Is belief in the creation story a salvation issue?

[Speedwell]

That was the truth actually.

No, it was a bald-faced lie, an intentional mischaracterization of what non YEC Christians believe.

To claim Jesus did not really created the world and heavens is to oppose the bible. It doesn't matter if you use the word bozo or not.

And so is that.

 

[Archivist]

You can't believe there were 2 accounts that offered different orders of creation. To be saved doesn't mean one is clever. Nor does it mean they are belief superstars or scholars. If a believer accepts Jesus, then they realize the old testament and Moses were very true. Even the New testament refers to creation. There is no way creation can be taken to mean anything but the literal record of creation we have in Scripture. One cannot have a big bang or the evolution of life as the origin of life. That is unbelief. It is very lukewarm and putrid and sickening to have a 'believer' trying to justify science claims, and claim God was on the sidelines while the universe created itself, and life evolved in imagined long ages with no apparent help from God.

Then which account is correct?

 

[dad]

No, it was a bald-faced lie, an intentional mischaracterization of what non YEC Christians believe. And so is that.

Put your proof on the table? So God was in hiding in the big bang? He got the bible wrong? Relax.

 

[dad]

Then which account is correct?

For the order, there is only one account, chapter one. By chapter two it was over. Done. The chapter therefore has to go back and look at what was done. More details of what was created and done are given.

 

[Archivist]

For the order, there is only one account, chapter one. By chapter two it was over. Done. The chapter therefore has to go back and look at what was done. More details of what was created and done are given.

But that is interpretation on you part. The plain order of creation in chapter 2 differs from the order in Chapter 1.

 

[Speedwell]

Put your proof on the table? So God was in hiding in the big bang? He got the bible wrong? Relax.

I'm supposed to prove to you what the rest of us believe? You made the outrageous claim that non-YEC Christians believe that God played no role in the creation. Let's see you back it up. Go ahead and demonstrate that mainstream Protestants, Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Orthodox and Oriental Christians, Syriacs, Chaldeans, Copts, etc. believe that God played no role in creation.

No, God didn't get the Bible wrong, but it is entirely possible that you did.

 

[rjs330]

Of course Scripture has always been used to interpret Scripture. Your new idea is that it should be the only thing.

How is that new if it always was? Use scripture to interpret scripture. It's not that difficult really. If you dig hard enough into scripture there's usually an answer.

 

[Speedwell]

How is that new if it always was? Use scripture to interpret scripture. It's not that difficult really. If you dig hard enough into scripture there's usually an answer.

Scripture has always been used to interpret scripture. What is new is the Fundamentalist claim that it is the only way to interpret scripture.

 

[rjs330]

Scripture has always been used to interpret scripture. What is new is the Fundamentalist claim that it is the only way to interpret scripture.

Sorry I don't get what you mean by that. What other ways are you referring to? The book of Mormon, Darwin, the Quran biblical commentaries? Heck I use biblical commentaries all the time along with lexicons etc.

 

[Speedwell]

Sorry I don't get what you mean by that. What other ways are you referring to? The book of Mormon, Darwin, the Quran biblical commentaries? Heck I use biblical commentaries all the time along with lexicons etc.

How much do you rely on linguistic, literary, cultural, anthropological, archaeological and other scholarship?

 

[dad]

But that is interpretation on you part. The plain order of creation in chapter 2 differs from the order in Chapter 1.

No, the first verse in chapter two spells it out clear as possibly could be. Ir was all finished! Not only that, but all the rest of the bible does not mention any confusion on what the creation was. They do not say things like 'since the beginning of the second creation story, one of the men named Adam did so and so..'! Jesus is the creator, and He mentioned the creation. So what do you expect us to do, toss out the rest of the bible, and believe that God was either confused or incompetent, or a liar, or etc? Do we assume the first man in chap one was not the same guy as chapter 2?

Dishonoring Jesus by interpreting Scripture in such a cherry picking and insane way seems to be going to extreme mind bending mental loops just to be able to embrace the claims of science to heart, while despising and belittling God's word.

 

[dad]

I'm supposed to prove to you what the rest of us believe?

Believe? Well that depends if you are talking about the cherry picking disbelief in Scripture that many resort to in peeing all over the creation account in Genesis...or trying to support the big bang fable. You cannot do the latter, and I haven't seen you try to do the former. What can you do??

You made the outrageous claim that non-YEC Christians believe that God played no role in the creation.

Nope. Never even used those silly words actually. Jesus is the creator, and those that know Him know that. If someone follows afar off, and doesn't really know Scripture, or science, well, fine. We can maybe excuse their newbieism or lack of love for Scripture etc. Maybe they believe enough from one verse in the New testament or something to have been saved. Fine. But the theological phonies, that incorporate unbelief into their methodical assault on Scripture, that is another story. To those I say...en guarde!

Let's see you back it up. Go ahead and demonstrate that mainstream Protestants, Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Orthodox and Oriental Christians, Syriacs, Chaldeans, Copts, etc. believe that God played no role in creation.

How would I know what all those assorted groups chose to believe?? The only issue is what Scripture says. You think if those folks voted that the universe sailed out of a pepper sized little hot soup, that would make it true?

No, God didn't get the Bible wrong, but it is entirely possible that you did.

In English now, what do you believe about Jesus created the universe and life one earth? Do you think He took dust and formed it into a man, and from that later took a bone to make woman? Or do you think Jesus really was in hiding or not around when the universe started? Be clear. Be honest.

 

[Speedwell]

In English now, what do you believe about Jesus created the universe and life one earth? Do you think He took dust and formed it into a man, and from that later took a bone to make woman? Or do you think Jesus really was in hiding or not around when the universe started? Be clear. Be honest.

LOL! A false dichotomy. If you can't argue your position honestly, what good is it?

 

[dad]

LOL! A false dichotomy. If you can't argue your position honestly, what good is it?

Name someone that believes that the first chapters are conflicting, and that really believes in an actual creation also? How about you? Do you accept the big bang and evolution of man, or the creation? Be honest.

 

[Archivist]

No, the first verse in chapter two spells it out clear as possibly could be. Ir was all finished! Not only that, but all the rest of the bible does not mention any confusion on what the creation was. They do not say things like 'since the beginning of the second creation story, one of the men named Adam did so and so..'! Jesus is the creator, and He mentioned the creation. So what do you expect us to do, toss out the rest of the bible, and believe that God was either confused or incompetent, or a liar, or etc? Do we assume the first man in chap one was not the same guy as chapter 2?

Dishonoring Jesus by interpreting Scripture in such a cherry picking and insane way seems to be going to extreme mind bending mental loops just to be able to embrace the claims of science to heart, while despising and belittling God's word.

So cherry picking to affirm a Chapter 1 creation story is fine, but any other cherry picking is wrong. Right.

 

[Archivist]

Name someone that believes that the first chapters are conflicting, and that really believes in an actual creation also? How about you? Do you accept the big bang and evolution of man, or the creation? Be honest.

A great many Christians believe in the Big Bang and evolution, all guided by God. Are you saying that those with that view will not be saved?

 

[Speedwell]

Name someone that believes that the first chapters are conflicting, and that really believes in an actual creation also? How about you? Do you accept the big bang and evolution of man, or the creation? Be honest.

Both. God created the universe and science can discover how it went down.

 

[dad]

So cherry picking to affirm a Chapter 1 creation story is fine, but any other cherry picking is wrong. Right.

No need to affirm Chapter 1. Why would there be? You need to affirm John 14 too? You simply need to believe or disbelieve.

 

[dad]

Both. God created the universe and science can discover how it went down.

Science based it's models on faith alone, so when you chose science claims over God's claims in His word you are merely stating belief in one rather than the other. Nothing more.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Concerning evolution and all the other religions too:

5 Meanwhile, all the other people live however they wish,
picking and choosing their gods.
But we live honoring God,
and we’re loyal to our God forever and ever.