If the beginnings of Genesis aren't literally true, then what way are they true?

[Loudmouth]

Guess we'll see when Jesus gets back

. . . says every Christian denomination for the last 2,000 years.

 

[Davian]

Guess we'll see when Jesus gets back

maybe next week

• Davian
• Dec 1, 2014

 

[Isaacsname]

Guess we'll have to wait until Jesus falls out of a cloud riding a horse

 

[HitchSlap]

Guess we'll have to wait until Jesus falls out of a cloud riding a horse

Why not a Bugatti?

 

[ScottA]

How can you share something you don't posses?

Well...I certainly can't share what I DO KNOW with those who do not listen. I said, "I know."

 

[CGL1023]

If the beginnings of Genesis aren't literally true, then what way are they true?

God Bless!

Every Word of God has to be considered true, by definition. If the Word is not true then we have no salvation and no promises of God to receive. I don't expect this to be received but is my two cents.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Every Word of God has to be considered true, by definition. If the Word is not true then we have no salvation and no promises of God to receive. I don't expect this to be received but is my two cents.

So, if it's true ---> good stuff for you.

If it's not true ---> no good stuff for you.

Therefore, it must be true?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

There is this: Two sons were born to Eber: One was named Peleg, because in his time the earth was divided; his brother was named Joktan.;
and then there is the question of where the flood waters subsided to after the flood (into the ocean basins formed at the same time?), the environmental consideration that made rainbows a post deluvian phenomina, and another though I had about the land area required to support mega fauna.
I would suggest that the land area is significantly less and different from that originally created.

The division referred to for the land that caused Peleg to get his name was not the separation of continents. Rather, it was the settling of the land by different people groups in different places.

There never were any flood waters in Greenland or in Antarctica; annual layers of ice in the icecaps there go back hundreds of thousands of years, which eliminates the possibility of flood waters at those locations during Noah's time. Therefore, the flood of Noah was an extensive but but non-global flood.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Every Word of God has to be considered true, by definition. If the Word is not true then we have no salvation and no promises of God to receive. I don't expect this to be received but is my two cents.

Now please establish that the Bible is the Word of God, somehow.

And there are theologies that would allow for you to be saved even if it is not. For example suppose God is a benevolent Deity who saves everybody regardless of what they believed.

So you see, merely saying "every Word of God has to be considered true" is only the beginning of what you have to prove if you are going to use the method of proof for your evangelism techniques.

By the way, my pastor told us once that God sometimes directs him to preach a certain passage with a certain lesson. Is this proof that my pastor's sermons are inerrant? If not, then you admit it is possible for the Bible to be inspired and not be inerrant. So be careful how you answer that. And be careful what you claim for the Bible.

I suggest you give room for the Holy Spirit to touch the heart of the reader, rather than depending on the inerrancy of the literal words.

 

[Chriliman]

Now please establish that the Bible is the Word of God, somehow.

And there are theologies that would allow for you to be saved even if it is not. For example suppose God is a benevolent Deity who saves everybody regardless of what they believed.

So you see, merely saying "every Word of God has to be considered true" is only the beginning of what you have to prove if you are going to use the method of proof for your evangelism techniques.

By the way, my pastor told us once that God sometimes directs him to preach a certain passage with a certain lesson. Is this proof that my pastor's sermons are inerrant? If not, then you admit it is possible for the Bible to be inspired and not be inerrant. So be careful how you answer that. And be careful what you claim for the Bible.

I suggest you give room for the Holy Spirit to touch the heart of the reader, rather than depending on the inerrancy of the literal words.

The bible itself says it is the word of God and is inspired by the Holly Spirit. If scripture does not support scripture then the word of God is being misenterpreted.

2 Timothy 3:16
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"

God would not have inspired the bible if he didn't expect us to hinge on every word and scour the scripture for His Truth, as long as we're open to the holy spirits teaching we will not be lead astray.

John 5:39
"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me"

I think we're on the same page here, it just seemed odd that you'd go against someone who's saying every word of God must be true. Ultimately we won't need the bible in heaven because Gods truth is written on our hearts, but until then we've got the holly spirit and the bible to back what the holly spirit tells us. Fool proof design by God himself

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The bible itself says it is the word of God and is inspired by the Holly Spirit. If scripture does not support scripture then the word of God is being misenterpreted.

2 Timothy 3:16
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"

God would not have inspired the bible if he didn't expect us to hinge on every word and scour the scripture for His Truth, as long as we're open to the holy spirits teaching we will not be lead astray.

John 5:39
"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me"

I think we're on the same page here, it just seemed odd that you'd go against someone who's saying every word of God must be true. Ultimately we won't need the bible in heaven because Gods truth is written on our hearts, but until then we've got the holly spirit and the bible to back what the holly spirit tells us. Fool proof design by God himself

How can you use the words of scripture to assert that scripture is inerrant? That's the fallacy of circular reasoning.

 

[Chriliman]

How can you use the words of scripture to assert that scripture is inerrant? That's the fallacy of circular reasoning.

On the contrary, if I don't use words of scripture to back what I'm saying then I can't show that my words are inerrant. It's far too easy to assume I know truth, but if I can't back it up with scripture, then it's not truth.

1 Timothy 6:3-6
"If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain. But godliness with contentment is great gain."

If you've accepted Jesus with all your heart, soul and mind and you follow His teaching, you will be lead to righteousness. That is the truth.

 

[Goonie]

On the contrary, if I don't use words of scripture to back what I'm saying then I can't show that my words are inerrant. It's far too easy to assume I know truth, but if I can't back it up with scripture, then it's not truth.

1 Timothy 6:3-6
"If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain. But godliness with contentment is great gain."

If you've accepted Jesus with all your heart, soul and mind and you follow His teaching, you will be lead to righteousness. That is the truth.

As has been said circular. Interesting fact about 80% of biblical scholars dispute the authenticity of both timothy 1 and 2.

 

[Chriliman]

As has been said circular. Interesting fact about 80% of biblical scholars dispute the authenticity of both timothy 1 and 2.

Well, it makes sense that you would say that since you're an atheist. I'm not going to debate scripture with someone who is blinded to the truth of scripture. I will discuss the basis of your reasoning in regards to reality and God if you want.

 

[Goonie]

Well, it makes sense that you would say that since you're an atheist. I'm not going to debate scripture with someone who is blinded to the truth of scripture. I will discuss the basis of your reasoning in regards to reality and God if you want.

Just reitterating the previous respondents view that your reasoning is circular. Not blind, just not prepared to accept something without a good basis of evidence.

 

[Chriliman]

Just reitterating the previous respondents view that your reasoning is circular. Not blind, just not prepared to accept something without a good basis of evidence.

This whole idea that reasoning is circular as being a bad thing doesn't make sense to me. If I believe I have access to truth, why wouldn't I go to that source for truth and then apply it to my life and then go back to the source for truth again repeating the cycle in order to maintain truthfulness?

Now what I can show is that an atheist's reasoning is actually based on contradicting truths.

So let me ask you would you rather believe in the truth or would you rather believe in contradicting truths?

 

[Goonie]

Contradictory truths? Define please.

 

[Goonie]

This whole idea that reasoning is circular as being a bad thing doesn't make sense to me. If I believe I have access to truth, why wouldn't I go to that source for truth and then apply it to my life and then go back to the source for truth again repeating the cycle in order to maintain truthfulness?

Now what I can show is that an atheist's reasoning is actually based on contradicting truths.

So let me ask you would you rather believe in the truth or would you rather believe in contradicting truths?

Contradictory truths? Please define. Sorry about the repeat.

 

[Chriliman]

Contradictory truths? Define please.

We need to define the terms "assumption" and "believe". My definitions are as follows and you let me know if you agree.

Assumption - The acceptance that something is possibly true as well as possibly not true. In other words an uncertainty about what is true.

Belief - The acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

Do you agree with these definitions?

 

[Goonie]

We need to define the terms "assumption" and "believe". My definitions are as follows and you let me know if you agree.

Assumption - The acceptance that something is possibly true as well as possibly not true. In other words an uncertainty about what is true.

Belief - The acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

Do you agree with these definitions?

Provisionally yes.