Oopart dinosaurs? ideas please..

[Molal]

John 1:1-5

In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD. He was with GOD in the beginning. Through HIM all things were made; without HIM nothing was made that has been made. In HIM is life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

(New Testament - Greek)

So, God made everything. He made everything from nothing. This is not a refutation of science and is not supporting evidence for a literal interpretation.

I get as much theological information from an allegorical approach to genesis as do you with a literal interpretation. I would assert, given my experience, that an allegorical approach brings people to Christ easier than a literal interpretation. This is because a literal interpretation brings you to logger-heads immediately with the scientific community. In addition, a literal interpretation negates the historical reason of why God inspired genesis the way He did.

 

[LittleNipper]

So, God made everything. He made everything from nothing. This is not a refutation of science and is not supporting evidence for a literal interpretation.

I get as much theological information from an allegorical approach to genesis as do you with a literal interpretation. I would assert, given my experience, that an allegorical approach brings people to Christ easier than a literal interpretation. This is because a literal interpretation brings you to logger-heads immediately with the scientific community. In addition, a literal interpretation negates the historical reason of why God inspired genesis the way He did.

And I would say that the HOLY SPIRIT brings people to CHRIST and human reasoning has little to do with it.

 

[Assyrian]

Go ahead, evidence your claim. I suspect you will fall back upon your literal interpretation of genesis, forsaking historical context, and hebrew grammar.

First you need to provide evidence for a literal interpretation....

John 1:1-5

In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD. He was with GOD in the beginning. Through HIM all things were made; without HIM nothing was made that has been made. In HIM is life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

(New Testament - Greek)

It never ceases to amaze me that way people try to support literalism by quoting some of the most allegorical and figurative passages in the bible.

Think about it. Was Christ simply a phrase spoken by God to create the world? Or is he the second person of the Trinity, through whom and for whom all things were created, God incarnate, our Lord and Saviour? Calling Christ 'the Word' is a metaphor.

 

[juvenissun]

In a literal interpretation of genesis, none are mentioned.

It rained for 40 days and there were also water poured out from the ground. The flood water would rise and fall during the stages of advancing and would also do the same during the stages of receding. The water stayed on (covered) land for half an year. It should continue to stay on continent for a much long time while the ocean basin was adjusting to accommodate the water.

The Scripture is not a historical geology book. Could you "reason" and reconstruct a possible onset and offset processes of the flood, which is easily tied to the adjustment of sea level? I AM a Creastionist. And I AM doing a SCIENTIFIC reasoning here.

I would suggest there are numerous transgression and regression cycles of various scales took place during the Flood.

 

[Molal]

It rained for 40 days and there were also water poured out from the ground. The flood water would rise and fall during the stages of advancing and would also do the same during the stages of receding. The water stayed on (covered) land for half an year. It should continue to stay on continent for a much long time while the ocean basin was adjusting to accommodate the water.

The Scripture is not a historical geology book. Could you "reason" and reconstruct a possible onset and offset processes of the flood, which is easily tied to the adjustment of sea level? I AM a Creastionist. And I AM doing a SCIENTIFIC reasoning here.

I would suggest there are numerous transgression and regression cycles of various scales took place during the Flood.

I would suggest that you are reading more into a literal interpretation of scripture than is actually mentioned in scripture.

I would suggest that although transgression, regressions cycles are evident interbedded with coal, and given out current data set, these cycles took many years to form.

 

[Molal]

And I would say that the HOLY SPIRIT brings people to CHRIST and human reasoning has little to do with it.

Then why do evangelics go out into the world to bring people to Christ? Why did Jesus and his disciples do this? If the Holy Spirit brought people to Christ, then why bother?

But, I cna already see this discussion is just going to regress into I say this, you say that.

But, we could get back to the original discussion. Where is your evidence for a young earth?

 

[juvenissun]

I would suggest that you are reading more into a literal interpretation of scripture than is actually mentioned in scripture.

I would suggest that although transgression, regressions cycles are evident interbedded with coal, and given out current data set, these cycles took many years to form.

Time duration is not a part in the definition or in the process of transgression/regression.

 

[Molal]

Time duration is not a part in the definition or in the process of transgression/regression.

What - please tell me your joking? You are saying that sea level changes (regression/transgression) are instantaneous. That's patently untrue. Not only do sea level changes occur over time, the deposition of sediment (from the sea level change) would take time as well.

 

[LittleNipper]

It never ceases to amaze me that way people try to support literalism by quoting some of the most allegorical and figurative passages in the bible.

Think about it. Was Christ simply a phrase spoken by God to create the world? Or is he the second person of the Trinity, through whom and for whom all things were created, God incarnate, our Lord and Saviour? Calling Christ 'the Word' is a metaphor.

CHRIST fulfilled the WORD of GOD. How does one fulfill what is not literal history?

 

[LittleNipper]

Then why do evangelics go out into the world to bring people to Christ? Why did Jesus and his disciples do this? If the Holy Spirit brought people to Christ, then why bother?

But, I cna already see this discussion is just going to regress into I say this, you say that.

But, we could get back to the original discussion. Where is your evidence for a young earth?

GOD is teaching me, and maturing me, and leading me along HIS path. CHRISTIANS witness for their own growth as well as holding the light high for those who are being pulled towards GOD.

Is the ocean getting more or less salty?
Is the moon moving towards or away from the earth?

 

[Molal]

GOD is teaching me, and maturing me, and leading me along HIS path. CHRISTIANS witness for their own growth as well as holding the light high for those who are being pulled towards GOD.

Is the ocean getting more or less salty?
Is the moon moving towards or away from the earth?

And God does this for me, by looking at His creation, making discoveries about His creation. His word, the bible, is not a book of science, it is a book of theology. A guide to Him.

I am being a light on the hill, my light is not hidden from view.

 

[Assyrian]

CHRIST fulfilled the WORD of GOD. How does one fulfill what is not literal history?

Usually it is the fulfillments that are history, what they fulfill are prophetic promises, which may be literal (Is 53:3 he was despised and rejected by men) or allegorical (Gen 3, the seed will bruise the snake's head, Isaiah 11:1 there shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse...), or even symbols like the Passover lamb and OT sacrifices.

Do you think calling Christ the Word of God only means he fulfilled God's promises? So did Cyrus, Nebuchadnezzar, and so will the antichrist.

You need to understand that when the bible calls Jesus the Word of God, the good shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep, the bread of life, or the lamb who takes away the sins of the world, it is speaking in metaphors. The bible is filled with them. Don't think that just because the fulfillment was historical, the description is literal, Jesus wasn't a sheep, he wasn't a shepherd and he wasn't bread. These are metaphors not literal descriptions.

 

[LittleNipper]

And God does this for me, by looking at His creation, making discoveries about His creation. His word, the bible, is not a book of science, it is a book of theology. A guide to Him.

I am being a light on the hill, my light is not hidden from view.

The Bible is a history Book. History is not a novel.

 

[theFijian]

CHRIST fulfilled the WORD of GOD. How does one fulfill what is not literal history?

Hint: John chapter 1!

 

[LittleNipper]

Usually it is the fulfillments that are history, what they fulfill are prophetic promises, which may be literal (Is 53:3 he was despised and rejected by men) or allegorical (Gen 3, the seed will bruise the snake's head, Isaiah 11:1 there shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse...), or even symbols like the Passover lamb and OT sacrifices.

Do you think calling Christ the Word of God only means he fulfilled God's promises? So did Cyrus, Nebuchadnezzar, and so will the antichrist.

You need to understand that when the bible calls Jesus the Word of God, the good shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep, the bread of life, or the lamb who takes away the sins of the world, it is speaking in metaphors. The bible is filled with them. Don't think that just because the fulfillment was historical, the description is literal, Jesus wasn't a sheep, he wasn't a shepherd and he wasn't bread. These are metaphors not literal descriptions.

So when GOD said that by one man sin entered into the world HE meant more than one? And if that one was not Adam, who was that ONE? Tell me scientifically.

 

[Molal]

The Bible is a history Book. History is not a novel.

I have to disagree, it's a book of theology, a book about God, Christ, his love for us. It is not a book of history.

Can you provide evidence for it's historical veracity?

 

[Mallon]

To say nothing of the fact that the Bible is not simply one book. It is a collection of different books, written by different people in different cultures, over thousands of years.
FSTDT.

 

[LittleNipper]

To say nothing of the fact that the Bible is not simply one book. It is a collection of different books, written by different people in different cultures, over thousands of years.
FSTDT.

I would highly suggest you read II Peter, and please take it as literal.

 

[Mallon]

I would highly suggest you read II Peter, and please take it as literal.

Done. The Bible is still a collection of different books, written by different people in different cultures, over thousands of years. 2 Peter doesn't change that.

 

[juvenissun]

What - please tell me your joking? You are saying that sea level changes (regression/transgression) are instantaneous. That's patently untrue. Not only do sea level changes occur over time, the deposition of sediment (from the sea level change) would take time as well.

You are wrong.

If you do not believe it, then try to spell out a definition of transgression. I would like to see how to you put the factor of time in it.