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.
That's their prerogative.
I have a slew of thought-provoking challenges I've issued over the years here: just for them.
If I did, then they wouldn't disagree with me, would they?If this is reflective of your "slew of thought-provoking challenges", then I'm not sure that you've reached a single person who disagrees with you.
The Bible is written in what we call shadows and types? Man can not teach us the Bible. Each and every individual is responsible to discover the Word of God for themselves. Everyone is given a choice and everyone is responsible for the choice they make.Clearly, most christians disagree that it is "clear".
A right understanding of the Bible is in 100% agreement with true science. God gave us the Bible and God gives us Science so there are no contradictions.expecting the Bible to be used as a science textbook.
I totally agree.A right understanding of the Bible is in 100% agreement with true science. God gave us the Bible and God gives us Science so there are no contradictions.
I love to study the Tabernacle in the Wilderness.The Bible is written in what we call shadows and types? Man can not teach us the Bible. Each and every individual is responsible to discover the Word of God for themselves. Everyone is given a choice and everyone is responsible for the choice they make.
If I did, then they wouldn't disagree with me, would they?
I'd like to ask you a question though:
If you've studied all these religions, as you said you did, then why do you expect us to be logical?
You should know from your studies that expecting [worldly] logic from a man or woman of faith is like expecting the Bible to be used as a science textbook.
If you're as educated as I think you are, do you define "faith" as "believing what you know isn't true"?
And we are to beware of them ...There are strong philosophical traditions within Christianity ...
A process the Bobgans call "psychoheresy".
I didn't say that though.I was replying to your question of why I would assume that "we" (implying all Christians) would care about logic after studying Christianity.
And here are your exact words:If you've studied all these religions,
Let's not lay a lack of [worldly] logic just at the doorstep of Christianity, eh?As someone who's studied world religions quite a lot,
How many different flavors of creationism have you studied within Christianity specifically, and world religions as a whole?MadotsukiInTheNexus said:Your views on questions like whether God can create a paradox like a new old dress aren't really typical, and that's what I was pointing out. If you hold those views, then that's fine and actually kind of interesting, but they don't reflect nearly as common a position within Christianity as that question would suggest.
Joe is wearing a watch he's had for ten years.
It has a cracked crystal, a rusted and corroded case, moisture seepage, bent stem, multiple scratches and pits, broken second hand, and a torn strap.
My question is this:
If Joe said he bought that watch brand new ten years ago, would you accuse him of being deceptive with you?
I assume you would not accuse Joe of deception, if he was wearing a messed-up watch, but said he bought it brand new ten years ago.What is your point with this one, AV? That things look old after the passage of time?
I assume you would not accuse Joe of deception, if he was wearing a mess-up watch, but said he bought it brand new ten years ago.
So why would educatees accuse God of deception if they are looking at an earth that has been getting dents and scratches and cracks and pits for just over 6000 years?
The earth has been getting dents and scratches and cracks and pits for a lot longer than 6000 years.I assume you would not accuse Joe of deception, if he was wearing a mess-up watch, but said he bought it brand new ten years ago.
So why would educatees accuse God of deception if they are looking at an earth that has been getting dents and scratches and cracks and pits for just over 6000 years?
I just wouldn't give him the keys of my car, I wouldn't let him watch over my kids and I would decline every dinner invitation if he is the cook.Joe is wearing a watch he's had for ten years.
It has a cracked crystal, a rusted and corroded case, moisture seepage, bent stem, multiple scratches and pits, broken second hand, and a torn strap.
My question is this:
If Joe said he bought that watch brand new ten years ago, would you accuse him of being deceptive with you?
True science; old earth, no global flood, earth doesn't stop, no 'lesser' night light, life evolves, mixed fabrics not a problem, can't see entire earth from highest building, Jews never slaves in Egypt...A right understanding of the Bible is in 100% agreement with true science. God gave us the Bible and God gives us Science so there are no contradictions.
What does your wristwatch look like after ten years?I just wouldn't give him the keys of my car, I wouldn't let him watch over my kids and I would decline every dinner invitation if he is the cook.
The start of life here would naturally be different from an ongoing life involving birth of infants. Frist life would not be infants but somehow enabled with the ability to survive to reproduce. Infants would not fit the bill. In theory, they would be adults equipped with the capacity to reason and perform tasks conducive to survival or assignment.I mean, by definition, no. Asking if God could create a new old thing is kind of like asking if God could create a four-sided triangle.
Yeah there are logic truths autonomous of scientific findings.Most Christians would agree that God can't do things that are logically impossible, like add two and two to equal five.
New life would not have to start from infancy since infants are incapable of survival. Adam and Eve depicted as unique. We deduce they were immortal before the fall and described as living a long life post fall. That means they were superior beings relative to us who live short lives by comparison. As depicted we are the downgraded version.Something being both new and old is contradictory and logically impossible.
Perhaps necessary.Presumably he could make something to look old when it wasn't, but that would definitely be deceptive.
Why would it be necessary to make a new thing look old? We're talking about the garden of Eden here. Non-sentient animals wouldn't care and sentient animals would know it's a deception. So what possible reason would there be for the deceit?Perhaps necessary.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?