Some questions for Christians who accept evolution

AV1611VET said:

Science should be teaching that obedience to godly parents is the key to longevity

Click to expand...

That is the main verse. There are five or six more verses on how to add years to your life. We are all given 70 or if for reason of strength 80. If you die early than satan robbed you.

AV1611VET said:

Today's science is antibiblical and has an agenda to sterilize as much of the Bible as it can before the Antichrist shows up.

Click to expand...

They are trying to sterilize as many people as they can also.

TLK Valentine said:

Except I was referring to the word "college."

Click to expand...

Jesus was a Great Teacher, not an institute.

joshua 1 9 said:

Jesus was a Great Teacher, not an institute.

Click to expand...

Indeed he was -- completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but indeed he was.

Now all we need are students who actually learned his lessons -- "Saved by grace" is the ultimate Gentleman's C.

joshua 1 9 said:

The Bible is a story of the Hebrew people (nation). The disciples were very surprised that the gentile (non Jewish) people could be saved. Jesus said He was sent to the lost sheep of Isreal.

The Bible makes it clear that God has preserved only 12,000 from each tribe. Only 144,000 are pure before God. Israel is the least of people and the smallest nation. So no man can boast because the Power is in God and to Him goes all honor and glory.

Click to expand...

The Bible is a collection of Books chosen by the Church in Rome to the exclusion of other books that were once important to believers. The same church made up of corrupt men with a long history of human imperfection, declared even its own councils to be inerrant.

As for the story of the Hebrew people, in the light of the loss of their national pride and the challenge to their faith in Abrahams faith, the Hebrew preist went to the other extreme in a well intentioned attempt to corral the faith of the scattered Israelites. They recast their entire history, transforming a secular history into a miraculous fiction. The Jews are not now nor have they ever been a miraculous people.

The 144,000 nonsence is still more of the same kind of conjecture and speculation on the part of some opochalytic writers who messed up Johns vision on Patmos which was further exploited by some christian sects.

Colter said:

The 144,000 nonsence is still more of the same kind of conjecture and speculation on the part of some opochalytic writers who messed up Johns vision on Patmos which was further exploited by some christian sects.

Click to expand...

Speaking of "messed up," are the following beliefs true or false?

1. Prayer is not to be attempted until one has exhausted the human capacity for human adjustment. In addition, words are irrelevant to prayer.
2. The biblical doctrine of atonement unnecessarily encumbered Christianity with teachings about blood and sacrifice.
3. The home is a sociological institution, and the belief that marriage is a sacred state is unfortunate. Deity is not a conjoining party in marriages that dissolve.
4. Mankind's parents were named Andon and Fonta, who procreated Sontad.
5. Adam, Solomon, and David were not in the direct line of ancestry of Joseph, the father of Jesus.
6. Jesus adopted the term "Son of Man" at age fifteen after reading a passage in the Book of Enoch.
7. During His twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth years on earth, Jesus toured the Roman world, accompanied by the natives from India.
8. The indwelling Christ is not essential to salvation, since Jesus does not require His disciples to believe in Him but rather to believe with Him.

Colter said:

The Bible is a collection of Books chosen by the Church in Rome Nicaea

Click to expand...

FTFY.

Armoured said:

FTFY.

Click to expand...

The Roman Catholic Church was based in Rome not Nicea, hense the designation "the church at Rome." The First council of Nicea was convened there which included bishops from all parts of the Holy See.

AV1611VET said:

Speaking of "messed up," are the following beliefs true or false?

1. Prayer is not to be attempted until one has exhausted the human capacity for human adjustment. In addition, words are irrelevant to prayer.
2. The biblical doctrine of atonement unnecessarily encumbered Christianity with teachings about blood and sacrifice.
3. The home is a sociological institution, and the belief that marriage is a sacred state is unfortunate. Deity is not a conjoining party in marriages that dissolve.
4. Mankind's parents were named Andon and Fonta, who procreated Sontad.
5. Adam, Solomon, and David were not in the direct line of ancestry of Joseph, the father of Jesus.
6. Jesus adopted the term "Son of Man" at age fifteen after reading a passage in the Book of Enoch.
7. During His twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth years on earth, Jesus toured the Roman world, accompanied by the natives from India.
8. The indwelling Christ is not essential to salvation, since Jesus does not require His disciples to believe in Him but rather to believe with Him.

Click to expand...

Yes, all true. Jesus preached and lived his gospel which he attempted to convey to the Jews. If the Jews would have adopted the original gospel, taken up their sacred calling, welcomed the answer to Abrahams blind faith, then today the Kingdom of Heven would be preached and based in Jerusalem in the Fathers Temple, a bright shining house of God on the hill. The original gospel of the kingdom would have gone out to the 4 corners of the earth.

But instead, the Jews 'tragically rejected their calling, rejected the simple gospel of salvation by faith and rejected the Son. Christianity became a religion about Jesus not the religion of Jesus. The gospel began to change emediatly after Jesus left, then came Paul with his opinions.

Papias said:

NBC - yep, all fair questions. Here are some answers from me - other Christians may have different ideas.

you wrote:


Minor quibble - "a straightforward reading of the biblical account....". I'd say "a literalistic reading of a clearly poetic passage....."

Anyway....




I make the same thing you do for all of these - we both see them as commandments to be followed.

Referencing a story doesn't mean that the story was literally true. Jesus referenced the story of the good Samaritan, which is obviously a parable that didn't have to have actually happened. Because everyone knew the 6 day story back then, it made sense to reference it - regardless of whether or not it literally happened. You do this too, in your own life. You might say "don't pull that fire alarm if there isn't a fire - remember the boy who cried wolf?". Or, just recently House speaker Boehner said "this bill can't pass - we can't put humpty dumpty back together again". In those cases, you don't think that the boy who cried wolf story actually happened, just as speaker Boehner wasn't saying that he thought humpty dumpty was real. As humans, we reference stories that make our points - just as Jesus did - and we know that everyone is smart enough not to think that we are claiming those stories to be literally true.




When people rebelled against God. That's what the story of the fall is about. After all, if we make it a story about magical fruit, we suggest that God is weaker than magical fruit, that God would punish someone over the effects of magical fruit, and we basically make Christianity look silly. The sin of rebellion led to suffering that we would not have if we didn't rebel against God.




The Genesis story itself shows that death came before the fall. God tells Eve (and Adam) that they'll die if they eat the fruit - and they know what he's talking about. If there was no death, how would they have any idea what "death" was? Plus, how could anything work? They couldn't eat - because doing so kills plants (even fruit are made up of living cells) - and nothing could live. Nothing works without death. Genesis never says that there was no death - that whole idea is an unscriptural idea of some human.

Adam - I do see a literal Adam, fully consistent with science, which you can find described in other posts I've made (use the search engine, my name, and "Adam, transitional"). Jesus' death was to atone for the original sin of rebellion against God. - As the scriptures say.





Again we have a passage here that shows that the Genesis account is not to be read literally. Literally, at the beginning of creation, God made light - not male and female, and obviously not humans. Male and female - and humans weren't made at the beginning of creation at all, but at the end (on the 6th day).

So here we have God incarnate telling us directly that Genesis is not be read literally. This is yet another of the many places where creationists ignore or change scripture to fit their man-made doctrine. Jesus is clearly talking about "at the beginning of humanity", and evolutionary science shows us that yes, hominids were male and female at the beginning of humanity, since sex evolved long before humans evolved.



The data does show how things are going now, if God doesn't intervene to change things. I don't know if God is planning to do so or not (in other words, how to exactly interpret the book of Revelation). Since we all agree that Revelation is heavily symbolic, I'm guessing that you also don't have an exact, certain interpretation (which would include exactly what/who is the antichrist, when they'll appear, what mark of the beast exactly is, when it will come to pass, etc.). So I have to say that God knows, while I don't.

I hope those helped -

In Christ-

Papias

Click to expand...

Perfect answer to the OP. Exactly right on, and as I've seen for nearly thirty five years. Excellent post brother

Winepress777 said:

Perfect answer to the OP. Exactly right on, and as I've seen for nearly thirty five years. Excellent post brother

Click to expand...

Genesis was written by the elite preist class for the child like mind of Bronze Age sheep hearders. It was meant to be literal, but obveously thinking people of today notice it has huge problems so some parabolic license is overlaid so one can maintain the appearance of Biblical faith while not beliving what it says. The parables of Jesus were obveously so.

In my theology:

When did sin come into God’s creation and how does that relate to death and suffering in the world?

Click to expand...

Sin is to know the will of God, to know what is right, yet choose to do otherwise. There is a potential for sin in every being other than God with free will choice. The Large sin which effected the local evolutionary world(s) had to do with a high administrator in the celestial world in the chain of command entrusted with our watch care. Lucifer rebelled against the rule of his Paradise Creator brother Michael aka Jesus. Lucifer lost faith in the unseen Father and attempted a system wide coup d'état. Satan was Lucifer's assistant, Caligastia was our resident "prince of this world" aka "the crafty beast".

If death came before sin then it wasn’t the penalty for sin. So, if there wasn’t a literal Adam who brought sin and death to God’s creation, then what was the purpose of Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross?

Click to expand...

Death came specifically to Adam and Eve, two immortal incarnate beings on a mission of redemption and world administration who were essentially outflanked by the "crafty beast" into default. Death is normal for evolutionary man unless he is first translated to the Mansion worlds. But even then the desolation of the mortal body in the spiritual flames is technically death of the mortal body. Enoch's material body was dissolved be his soul was translated.

Jesus spent his entire life on the cross of human experience as a contribution to mans inner spiritual life. Death is normal for man, Jesus experienced that to. But Jesus didn't define the cross other than to say it was proof of his authority,

In Mark 10:6, Jesus says this, "But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female.” So here we have God incarnate telling us directly that mankind was right there at the beginning of creation. How do you reconcile that with the evolutionary idea of billions of years?

Click to expand...

Out of context, this was in reply to the question of divorce, not a dissertation on YEC.

The evolutionists have various hypotheses for the ultimate fate of the universe. Which one do you accept as the most likely, or is the second coming of Jesus a part of the Bible that you still accept as being the truth?

Click to expand...

Jesus will return but only for a visit, his headquarters are on another planet.

Winepress777 said:

Perfect answer to the OP. Exactly right on, and as I've seen for nearly thirty five years. Excellent post brother

Click to expand...

Thanks!

AV wrote:

Speaking of "messed up," are the following beliefs true or false?

Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for concisely showing that some of colter's beliefs are not supported.

Colter, you've also mentioned a lot of things that are correct, and in any case, a lot of it is off topic.

Blessings-

Papias

Papias said:

Thanks!

AV wrote:



Wow, thanks for concisely showing that some of colter's beliefs are not supported.

Colter, you've also mentioned a lot of things that are correct, and in any case, a lot of it is off topic.

Blessings-

Papias

Click to expand...

My beliefs are supported by the authoritative teachings of the Urantia revelation which is where my theology comes from.

Colter said:

My beliefs are supported by the authoritative teachings of the Urantia revelation which is where my theology comes from.

Click to expand...

[VERSE=Galatians 1:8,KJV]But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.[/VERSE]

Colter said:

My beliefs are supported by the authoritative teachings of the Urantia revelation which is where my theology comes from.

Click to expand...

From what I've read, I don't think your source makes any claims to be authoritative.

AV1611VET said:

[VERSE=Galatians 1:8,KJV]But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.[/VERSE]

Click to expand...

* Pauls gospel was a variation of the original gospel of Jesus to begin with.

* Galations was Pauls response to churches that he had founded who were themselves moving away from his teaching towards the Mosaic Law.

* Your attitude would also deny Jesus if he tried to teach any additional truth to stubborn Christians.

Not_By_Chance said:

I have some questions for Christians who have accepted the theory of evolution as being the truth, rather than a straightforward reading of the biblical account of creation...

• If the Genesis account of creation isn’t true, what do you make of the following part of the ten commandments?

Exo 20:8 "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.
Exo 20:9 Six days you shall labour and do all your work,
Exo 20:10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns.
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

• When did sin come into God’s creation and how does that relate to death and suffering in the world?
  
  
• If death came before sin then it wasn’t the penalty for sin. So, if there wasn’t a literal Adam who brought sin and death to God’s creation, then what was the purpose of Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross?
  
  
• In Mark 10:6, Jesus says this, "But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female.” So here we have God incarnate telling us directly that mankind was right there at the beginning of creation. How do you reconcile that with the evolutionary idea of billions of years?
  
  
• The evolutionists have various hypotheses for the ultimate fate of the universe. Which one do you accept as the most likely, or is the second coming of Jesus a part of the Bible that you still accept as being the truth?

Click to expand...

Because there have been 6 creation events and 5 destruction's.

So you want me to believe that there "was a morning and an evening, the first day" - even if supposedly the sun and stars were not created till the fourth day? Misinterpret the original Hebrew to fit a pre-conceived dogmatic belief?

The earth was already flourishing with life prior to man. Life that has went extinct in several eras, after which all new forms of life arose. It's that gap game back again. Then the last catastrophe struck.

In the oldest manuscripts there is a mark of a pause between the first and second verse. It may be as science tells us, that this globe existed millions of years ago; that it has been the habitation of numerous and varied races of animated beings; and that it has undergone many great destructions and creations before it was brought into its present state: none of these views are in the least discordant with the statement of the inspired historian, that “in beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”

In twenty places in this chapter the verb “was” is used as the equivalent to “became”. The true meaning of the Hebrew word "hayah".

The Earth "became" desolate and waste, (tohu wa bohu - used nowhere else together in the Bible except this verse and two other places, and always when used elsewhere point to a once flourishing condition that was then laid waste - Gen 1:2; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23) and darkness overspread the Earth. At this time (man) did not exist prior, nor any of the current animals found with skeletons of modern man, except in a few rare cases as in one or two classes of reptiles and fish that survived this worldwide cataclysm, and the untold number before, told of before science had ever thought of such a thing as possible.

Comet, meteor? Who knows? It is quite accurate when interpreted properly. After unknown periods of time another act of creation occurred, this time with a notable exception, one worth bothering to describe in more detail, unlike any others that may have occurred previously. But then a new creation happened, the waters were separated from the waters (evaporation). "Let there be light...divided the light from the darkness". In Hebrew literally: " divided between the light and between darkness." Where all had previously been darkness due to the destruction, the addition of heat began separating the clouds. The events in the entire chapter are described as if one's viewpoint is from the earth.

It must be noted that the word 'ohr is not the same word used in verse 14 signifying "lights," or "luminaries," ma-'ohr; rather, it signifies "heat." the effect, which immediately followed is described in the name Day, which in Hebrew signifies "warmth."

So heat began penetrating into the depths after God acted, separating the clouds, letting light into the depths, the clouds had been so low as to contact the Earth itself. But heat allowed evaporation and the waters above were separated from the waters below and dry land appeared.

The next is just a twisted version by evolutionists. The creatures in the waters formed first, in Hebrew discourses this includes all microbial and plant life in the seas. Then reptiles and crawling things and finally birds of the air. Then mammals and man. This is where evolution theory got their idea of the order from, the Bible told them long ago. They knew the truth and so modeled their theory upon this same basis. But again, the lack of transitory species makes their interpretation of the events in the Bible suspect. If evolution is indeed correct, where are the transitory species today? Did it only occur in the past? Instead all we see is "Kind after Kind" and different "breeds" or "strains" or "species" within those Kinds. Lines which are "never" crossed. Lines which never become so different we can't recognize they are all of the same Kind. All Felidae are Felidae. All Canidae are Canidae. All Caprinae are Caprinae.

We know of no other thing, even down to the genetic level, which thanks to technological advancements, is showing that tree is nothing but individual distinct bushes, with sideways variation. I.e., different "breeds, or strains, or species, or subspecies, etc.", within that kind - or bush. Never once indicating a transitional form to another "kind". Even after billions of generations and billions of mutations, all E. coli are still E. coli, and always will be. All Felidae, no matter how many times we breed them or even mutate them in the lab, will always be Felidae.

Every past form of life sprang from nowhere, lived for a time, different breeds of that kind prospering, then went extinct due to cataclysmic actions. In its place all new life once again sprang up, to again repeat the cycle. The Bible just affirms this, when it told you of the earth becoming desolate and waste, and the darkness that became upon it, encompassing it around. Hence the dinosaurs died out. It then described the "sixth" such event, when man himself was created.

There have been 5 - count them, 5 major extinction events. Mankind and the animals with him were created "after" this 5th extinction event, the 6th creative act. Soon to be a sixth destruction and a seventh and final creation - in which new forms of life will be created as well - such as a lion that eats straw.

Colter said:

Death came specifically to Adam and Eve, two immortal incarnate beings on a mission of redemption and world administration who were essentially outflanked by the "crafty beast" into default.

Click to expand...

What exactly were Adam and Eve here to redeem, and didn't an all-knowing God know in advance they were going to fail so utterly?