- Mar 5, 2004
- 17,332
- 6,439
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Try actually reading the order in the accounts themselves. The order differs.
Upvote
0
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.
Try actually reading the order in the accounts themselves. The order differs.Please explain what this means.
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
How could something give an account of creation beginning with, "Everything was done?"
You aren't the only one to make this claim. Many do. All are wrong.
"A great many people, including Bible-professing Christians, will insist that Genesis 1 and 2 reflect different creation accounts. Some will say that because the chapters contradict each other the Bible is not infallible. Others will say that the differences allow for a race of pre-humans to exist before the arrival of Adam and Eve. Neither is justified by the text. When the Bible gives an account, the literal translation is always the one we should assume first. Genesis 1:1-2:3 give a summary of creation while Genesis 2:4-25 give details regarding the creation of Adam and Eve." source
It is always important to pay attention to details of any Scripture, especially the creation account in Genesis 1 and 2. These are not two contradictory accounts of creation. Genesis 1 covers the six days of creation. God pronounced it good at the completion of the sixth day. Genesis 2, from verse 4 onward, is a looking into the details of the events of Day 6, the origin of the human race. These accounts are not contradictory. Genesis (Hebrew Beresheeth-means in the beginning, titled by the first words) has a specific structure throughout its record, especially when it comes to the flood, the genealogies and the forming of nations, giving geography and the generations of families from Adam through the flood (the taldot- generations) are specific in detail.
Genesis 1 focuses on God calling the universe into existence ex nihilo, “out of nothing.” And the preceding days where he arranges the universe and the earth for habitation.
Genesis two gives us the details missing from Genesis 1. source
If you are ever arrested and put on trial I expect that you will want your lawyer to ask "where's the evidence."They usually pick out a random word and ask you to define it too. Oh, and the other two..."wheres the evidence" and "are there any peer reviewed papers"
I don't belive that Jesus ever told anyone to kill the men, women and children who were the refugees of war, allowing the killers to keep the female virgin children for themselves. Those atrocities were committed by men and ascribed to God. Much of the OT was written by the kind of people who killed Jesus.I love it when people believe that Christ was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, preached for three years, turned water to wine, walked on water, healed the deaf, dumb and blind, healed crippled people, lepers, one woman as she just touched Him.
Then He was beaten, flogged, crucified, a spear thrust through His heart, caused darkness over the earth during daytime, caused an earth quake, caused recently dead people to come back to life.
Died, three days later came back to life, talked to His friends, talked to hundreds of people. Walked through walls, ate food.
Then, at the end, rose up into the sky and disappeared behind a cloud in front of several of His friends.
They believe all of this. All of this supernatural, unproveable, untestable, unrepeatable and, to some, unbelievable events.....
BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO IF THEY WANT TO BELIEVE IN THEIR SALVATION.
All the rest of equal, or lesser supernatural events.... they kick to the side. They say "that doesn't need to be true for me to be saved"
What hypocrites.
They only believe what they think will save them.
Well, let me tell you... the entire 66 books are as true as the gospel. Those of you that sift through the words of God and put in your pocket the things yo believe are for your benefit and burn the rest.... you need to take a good look at what your burning.
Evolution came from God, it was his technique of creation. It's in the fossil record which doesn't look anything like the creation story that the Hebrews created.Why not start with where "life" came from. Any self respecting explanation of the events that caused all the animals, fish, birds and mankind to end up on this earth..........MUST tell me where "life" came from.
I know, I know, evolution doesn't deal with where life came from.
Well, for that reason... it is dead in the water... pun intended.
Mods, if this isn't in the right section please move, I wasn't sure where the best place for this discussion would be, as this has more to do with the entire book and not only creation.
Genesis is the history of Israel's roots...most believe Moses to be the author of the book, and if we go by the chronology from Genesis to Exodus, he wouldn't have been born until a couple thousand years after the account of Adam. Prior to this, these stories would have been handed down through oral tradition.
When stories are told from one generation to the next things change. Some things may be added, others taken away...things become embellished...that's just how it is. It doesn't mean that anyone is lying, necessarily, just that what we hear as a child and what we teach to our children about a subject may change slightly based on our recollection. And then there are those that like to add their own spin to make things more interesting, and it sticks...
A good, more modern example of this would be the story of Jesse James...many accounts made him out to be a Robin Hood of his day, only stealing from the rich and helping the poor...after the Civil War there was a lot of distrust in this country, and people wanted a hero they found him in this notorious outlaw...the truth of the matter was he was your typical run of the mill thief...albeit a very good one...but stories were made up about him in newspapers, books and songs...and now, 140 years later, there are those that think he was, as the "The Ballad of Jesse James" said, "a friend to the poor that would never have a brother suffer pain." In this instance, of course, we can look back at actual accounts from the day and easily put these claims to rest.
So, is it possible that this is what happened with Genesis? That after years of oral tradition some of the "facts" changed? I'm not saying this as a dig at creationism, or anything like that. Nor am I saying that there is no truth to be found in Genesis...I believe it paints a beautiful picture of creation, of God's desire to have a relationship with His people, of man's biggest obstacle to overcome being his sinful nature, and how the foundation was being laid for the Christ.
You know this how?We come to the conclusion that the way Genesis is written, that it falls under the factual recount catogory of a factual text type.
You know this how?
As to the rest of your rant, no one here is defending Spong or his views, or even cares very much about it. I doubt that there are any parties to this discussion who fit your stereotype of a "liberal Christian."
As I said, I don't believe anyone here supports Spong. I certainly don't; I left the Episcopal Church over liberal ideas a lot less whacky than his.So do you support Spong, who is one of the leading advocate of Liberal Theology?
Simple question deserves a simple reply, that's all?
But that is the truth of the matter. Evolution is NOT science.Oh please. To say that evolution is not science is dishonest at worst, ignorant at least.
off topic. This thread is about interpreting Genesis, not evolution.But that is the truth of the matter. Evolution is NOT science.
It is at best speculation. Wishful thinking. Groping for alternatives to the obvious truth of the creation.
The theory of evolution has always been dependent on a deliberate falsifying of the fossil evidence, hiding evidence
detrimental to faith in evolution, posturing highly improbable theories as to how wonderful biological engineering
designs came about.
Worse is the fascism and totalitarian thought control by academia attacking and purging all other opinions that
choose real evidence to indicate the truth of intelligent design and engineering specific to complex biological
structures and functions.
200 years after Darwin and not one evolutionist can take me to a museum of natural history and show me many real
evidence for transition from one previous life form to another. There is no real evidence to show how birds built nests,
nor how caterpillars became butterflies, or how kidneys evolved, or the digestive tract, etc, etc, etc...
Evolution still remains artists illustrations in books. Books which are constantly rewritten as new evidence trashes previous
theories and agreed faith. But the Bible [original scriptures in original languages] has not changed nor needed to be
rewritten since its author [Jesus] inspired them to be written. Truth stands eternal.
As I said, I don't believe anyone here supports Spong. I certainly don't; I left the Episcopal Church over liberal ideas a lot less whacky than his.
Thank you, but I am satisfied with my relationship with Christ as it is.I sincerely have empathy for you, with no disrespect I see a well intentioned person who has rolled with the whacky liberal swine.
I know if I was in your position I would be scarred for life spiritually speaking. That is why I implore you to support a text type for what it is from a literacy point of view, without having to contend over doctrine.
Just believe it on faith value, that is what the Christian Fath is all about. You don't need to know the details as to the whys and hows, but establishing a one to one relationship with Jesus Christ is all it matters, as an obedient prisoner of Christ.
Just follow Jesus and his instructions documented in scripture.
Really!!! You should spend more time with real Christians.No one takes the bible 100% literally all the time.
What I see from the answers posted in this thread is that it is YECs who keep bringing up evolution as if it was the only reason for rejecting YEC bibliolatry. For my part, if the theory of evolution was overturned tomorrow, I would not change my view of Genesis on account of it.Do you know what I find is interesting? What I can see from the answers posted in this thread? That belief in evolution then requires you to have to explain why Jesus said things that did not fit, which means you have to explain how He could lie or be mistaken, which takes you right to where you deny Jesus's divinity. It is a clear example how one error leads to a more serious one, until you end up at a place that is not even Christian at all.
My point was - that I disagree - that my belief is that my teachings (if I chose to teach) would be consistent with known scientific truths, and the paradigms of the bible. You see its my belief to ignore scientific evidence is flagrantly false teaching. There is a place for both science and Christianity...but if I were to ignore science when Im using it in so many practical ways; well that would make me appear before others ignorant and hypocritical.However, when you teach others the things you believe which are contrary to the Scriptures you become a false teacher.
For my part, if the theory of evolution was overturned tomorrow, I would not change my view of Genesis
Nonsense! Virtually all qualified experts will disagree with you. I challenge you to find one person teaching at an accredited, real university who will agree with you.But that is the truth of the matter. Evolution is NOT science.
I am virtually certain your arguments are invalid. How do I know this since I, like you no doubt, am not an expert?Mutations do not increase information, as required by evolution......
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?