Proof Genesis is not Literal in every sense...

Vance said:

I still don't get who you were referring to on this board, if not the TE's. The Origins Theology board is a Christians-only board, so I am still at a loss. And the six statements you make simply make no sense in regards to non-Christians even on another board, since no one would expect anything different from a non-Christian, so your warning would be moot.

But if you are going to assert that your post was meant to describe non-Christians only, then fine. You would agree, then, that none of those statements apply to the TE's on this board?

Click to expand...

Dear Vance,

What make you so sure that there's no way that a non-Christian could possibly post here on this forum? What is your assurance?

What if I find you some posting that would clearly suggest that they are not really Christians and were able to post on this forum? Would you be a man enough to admit your errors?

Be that as it may, just so you know, based on your other postings, I still say that some your views or spiritual understanding of the Genesis 1 & 2 is flawed and not supported by the Scriptures.

Now, do you want to discuss it further?


God Bless

2Pillars said:

Dear Vance,

What make you so sure that there's no way that a non-Christian could possibly post here on this forum? What is your assurance?

What if I find you some posting that would clearly suggest that they are not really Christians and were able to post on this forum? Would you be a man enough to admit your errors?

Be that as it may, just so you know, based on your other postings, I still say that some your views or spiritual understanding of the Genesis 1 & 2 is flawed and not supported by the Scriptures.

Now, do you want to discuss it further?

Click to expand...

Yes, anyone can post here calling themselves a Christian. The rule, however, is that we are not allowed to question it. Period. But you didn't answer my question. Exactly what was the nature of the mistake? Were you thinking you were in another forum? Did you not know you were not allowed to question another's Christian faith?

And as for discussion, let's just start with those six statements you made. Do you think any of them apply to the TE's on this forum? If so, why?

MOD HAT ON
Actually, let me step in for a moment here.
This particular line of discussion is OVER.
2Pillars, I don't think I can explain any further. For you to say: those ETBs that are wearing a mask of Christianity IS questioning their faith--period. To make the assumption that someone else is only wearing a mask IS to make judgment on their salvation--period--that is NOT allowed on this board.
Again, this line of discussion is OVER.
Vance--do not push it any further.
I have tried very hard not to issue warnings, but I'm close to the end of that patience.
Let's get back on topic--What is the topic? You will find it in the name of the thread.

I am closing this forum for a short while to make sure everyone has seen this post before we move on--I shall open it again soon
MOD HAT OFF

temporarily closed for a cooling off period--let's regroup

now, don't we all feel better?

Sure, just askin' a simple question. :0)

Really, though, I am just not sure where he is coming from, whether he attributes any of those qualities to TE's. Anyway, it would seem to me that those questions would have to be addressed before any real discussion could take place because any Christian who believed those things about another Christian would not accept anything they say, anyway.

I understand, but in asking him, you're asking him to break the rules, right?

Oh, no, I am not asking him about that last bit, where talked about Christians not really being Christians. I am talking about the six points he made that I listed.

These:

1. we have a faith, or religious belief in mortal man's science.
2. we attempt to show how it happened without God having anything to do with it.
3. we profess ourselves to be wiser than God
4. we dismiss His Holy Word
5. we say that Scripture is "nothing more" than allegory, story or myth.
6. we believe God lied to us

You have answered them, but I was wondering whether we had it wrong and he was not addressing theistic evolutionists with these points at all. If he was, then no point in discussing anything. If not, then great.

If he can find a way to answer those without crossing the line, then sure, but I'm not sure it's possible

Vance said:

Oh, no, I am not asking him about that last bit, where talked about Christians not really being Christians. I am talking about the six points he made that I listed.

These:

1. we have a faith, or religious belief in mortal man's science.
2. we attempt to show how it happened without God having anything to do with it.
3. we profess ourselves to be wiser than God
4. we dismiss His Holy Word
5. we say that Scripture is "nothing more" than allegory, story or myth.
6. we believe God lied to us

You have answered them, but I was wondering whether we had it wrong and he was not addressing theistic evolutionists with these points at all. If he was, then no point in discussing anything. If not, then great.

Click to expand...

I in no way wish to assume I know whom 2pillars was refering to, But I have seen with my own eyes someone who was argueing on here as a TE, and yet in his profile his orgin belief stated Atheistic evolution. As herev once said before if someone proclaims to be an atheist and I say hey that guy is an atheist I have not judged he has said and yet he was here in this very forum(christians only) standing side by side with TE's argueing against YEC'ism I belive I could call this person one of those ETB's could I not? I belive we should watch for such things TE's and YEC's alike, lest we be as Vance once put it "strange bedfellows".

God Bless

1denomination said:

I in no way wish to assume I know whom 2pillars was refering to, But I have seen with my own eyes someone who was argueing on here as a TE, and yet in his profile his orgin belief stated Atheistic evolution. As herev once said before if someone proclaims to be an atheist and I say hey that guy is an atheist I have not judged he has said and yet he was here in this very forum(christians only) standing side by side with TE's argueing against YEC'ism I belive I could call this person one of those ETB's could I not? I belive we should watch for such things TE's and YEC's alike, lest we be as Vance once put it "strange bedfellows".

God Bless

Click to expand...

1) What does "on here" mean? In the Christians-only forum?
2) If so, there's a good reason: the terms theistic and atheistic can be interpreted as "evolution using God" and "evolution without God involved", or it could distinguish "evolution, held by a theist" and "evolution, held by an atheist." It's ambiguous. What probably happened is that you witnessed a Christian evolutionist (a TE in that sense) who is not a technical TE (believes God did not have to influence evolution's path).

GodAtWorkToday said:

I see a lot of this guys work revered by many Christians who promote evolution as consistent with the Bible. However, he is but one scholar who may be right, but equally may be wrong. Just because he expressed the opinions that he did, does not make it so.

Click to expand...

And....It does not make it not so. What's your point? That you have no means to discern what is truth? Then why believe even what you do?

And, it is not a "guy's" opinion as you stated. There are a list of scholars who saw this perplexing aspect to be found in Scripture long before the evolution controversy. That in itself (since they had no bias) should tell someone something about what is written, and should take note.

http://www.ucg.org/booklets/BT/versesofgenesis.htm

And, you speak like I am promoting evolution? I am not. I am saying that the Scriptures reveal multiple creations [which explains perfectly why we see ages in the fossil records, yet no definitive "missing links."]

The Bible even says that this present creation will be done away with and replaced with a new Heaven and New Earth! No evolution! Lions will eat straw with lambs! Children will be able to put their hands in a viper's nest and not be harmed! God will once again create a new creation to replace an older one!

Isaiah 65:17niv
"Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind."

God's Word reveals that it is God's modus operandi to replace one creation that has served its purpose, with a new one. Its not evolution! Its multiple creations!

Evolution is secular reasoning attempting to figure out the fossil data. Young Earth Creationism is sentimental traditionalism attempting to recapture the nostlagic feelings of a time when traditions were not questioned during the age of the "old time religion." Both sides are wrong. Each sees the flaws in the logic of their opponent, but they fail to see their own. This keeps both sides in a perpetual unresolved conflict that has no answer from either side. Both are determined to win, but both are losing an unwinnable battle as long as they remain dug in to their party line.

Jewish scholars who lived long before the evolution controversy saw in the Hebrew texts what I have been telling you.

"Gen. 1. 1 and 1. 2 was already to be found in the Midrash. In his great work, The Legends of the Jews, Louis Ginsberg has put into continuous narrative a precis of their legends, as far as possible in the original phrases and terms. In Volume 1 which covers the period from the Creation to Jacob, he has this excerpt on Genesis 1:4

genez said:

Jewish scholars who lived long before the evolution controversy saw in the Hebrew texts what I have been telling you.

Click to expand...

Would these be the same "scholars" who denied Christ, who interpret the "sufferring servant" as the nation of Israel instead of Christ and who are yet awaiting the arrival of the Messiah?

versastyle said:

God says Adam would die the day he ate of the fruit.

[font=verdana,arial,helvetica]Ge 2:17[/font][font=verdana,arial,helvetica]But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.[/font]

Adam did not die that day. He lived many years after that.

Let me ask a question. If Adam DID die that day, would any of you YEC's say that the scripture did not mean a physical death, but really meant only a "spiritual" one which you consistently assert today?

So it is obvious that this "death by eating of the tree of knowledge" is easily interpretted to mean many different things.

Click to expand...

The word ''day'' there can mean any amount of time unless it is further defined by a number or a phrase such as ''an evening and a morning''.

God meant a physical death.
He just didnt mean a literal day there as in Genesis one.

Adam was separated from God.
He was cast out of the garden and direct communion with God.
He would also return to the dust where he came from.

California Tim said:

Would these be the same "scholars" who denied Christ, who interpret the "sufferring servant" as the nation of Israel instead of Christ and who are yet awaiting the arrival of the Messiah?

Click to expand...

You are comparing the wrong group! If things were written before Jesus was on earth, many Jews were born again! If the oral traditions were passed down from these scholars, who are you to say what you did? Moses did not know the name Jesus Christ. You read his words. David did not know the name Jesus Christ, yet we quote him all the time. These men were born again. God was working through them. Many Jews before Christ walked the earth were born again. If they were not, why do you read the Old Testament? The Mishna's origins is pre-Christ.

Grace and peace.... GeneZ