• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Is there a denomination that accepts theistic evolution/old earth?

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟65,919.00
Country
Austria
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
His student said:
No one said that the physical world was a good creation and the spiritual world was a bad creation.

Here is what I said.

His student, said: "In Genesis one God pronounced the physical creation good.
Obviously there was a spirit world that came before that from which Satan came to tempt the man in the garden. Do you not believe that?"
What I said did not "imply" that God created the spirit world bad. Everything God creates is good even Lucifer.


But Satan came from the spirit world (see Job chapter one for a glimpse of it and it's inhabitants).

He came into God's altogether good physical creation and tempted Adam in the garden.

You simply read what I said and heard it wrong. That's an honest mistake. But when I corrected you - you doubled down rather than re reading my original post to see what I actually said.

Since I have supplied here in this post all you need to understand your mistake - we really don't need to labor the point. Nor do you need to admit your mistake. It's no big deal at this stage (unless of course you choose for some reason to "triple down" on your mistake:)).
You are concentrating on yourself too much.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,721
5,560
46
Oregon
✟1,106,405.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Yes - He did "make it look like it took a long time". The universe was created fully functioning and mature.

Exactly as was Adam created fully functioning and mature. I can pretty much be sure that Adam was not created as a baby without pubic hair and fully functioning organs - which is what God "must have done" according to those who think God would be "trying to fool us" if He created thing fully mature.

However - having said that - God apparently has no aversion to "fooling" those who are wise in their own eyes and choose to twist scripture to compromise with the teaching of the world rather than conforming their thinking to what God says in His Word.

"No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval." 1 Corinthians 11:19

This is a test of sorts and it appears that some here are failing that test.

Of course it doesn't.

But the Bible clearly says that the first man and woman were created in a different manner - a manner that leaves no room for evolution in that creation.
Whom did Cain have as his first wife...?

Or where did he get his first wife from...?

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟65,919.00
Country
Austria
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
The problem with your assertion is that neither you nor I were there to be eye witnesses of how it all took place, so all we can do is to guess about things that the Bible does not inform us.

Therefore, apart from sheer guesswork, we can come to no other conclusion than: "We don't know!"
But we have eyewitnesses of what is left from that process, right?
 
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
79
Northwest
✟56,102.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You are concentrating on yourself too much.
Not considering that you replied to a particular quote of mine and entered into a discussion about it with me.

If you want to break it off now that's OK with me. Unless, of course, you want to concentrate on yourself a little more.
 
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
79
Northwest
✟56,102.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Whom did Cain have as his first wife...? Or where did he get his first wife from...? God Bless!
It seems obvious to me and to almost every theologian that she was a sister.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BobRyan
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
And that 1000 years is a day .

No text says "a thousand years is a day".

Rather we have the two-way statement "a thousand years IS AS a day AND a day IS AS a thousand years" 2 Peter 3 making the point that no time is "too short for God act" and no time is "too long" for God to patiently wait.

Thus when Jesus said he would be in the grave 3 days and 3 nights -- He did not mean "3000 years" and he did not mean "3 seconds"
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,721
5,560
46
Oregon
✟1,106,405.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
It seems obvious to me and to almost every theologian that she was a sister.
He was banished to a "far-off country", then took a wife from there, I'm not denying the special creation of Adam and Eve or Man, but Cain took nobody with him, and He was far removed from his parents, or any "only possible or theoretical" brothers or sisters or whatever anyway (cause the Bible does not mention any) (not before the incident with Cain and Able anyway) (or before Cain was banished to a far-off country anyway)...?

I'd just like you guys to consider the possibility of possibly "two races", from which eventually became interbred and intermixed possibly, and could account for the slow deterioration in the lifespans of man, etc...

Just as a possibility of course...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,721
5,560
46
Oregon
✟1,106,405.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
No text says "a thousand years is a day".

Rather we have the two-way statement "a thousand years IS AS a day AND a day IS AS a thousand years" 2 Peter 3 making the point that no time is "too short for God act" and no time is "too long" for God to patiently wait.

Thus when Jesus said he would be in the grave 3 days and 3 nights -- He did not mean "3000 years" and he did not mean "3 seconds"
Your actually comparing the days and nights in the Creation account to when Jesus said said he would be in the grave for three days and three nights, no offense man, but "come on", really...?

It's also possible that Jesus went to or into a place that was "timeless" at that time also, but that's just another "possibility" only, etc... Not something I would latch onto for 100% sure, etc...

The days (and nights) in the creation account represent long, long periods of time, just accept it...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Too right. God could have spoken his word into our memory complete 100% in a language we could understand and with no need for interpretation, every single one of us. But he chose to have the book pieced together over centuries with inspired mortal men writing it down ..
But big point is, God can do anything, but has CHOSEN to do some things in certain ways for reasons only He knows.

Indeed that is THE point. God's Word was not written to conform to Darwinism and Moses was not a Darwinist. Jamming Gods word into Darwinism is not exegesis - it is eisegesis.'

"compare" the Gen 2:1-4 statement of days to... I started out comparing it to legal code in Ex 20:11 and continue to compare compare it to Ex 20:11
"SIX days you shall labor" Ex 20:9
"for in SIX days the LORD made..."

Even the Hebrew and OT scholars in all world class universities freely admit that the account for origins in Genesis 1-2 and Ex 20:11 is nothing remotely compatible with evolution's own doctrine on origins. they are as far apart as day and night.

Ex 20 "six days you shall labor...for in six days the LORD made" is so obviously "not" the evolutionism that is so popular today that it goes without saying.

Gen 2:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.

Ex 20: "six days you shall labor..."
Ex 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Notice what the top scholars in Hebrew and OT studies are saying in all the world class universities about the basic most obvious features of "the text" of Genesis.

=============================================
Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written:


‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that
--the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that:

(a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience

(b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story

(c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark.

Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know."

=====================================

Those guys get "the basics" about "interpretation" and "translation" and "the kind of writing that it is" - stating that this aspect of the discussion is sooooo incredibly obvious and basic that even the agnostic/atheist/lib/left scholars see that one point clearly.

============
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
And that 1000 years is a day .

No text says "a thousand years is a day".

Rather we have the two-way statement "a thousand years IS AS a day AND a day IS AS a thousand years" 2 Peter 3 making the point that no time is "too short for God act" and no time is "too long" for God to patiently wait.

Thus when Jesus said he would be in the grave 3 days and 3 nights -- He did not mean "3000 years" and he did not mean "3 seconds"

Your actually comparing the days and nights in the Creation account to when Jesus said said he would be in the grave for three days and three nights, no offense man, but "come on", really...?

I am not the one that brought up that statement from 2 Peter 3 -- that was another person on this thread.

I am the one pointing out that jamming 1000 years into a day was not the meaning in 2 Peter 3.

But if you are asking what I "compare" the Gen 2:1-4 statement of days to... I started out comparing it to legal code in Ex 20:11 and continue to compare compare it to Ex 20:11
"SIX days you shall labor" Ex 20:9
"for in SIX days the LORD made..."

It's also possible that Jesus went to or into a place that was "timeless"

you can't be serious. no text insert such fancy into the subject and I think we both know it.

As said about that side trail " Not something I would latch onto for 100% sure,"


The days (and nights) in the creation account represent long, long periods of time,

Not even the atheist scientists will argue that plants survive long ages of period of time of nothing but a sunless night, or that the rotation of earth was ever "one rotation every million years" or any such thing as the fancy you have suggested - just accept it...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
He was banished to a "far-off country", then took a wife from there,

let's look for the text that says Cain took a wife from a far off country.

Gen 4: 16 Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. "

The text does not say "knew his wife that he found in a far off country" in fact nothing in the text says that Cain was not already married at the time he killed Able.

why insert those fancies into the text and leave it as an exercise for the reader to undo your own "insert"? How is that reasoning logical?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: His student
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,721
5,560
46
Oregon
✟1,106,405.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Not even the atheist scientists will argue that plants survive long ages of period of time of nothing but a sunless night, or that the rotation of earth was ever "one rotation every million years" or any such thing as the fancy you have suggested - just accept it...

God Bless!

I said no such thing about the rotation of the earth first off, and secondly primitive forms of plant life not only could have, but would have started to come about (and begin to evolve) before the sky was completely cleared as well, just maybe not starting to turn into complicated or complex plant life until afterward, etc...

See my post here: Genesis and Creation, Days are long "ages" ect...?

Or my OP in that thread here: Genesis and Creation, Days are long "ages" ect...?

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Biblical and Book of Mormon literalism are heresies, guys, nothing more nothing less.

By contrast the rest of us believe in the literal virgin birth, the literal resurrection of Christ, the literal ascension of Christ into heaven, a literal second coming of Christ and the literal creation as God states it in Genesis. (Without also having to drag in the book of Mormon)

To each his own.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I said no such thing about the rotation of the earth

Then how did you get "evening and morning" to be a million years of evening followed by a million years of morning? Is it your claim that the rotation of planet earth has nothing to do with evening and morning?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I wonder why people ignore vast differences in words, places, numbers etc. between gospels but try to read much more older and much worse preserved text of Genesis as perfect to every word.

At what "age" does the Word of God become unreliable and atheist evolutionism's doctrine on origins - "much more trusted" in your POV?
 
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟65,919.00
Country
Austria
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
At what "age" does the Word of God become unreliable and atheist evolutionism's doctrine on origins - "much more trusted" in your POV?
Jesus is the Word of God.

If we are talking about written copies of copies of copies of biblical text, then it becomes unreliable in the moment when you have two different versions and cannot decide which one is right or in the moment when you have totally no idea what was the original because the earliest copy you have is thousands of years distant from the original.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,414
11,950
Georgia
✟1,103,374.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jesus is the Word of God.

If we are talking about written copies of copies of copies of biblical text, then it becomes unreliable in the moment when you have two different reading and cannot decide which one is right.

So then the NT text is unreliable in your view - no virgin birth? no bodily resurrection of Christ? no bodily ascension of Christ into heaven?

Or is it your view that the Jews don't know which Hebrew manuscript is the book of Genesis?
 
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟65,919.00
Country
Austria
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
So then the NT text is unreliable in your view - no virgin birth? no bodily resurrection of Christ? no bodily ascension of Christ into heaven?

Or is it your view that the Jews don't know which Hebrew manuscript is the book of Genesis?

Some points are reliable, some words are uncertain. Have you ever noticed that when you read three gospels together (Mark, Matthew, Luke) they describe same events differently? And quote Jesus's words differently? They even do not record the Lord's prayer in the same way.

If its so with Gospels given to the whole world about our Lord, why to suppose that Genesis given to ancient Jews about world' creation is perfect?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,782
29,459
Pacific Northwest
✟824,964.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Because the Bible says that is not how He did it - and the Bible is the Word of God

Jesus Christ is the Word of God.

The Bible is God's word about His Word.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0