on but it isn't, its woven throughout scripture.

You seem to be arguing against points that I never made...

 

[coffee4u]

And did Jesus say this meant a literal interpretation re: 6 days of creation?

Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Mark 10
“But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female."

Mark 13:19

19 "Because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again."

Luke 11:50-51

50 "Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all."

John 5:46
"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me."

2 Peter 2:5
and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Hebrews 11:8
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going.

I don't even need to quote Genesis to talk about creation or 6 days or the men from the time of Genesis. Mosses, Jesus, Paul and Peter did that.

 

[coffee4u]

Especially as the doctrine of Original Sin is supported just as well by a non-literal Genesis.

Explain it then, without context to Genesis.

 

[pitabread]

<snip>

I don't even need to quote Genesis to talk about creation or 6 days or the men from the time of Genesis. Mosses, Jesus, Paul and Peter did that.

None of those passages explicitly necessitate a 6 day literal creation as per what I asked (e.g. Jesus necessitating belief in such).

 

[coffee4u]

How do you tell what is "sound doctrine"? If anything that appears to be the sin of creationists. They refuse to learn the basics of science so that they can deny the reality that they do not like. Talk about what their itching ears want to hear.

Sound Doctrine means to test the spirits. The Bible says to do that many times. The teacher must confess Christ is God and came in the flesh and what they teach must align with scripture. Scripture must interpret scripture.

 

[coffee4u]

Yet it doesn't necessitate that Genesis be interpreted literally re: 6 days of creation.

Already told you, you don't even need to read Genesis to find 6 days, you can do so in Exodus just as well.

 

[pitabread]

Explain it then, without context to Genesis.

While I don't want to speak for Speedwell, a non-literal interpretation of Genesis isn't the same thing as disregarding it entirely.

 

[coffee4u]

This isn't disrespect for your beliefs; this isn't a snide attack on your typo; this is just an uncontrollable affection for puns.

Is it only mosses, or are the other bryophytes, such as liverworts and hornworts, also trustworthy?

Heh, well you got me there. I did mean Moses. I never claimed to have great spelling.

 

[Speedwell]

Explain it then, without context to Genesis.

I don't believe it is possible to explain Original Sin without reference to Genesis.

 

[pitabread]

Already told you, you don't even need to read Genesis to find 6 days, you can do so in Exodus just as well.

I edited my post to clarify. My original question to you was where in the Bible did Jesus necessitate that one believes in a literal Genesis re: 6 days of creation.

I'll save you the time of looking, because we both know it's not in there.

And yes, Exodus does reference 6 days of creation but so what? It's tying the Sabbath to the original creation story, which incidentally ties it back to the Hebrew calendar (which seems to be the original basis for the origin story in Genesis in the first place).

 

[coffee4u]

I don't believe it is possible to explain Original Sin without reference to Genesis.

Okay then how do you explain it with a non literal Genesis? Curious minds want to know, even though I am sure to disagree with you.

 

[coffee4u]

I edited my post to clarify. My original question to you was where in the Bible did Jesus necessitate that one believes in a literal Genesis re: 6 days of creation.

And I'll save you the time of looking, because we both know it's not in there.

I already posted a reply to this.

 

[pitabread]

I already posted a reply to this.

Do you agree that Jesus never necessitated a belief in literal 6 days of creation then?

 

[Speedwell]

Okay then how do you explain it with a non literal Genesis? Curious minds what to know, even though I am sure to disagree with you.

And bore the pants off all the non-Christians here with pages of discourse which they would only find tedious? If you really want to know, join a Traditional Christian church. See, I don't care if you believe in a literal Genesis or not. If you think you need to in order to hold on to your faith then that's what you should do. What I object to are the vicious lies so often directed by creationists at those Christians who don't need it. That they have "denied the Bible" and are not really Christians, that they reject Original Sin (that was yours), monstrosities of that sort. You don't own the Christian religion or the Bible and are no position to dictate to other Christians what they must believe about it. According to the rules of this forum, a Christian is one who assents to the tenets of the Nicene Creed, and that should be an end to the matter.

 

[pitabread]

According to the rules of this forum, a Christian is one who assents to the tenets of the Nicene Creed, and that should be an end to the matter.

Yet according to many Christians on this forum, that clearly isn't enough for them (for whatever reason).

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sound Doctrine means to test the spirits. The Bible says to do that many times. The teacher must confess Christ is God and came in the flesh and what they teach must align with scripture. Scripture must interpret scripture.

That is mere handwaving and gets you nowhere. When that is done there are still countless different interpretations of the Bible. Logically since Christians believe that the Earth is Gods' creation then what the Earth tells us should be heeded as well. The Earth tells us that life as we see it today was the product of evolution and certain events in the Bible, such as the Flood of Noah, never happened.

Those stories still work if they are treated as morality tales. But when taken literally all sorts of theological problems arise.

 

[Astrophile]

Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Mark 10
“But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female."

The context of Mark 10:2-9 is a discussion about divorce, not about the creation of human beings. The creation of male and female is used as an explanation for a man's leaving his father and his mother to cleave to his wife and as a ground for forbidding divorce: 'What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.'

 

[coffee4u]

Do you agree that Jesus never necessitated a belief in literal 6 days of creation then?

Of course he did. He not only quoted directly from Genesis he told us to believe what Moses wrote.