If you cannot believe the genesis account....

[the_cloaked_crusader]

The bible does say the earth was created in 6 days more than it says the earth is flat

That is my point.

and it says the earth is flat more than it says it is young (generally 6000 years old)

That is irrelevant. And you still haven't proven that the word for circle was not interchangeable with the word for sphere in ancient Hebrew. Show me that, and I might take you seriously.

Yet most creationist groups accept 6 days and a young earth, but throw out a flat earth. Seems like they are picking and choosing. But uh oh, they often claim picking and choosing is bad and sometimes even say its not something that a "true" christian would do. Welcome to hypocritical lane. (Unfortunatly creationist groups have been spotted on that corner more than once. )

Oh for Pete's sake. The statements about the flat earth are far more vague than those about the six days of creation. Give me one place where the Bible says, "He throweth the earth like a frisbee."

Luckily many people have it figured out. They make their decision based on ALL verses, this includes the ones written in the earth. That way they aren't picking and choosing at all, but allowing All of gods creation to guide their understanding.

I think these people have a slight problem, but that's between them and God.

2) Either show me a verse that literally claims the snake was possessed by satan, or admit satan slithers on the ground and eats dirt or that certain verses aren't taken literally (such as the rev verse that claims the snake was satan not possessed by satan but was satan).

You are purposefully being dense. I'm starting to understand how you evos feel when you say the YEC's are blocking up their ears. The way I see it, the snake in Genesis was either Satan incarnate or Satan-possessed. God then "punished" the snake kind by making it crawl on the ground and get dirt in its mouth on occasion (though technically the snakes don't mind the "punishment" since it suits them perfectly). Satan was punished in like manner. When God tells him to crawl on the ground and eat dirt, he does it. He does other things, too (prowls abouth te earth--although I daresay that, after what he was accustomed to in Heaven, he probably feels he is crawling on his belly and eating dirt). Go ahead and block up your ears. I don't give a crumb.

must we keep repeating this same tripe over and over....???

It's actually kind of fun. Later I'll go back through and count how many times I had to say the same things over again . . .

I see plenty of donkeys with the gift of speech on this board.

How do you know I can speak? I could actually be tapping away at the keys with my hooves.

Your right, there is no point in going over this again, since no matter what I say it will be ignored (yes I expected that )

irony ++! [/geek speak]

You say to listen to the hebrew until it contradicts what you think, then you say we should listen to the english.

What the beep? Where did either of us say to listen to the English over the Hebrew? Did you ever read the Alliance Curch Statement of Faith? OK, dumb question ...

Then you say I can't show you where it says "flat", but its acceptable when you can't show where it says "possessed."

That's because I don't give a crumb. Whether or not the snake was possessed or Satan incarnate is of no object as far as I'm concerned. The only thing I care about is whether the Bible ever says, "Disregard Genesis 1-3, they are a myth!".If it doesn't say that (and it doesn't) then I believe them.

Contradictions much?

"Much", when used as an adjective, is usually used before the noun it is modifying, and it is applied to a noun that cannot be ennumerated (like "time," or "flour")--not a plural one. Have a nice day, and thank you for calling the Grammar Hotline. [/ooc] Sorry, but your little "witticism" struck me as being funny in a way you didn't intend . . .

How are we to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt that Yome is used in the context of literal days and not "extended period of time"?

Because it says, "evening passed and morning came." This sounds very much as though God were telling us that he did mean 24 hour periods when he said "days".

Really, it gets rather redundant. I get a little tired of people grasping at straws trying to make something out of nothing. I keep waiting for a real discussion to come along, but it just does not seem to be happening right now.

I don't know how you can stand to be on these boards year round . . . I admire your tenacity.

best of regards
the_cloaked_crusader

 

[Arikay]

1) Not irrelevant at all, again, literally speaking a flat earth is more scripturally sound than a 6000 year old one (as in, there is actually literal scripture that can point to it), yet creationist groups have a 6000 year old earth in their statements of faith yet not a flat earth, suggesting something is a bit wrong with their "literal" version of the bible.
As far as interchangable, I can't show you that it wasn't interchangable, I can show you that they most likely ment flat circle,
www.geocities.com/arikayx/flatearth.html

2) Not dense at all, since you just met the second part of my statement by suggesting satan slithers on the ground and eats dirt.

[snip]

 

[Follower of Christ]

Oh for Pete's sake. The statements about the flat earth are far more vague than those about the six days of creation. Give me one place where the Bible says, "He throweth the earth like a frisbee."

 

[Follower of Christ]

1) Not irrelevant at all, again, literally speaking a flat earth is more scripturally sound than a 6000 year old one

study the bible much?

PROVE it or please give it up Arikay.....

the geneologies are there, in writing.......no where does it SAY flat

(as in, there is actually literal scripture that can point to it),

WAIT WAIT WAIT.....

So we have to ignore all those precise geneologies and lifespans for our ''evidience''..

BUT YOU get to say that someone cant use ''cirlce'' in describing the earth without meaning its flat

(I know this thing wont let me put up the number of smileys I need to convey my laughter right now

yet creationist groups have a 6000 year old earth in their statements of faith yet not a flat earth, suggesting something is a bit wrong with their "literal" version of the bible.

it LITERALLY shows the ages and geneologies.........YOUR TURN

-irrelevance snipped-

 

[Arikay]

So that means that there should be 0 (as i no) error when scholars interpret the geneologies, right?

 

[Follower of Christ]

So that means that there should be 0 (as i no) error when scholars interpret the geneologies, right?

yeah yeah yeah......I know all about it....

Tell me.....do you have a nickname???

I do.....Im william and go by Bill mostly here...

Your ''faulty'' geneology doesnt show billions of years

 

[Nathan David]

The geneaologies do not show a 6000 year old earth. That was a later interpretation of the geneaologies, and an assumption that the 6 days in Genesis were literal (kind of tricky since there was no sun for the first couple, plus the second Genesis story shortens it to two days; both suggest the 6 days were not intended to be taken literally).

6000-year-old earth is about as Biblically supported as the Rapture - not very much at all.

 

[Arikay]

wahoo its dodge time.
So, these geneologies have errors (never said they had my billions, thats contained in gods other book ). How odd that even though the geneologies are literal, scholars cant agree on what they say, its almost like they are picking and choosing how to interpret them. Oh no, bad scholars, they aren't "true" christians.

 

[Follower of Christ]

wahoo its dodge time.
So, these geneologies have errors (never said they had my billions, thats contained in gods other book ). How odd that even though the geneologies are literal, scholars cant agree on what they say, its almost like they are picking and choosing how to interpret them. Oh no, bad scholars, they aren't "true" christians.

Sorry if I wont allow an UNSTUDIED NON-CHRISTIAN to tell me that that ''error'' youre trying to use wasnt simply another name (nickname?) being used....

 

[Follower of Christ]

The geneaologies do not show a 6000 year old earth. That was a later interpretation of the geneaologies, and an assumption that the 6 days in Genesis were literal (kind of tricky since there was no sun for the first couple, plus the second Genesis story shortens it to two days; both suggest the 6 days were not intended to be taken literally).

6000-year-old earth is about as Biblically supported as the Rapture - not very much at all.

The geneaologies do not show a 6000 year old earth. That was a later interpretation of the geneaologies, and an assumption that the 6 days in Genesis were literal (kind of tricky since there was no sun for the first couple, plus the second Genesis story shortens it to two days; both suggest the 6 days were not intended to be taken literally).

6000-year-old earth is about as Biblically supported as the Rapture - not very much at all.

MAN......WHERE to start and HOW to not go overboard

Behold, I speak a mystery to you; we shall not all fall asleep, but we shall all be changed; in a moment, in a glance of an eye, at the last trumpet. For a trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall all be changed.

(1Co 15:51-52)
And they did not know until the flood came and took them all away. So also will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

(Mat 24:39-41)

I tell you, in that night there shall be two in one bed, the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two shall be grinding together, one will be taken, and the other left. Two shall be in the field, one will be taken, and the other left.

(Luk 17:34-36)

Mat 24:31 And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.


And then He shall send His angels and shall gather His elect from the four winds, from the end of the earth to the end of heaven.

(Mar 13:27)

 

[Arikay]

Ah, last ditch efforts I see. When in doubt yell "non christian" and plug your ears. are you going to repeat the yell of "non christian" if a christian repeated the same thing I said?
Kinda sad, I know you can come up with a better logical fallacy than this, maybe you should switch back to jobob, you were doing better then.

The error im talking about has nothing to do with different names.

Sorry if I wont allow an UNSTUDIED NON-CHRISTIAN to tell me that that ''error'' youre trying to use wasnt simply another name (nickname?) being used....

 

[Follower of Christ]

Ah, last ditch efforts I see. When in doubt yell "non christian" and plug your ears. are you going to repeat the yell of "non christian" if a christian repeated the same thing I said?
Kinda sad, I know you can come up with a better logical fallacy than this, maybe you should switch back to jobob, you were doing better then.

sorry got like 10 things going on here

present your ''evidence'' friend..........Ill withhold my laughter till youre finished...I promise

 

[JohnR7]

The geneaologies do not show a 6000 year old earth.

The genologies have nothing to do with the age of the earth. Adam and Eve were created about 6000 years ago. Noah lived about 4000 years ago. David lived about 3000 years ago. Christ lived about 2000 years ago.

6000-year-old earth is about as Biblically supported as the Rapture - not very much at all.

Jesus is coming soon and He is coming for a people who are without spot, blemish or wrinkle. Those who are not prepared well get "left behind". If you do not believe in the second coming, then there is a pretty good chance that He is not coming for you.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

John - the Second Coming and the Rapture are not the same thing; I believe in one but not the other.

 

[Follower of Christ]

John - the Second Coming and the Rapture are not the same thing; I believe in one but not the other.

theyre the very same thing.....

The day of the Lord.

After He comes, God will then pour out His wrath on mankind...


Jesus said it will be the same on that day as it was during the flood and Sodom...

In BOTH instances He cited, the chosen were pulled out of harms way (this will be our ''rapture'' as we call it) and immediatly Gods judgement came (Revelations seven Bowls of Wrath).....

And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man.

They were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were given in marriage,

until the day that Noah entered the ark,

and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Likewise also as it happened in the days of Lot;

they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building;

but on the day that Lot went out from Sodom,

it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.

In the same way it shall be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.

(Luk 17:26-30)

 

[Mike Flynn]

Those who are not prepared well get "left behind". If you do not believe in the second coming, then there is a pretty good chance that He is not coming for you.

Thats not what the theology says John. Salvation has nothing to do with whether you give a mental nod to the idea that Jesus will come again. It is about offering yourself to God as a servant through Jesus and the HS. It is about recognizing your character as it is without God, and accepting that in order for it to have any real value, it must be reunited with God and cleansed. In the role of servant you will help God to save others and bless the world. Thats where it begins and ends...and human theological understandings outside these truths are not on the table when judgement comes.

In fact, none of our understandings are relevant to salvation outside this core belief. So it does not matter if one of God's servants understands and accepts the second coming while another does not. Both get saved if they have come to God, regardless of any misconceptions.

And BTW, it is not fruitful for you to speculate about who does and doesn't get saved like this. Surely you know enough theology to know thats just not your place.

 

[the_cloaked_crusader]

1) Not irrelevant at all, again, literally speaking a flat earth is more scripturally sound than a 6000 year old one (as in, there is actually literal scripture that can point to it), yet creationist groups have a 6000 year old earth in their statements of faith yet not a flat earth, suggesting something is a bit wrong with their "literal" version of the bible.

No. A 6-10 thousand year old earth is based on geneological evidence. But I wouldn't care if it was discovered that the earth was created 20,000 years ago. I don't choose to die on that hill. If I must die on a hill, I will die on the hill of 6 day creation.

As far as interchangable, I can't show you that it wasn't interchangable, I can show you that they most likely ment flat circle,

This proves nothing. As I said before, God probably simply used the word he used so the message wouldn't be lost behind strange scientific concepts; it's less direct, but still accurate.

2) Not dense at all, since you just met the second part of my statement by suggesting satan slithers on the ground and eats dirt.

On occasion, I'm sure he does. What was your point?
Why do you bother quoting me? why not just leave out the "snip" and conserve space?

Follower of Christ--I keep running out of smiley faces myself. It's really very pathetic.

6000-year-old earth is about as Biblically supported as the Rapture - not very much at all.

WiErDnEsS! [/being an idiot] That was a very interesting statement. Elucidate, please.

So, these geneologies have errors (never said they had my billions, thats contained in gods other book). How odd that even though the geneologies are literal, scholars cant agree on what they say, its almost like they are picking and choosing how to interpret them. Oh no, bad scholars, they aren't "true" christians.

the margin of error is . . . marginal.

relatively good regards
the_cloaked_crusader

 

[Didaskomenos]

Jesus is coming soon and He is coming for a people who are without spot, blemish or wrinkle. Those who are not prepared well get "left behind". If you do not believe in the second coming, then there is a pretty good chance that He is not coming for you.

What the heck was the point of that wiseguy remark? Over the whole population of the earth, yes, most who don't believe in the second coming wouldn't be taken "to glory", but that's because they don't profess to be Christians either. But among those who do profess faith in Christ and don't believe in being caught away to sweet Beulah land, the "chances" are not only good that they are His, but at least as good as those who believe as you do. Being "prepared well" does not involve having all our theological ducks in a row, it involves being a part of His Kingdom. I happen to believe that the Kingdom of God is here, and in need of being spread to the ends of the earth, and I'm not expecting Jesus to come bail me out. You see, I'm a theo-evo and a preterist. I await swift excommunication from the Church of St. JohnR7 - good thing for both of us that Jesus doesn't expect perfection in doctrine.

 

[JohnR7]

Jesus to come bail me out.

It is not so much that Jesus is going to bail us out. The Bride will not be crawling along, gasping for breath. The Bride will be beautiful and radiant. It is though us that God will conquer the world. We are a army and His bannor over us is love.

Yes, Kingdom living is what it is all about, you are right. Walking in love and in peace and in accordance with all of the nine fruits of the Holy Spirit. Although there is a lot more fruit that we are to manifest than just that list of nine items.

 

[JohnR7]

When in doubt yell "non christian" and plug your ears.

Christians do not go about plugging up people ears. They go about opening up ears. So the blind see, the lamb walk, the deaf hear and the mute proclaim the glory of God.