• 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.

Some questions for Christians who accept evolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Then why did you try to distract us with a meaningless web link? Why not just say this first?
I didn't regard it as a meaningless web link. Furthermore, it looks like a great web site overall, so I shall be spending some more time looking at their articles to see how they support the historical narratives in the early part of the Bible, especially Genesis where God was creating everything out of nothing.
 
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
[QUOTE="

And based on what we know today about the universe, it will suffer heath death and become a cold black place with ghost planets orbitting dead stars.[/QUOTE]
We don't know much at all, and God has made it clear that He will deal with the ultimate destiny of the universe in His own good time and certainly not in millions or billions of years time. There will be judgment for all who have rejected His Son, The Lord Jesus Christ.
John 12:48 "There is a judge for those who reject me and do not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day."
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I didn't regard it as a meaningless web link.

Obviously. But that doesn't mean it isn't one.

Furthermore, it looks like a great web site overall, so I shall be spending some more time looking at their articles to see how they support the historical narratives in the early part of the Bible, especially Genesis where God was creating everything out of nothing.

Adorable.

So, what's a "Kind" again?
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single

A straight and sensible answer? One that can be tested and potentially falsified?

Who are you, and what have you done with AV1611VET?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,122
52,646
Guam
✟5,148,190.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Having trouble recognizing them?

From you? having trouble believing it.

They're synonyms -- not an hypothesis.

No, you made a hypothesis, whether you realize it or not -- "When the Bible speaks of 'Kind,' it's a synonym for the modern-day 'genus.'"

We can test that.
 
Upvote 0

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
988
59
✟64,806.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
1. My Bible notes about the good Samaritan verse start, "The famous parable of the good Samaritan..." so it is a obviously a well-established opinion amongst scholars and you stated that you accept this view as well. ..........

1. Not the point. You said that "Jesus said it was a parable". I've asked you many times to provide the verse for that. Do you?

Of course it's a parable - we all agree on that. The point is that parables and symbolic speech are not always (not even usually) explicitly called that. So you, yourself, have used your own judgement to decided this is symbolic speech - just as so many other Christians have done with Genesis.

1. My Bible notes ......I saw the film ...One of the commentaries on my electronic Bible adds ...... As my local pastor said ..........

Even worse - you seem to again be relying on the words of men. The notes in Bibles were made and put there by people, just like you citing a film. I've repeatedly shown scholars agreeing that Genesis is poetic speech, and need not be taken literally.


2. "Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." It seems patently clear to me that there was no death (of creatures with "the breath of life") until after Adam and Eve sinned.

Paul is obviously talking about spiritual death, since Adam didn't die when he ate the fruit, and because (as has been pointed out to you by others) - animals can't sin. Sin required an awareness of right and wrong, which animals don't have. So if death is the wages of sin, then animals wouldn't earn those wages, and hence wouldn't die. But animals do die, showing that your human idea is wrong. Humans are offered the remedy to spiritual death - that remedy is spiritual life through Christ. Obviously, we are talking about spiritual life, because I know many Atheists, and last I checked, they weren't physically dead, only spiritually dead.

Also, God described His original creation as "very good." Do you consider a world full of death and disease to be very good? ..
.
We covered that several posts ago, remember?


....Moreover, a spiritual or moral death immediately ensued; he lost his original righteousness, in which he was created; the image of God in him was deformed; the powers and faculties of his soul were corrupted, and he became dead in sins and trespasses; the consequence of which, had it not been for the interposition of a surety and Saviour, who engaged to make satisfaction to law and justice, must have been eternal death, or an everlasting separation from God, to him and all his posterity; for the wages of sin is death" s.

Right. Spiritual death. So now you agree with me? Look, it even uses the same verse from Paul you used above. Do you see now that the verse from Paul "the wages of sin is death" is talking about spiritual death, using your own reference?


3. Adam obviously would have been a perfect human being. God had just created him. Why would he make him anything else but perfect. Sometimes it's not necessary to state the obvious.
.

Adam was clearly not perfect, because he was made susceptable to being led astray. Just because something seems true to you doesn't mean you can write it into scripture. The scripture doesn't say he was perfect - that's your human idea. After all, didn't God make Lucifer too? Is Satan perfect? Since you think Satan is a perfect deity, should we worship Satan? That seems to be the conclusion your suggestion leads to.


4. It wasn't the fruit that opened their eyes but God saw it as rebellion against His wishes, simply because they were doing the one thing that He had told them they could do.


Right. Which is exactly my point - that this isn't about some magical fruit, it's about rebellion against God. As such, there may or may not have been any actual fruit involved. You, by insisting on taking poetic language literally, have to insist that this is about magical fruit - since the literal reading doesn't say that their eyes were opened by anything other than the fruit (heck, in the literal story, God didn't even know about it yet). So again, do you still insist on interpreting the story literally, which requires magical fruit?

5. God told him so, "
Gen 2:17 "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will certainly die." It's not feasible that God would not have made sure that Adam knew exactly what He meant by that is it? If I had been Adam and God had said that to me and if I didn't already know what was meant by death, I would have said, "Lord, what do you mean, I will surely die? I don't understand." Adam knew God was giving him an important instruction and he would have made sure he knew what God was talking about.

The scripture doesn't include God explaining what death was. So if death didn't already exist, Adam could not have known about it. You are, again, adding to scripture. In fact, the story makes it clear that everyone involved already knowns full well what death is, before the fall (Adam, Eve, God, the serpent). Obviously, physical death was normal and understood.

6. How could there have been physical disease? Would you call a world in where such suffering was taking place, "Very good" as God did? I certainly wouldn't. As my local pastor said a couple of years ago, "This world is a dramatically-damaged place and it's fair to say that everyone in this room either has suffered, is suffering or will suffer - the only requirement is to live long enough" If there had been death before the fall, it would have been just as bad as now and also, if that were the case, what exactly was the effect of sin?

As your own source pointed out earlier, Paul answered "what exactly was the effect of sin?". The wages of sin are (spiritual) death.

7. I'm not aware that I have deleted any of Jesus's words, at least not wilfully. Why would I do that, I believe everything He said? You are the one who is trying to distort the meaning of His words: for instance, when He clearly told us that he made man from the beginning of His creation, "

Remember, you started with the quote from Mark:

Mar 10:6 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' post #1

Then I pointed out that this very verse shows that Jesus knows to interpret Genesis figuratively, since "male and female" humans were made at the end of creation, not the beginning. post #2

You then disagreed, citing the same verse from Mark above as "in the beginning God made them make and female", taking out the "of creation". post #4

I called you on that removal (post #5)- hence our discussion now. So now you agree that Jesus says "at the beginning of creation" - showing that Gensis is to be interpreted non-literally?


Jesus could not have made it any clearer that man was right there at the beginning,

Anti-scriptural. Genesis 1 shows humans made at the end of creation, not at the beginning of creation.


You are the one who is trying to change the meaning of Jesus's and hence God's words to mean something that He clearly didn't mean to say.

I'm the one recognizing the symbolic speech (just like Jesus's other symbolic speech), so we all can see what God clearly intended.

We never have been related to monkeys in any way, shape or form. Yes, we share some common design, but that's because there is a common designer, so some similarities in God's creation are to be expected.

Creationist propaganda, unsupported by scripture. In fact, scripture itself makes it clear that we are animals.

I have not deliberately changed any of scripture to fit man's own ideas, as a straightforward reading of the text would reveal.

Sure you did. I gave a long list of examples where you did exactly that in post #12.

I'm convinced that if you were to hand a copy of Genesis for instance to someone who had never read anything of the Bible and then subsequently asked them to summarise the first two chapters, there would be absolutely no mention of millions or billions of years (man's ideas).

Maybe, maybe not. More to the point - what about if you give someone the parable of the good samaritan, and ask them to summarize what happened? Does that prove that the Good Samaritan actually happened?


I haven't seen any evidence that creationists are serial liars. They seem to be very sincere and knowledgeable people to me.
Because you don't know that practically all experts have shown their statements to be false.

"your constant suggestion that symbolic or non-literal scripture is somehow of lesser value" you see, your doing it with me now - I never said or hinted anything of the kind. Quite the reverse is true in fact; you have decided that certain parts of the Bible are merely symbolic or myth,

There, in you just did it again. You referred to them as "merely symbolic". "Merely" is a derogatory term. It means, right there, that you consider them of lesser value. Case closed. Most of Jesus' teaching are done with symbolic language. It's not "merely" anything.

in Christ-

Papias
 
  • Like
Reactions: lasthero
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
1. Not the point. You said that "Jesus said it was a parable". I've asked you many times to provide the verse for that. Do you?

Of course it's a parable - we all agree on that. The point is that parables and symbolic speech are not always (not even usually) explicitly called that. So you, yourself, have used your own judgement to decided this is symbolic speech - just as so many other Christians have done with Genesis.



Even worse - you seem to again be relying on the words of men. The notes in Bibles were made and put there by people, just like you citing a film. I've repeatedly shown scholars agreeing that Genesis is poetic speech, and need not be taken literally.




Paul is obviously talking about spiritual death, since Adam didn't die when he ate the fruit, and because (as has been pointed out to you by others) - animals can't sin. Sin required an awareness of right and wrong, which animals don't have. So if death is the wages of sin, then animals wouldn't earn those wages, and hence wouldn't die. But animals do die, showing that your human idea is wrong. Humans are offered the remedy to spiritual death - that remedy is spiritual life through Christ. Obviously, we are talking about spiritual life, because I know many Atheists, and last I checked, they weren't physically dead, only spiritually dead.

We covered that several posts ago, remember?




Right. Spiritual death. So now you agree with me? Look, it even uses the same verse from Paul you used above. Do you see now that the verse from Paul "the wages of sin is death" is talking about spiritual death, using your own reference?




Adam was clearly not perfect, because he was made susceptable to being led astray. Just because something seems true to you doesn't mean you can write it into scripture. The scripture doesn't say he was perfect - that's your human idea. After all, didn't God make Lucifer too? Is Satan perfect? Since you think Satan is a perfect deity, should we worship Satan? That seems to be the conclusion your suggestion leads to.





Right. Which is exactly my point - that this isn't about some magical fruit, it's about rebellion against God. As such, there may or may not have been any actual fruit involved. You, by insisting on taking poetic language literally, have to insist that this is about magical fruit - since the literal reading doesn't say that their eyes were opened by anything other than the fruit (heck, in the literal story, God didn't even know about it yet). So again, do you still insist on interpreting the story literally, which requires magical fruit?



The scripture doesn't include God explaining what death was. So if death didn't already exist, Adam could not have known about it. You are, again, adding to scripture. In fact, the story makes it clear that everyone involved already knowns full well what death is, before the fall (Adam, Eve, God, the serpent). Obviously, physical death was normal and understood.



As your own source pointed out earlier, Paul answered "what exactly was the effect of sin?". The wages of sin are (spiritual) death.



Remember, you started with the quote from Mark:

Mar 10:6 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' post #1

Then I pointed out that this very verse shows that Jesus knows to interpret Genesis figuratively, since "male and female" humans were made at the end of creation, not the beginning. post #2

You then disagreed, citing the same verse from Mark above as "in the beginning God made them make and female", taking out the "of creation". post #4

I called you on that removal (post #5)- hence our discussion now. So now you agree that Jesus says "at the beginning of creation" - showing that Gensis is to be interpreted non-literally?




Anti-scriptural. Genesis 1 shows humans made at the end of creation, not at the beginning of creation.


You are the one who is trying to change the meaning of Jesus's and hence God's words to mean something that He clearly didn't mean to say.

I'm the one recognizing the symbolic speech (just like Jesus's other symbolic speech), so we all can see what God clearly intended.



Creationist propaganda, unsupported by scripture. In fact, scripture itself makes it clear that we are animals.



Sure you did. I gave a long list of examples where you did exactly that in post #12.



Maybe, maybe not. More to the point - what about if you give someone the parable of the good samaritan, and ask them to summarize what happened? Does that prove that the Good Samaritan actually happened?



Because you don't know that practically all experts have shown their statements to be false.



There, in you just did it again. You referred to them as "merely symbolic". "Merely" is a derogatory term. It means, right there, that you consider them of lesser value. Case closed. Most of Jesus' teaching are done with symbolic language. It's not "merely" anything.

in Christ-

Papias
We could go on like this ad infinitum and you still wouldn't accept what I say and I wouldn't accept what you are saying. It's clear to me that you are distorting the original meaning of the Biblical texts and my own words as well to try to fit in your evolutionary beliefs, for what reason I can't fathom. I would suggest that you get hold of a copy of Dr Henry Morris's excellent commentary of the book of Genesis and then come back here when you hear what he has to say and how your man-made interpretations of the Bible stack up against those of a real expert. You could obtain a copy here http://www.amazon.co.uk/Genesis-Rec...1435171957&sr=8-1&keywords=the+genesis+record or here http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Recor...1435172077&sr=8-1&keywords=the+genesis+record
(Note if you will, the proportion of positive reviews v. negative reviews).

Oh and just to pick you up on one point you made above (there are lots of others which I haven't got the time to go into), it's clear that you are getting perfect mixed up with free will. Adam would have been perfect, but and it's a big but, God would have given him free will to choose to obey Him or not (God didn't make a robot, which would have had to have obeyed His every commands), so your accusation falls flat, as do all the others that you have made. You really need to forget man's ideas, including the myth of evolution and re-read the scriptures to see what they really say.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Obviously. But that doesn't mean it isn't one.



Adorable.

So, what's a "Kind" again?
The Bible would indicate that it's a group of creatures or plants that are able to have similar offspring (in the case of non-plants it suggests fertile offspring, so that there can be continuing generations):-
Gen 1:20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky."
Gen 1:21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth."
Gen 1:23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
Gen 1:24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so.
 
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
What's that got to do with anything?
Well, it's an indication that people who have purchased the book, regard it as being a worthwhile purchase. Here's some samples from the reviews:-

"Highly Recommended! Henry Morris has done an excellent job
of researching and explaining the scripture in Genesis.
Many questions as to the meanings of Genesis are answered.
Those topics which are open for different possible interpretations (there are a few)
are noted as such but also, logical possibilities are offered
and explained. Recomended to Anyone studying the bible, especially those
interested in Genesis, the book of beginnings."

"An extremely well-written book being, as the cover says, both a scientific and devotional commentary on the 'Book of Beginnings. Whether the reader is a believer in six literal days of creation or believes in God but "evolution is the way He did it" the book is a useful tool, exploring every aspect of the narrative thoroughly. The latter often believe it doesn't really matter if the Genesis record is taken literally or not but this book will make you really consider that position afresh.
You don't have to accept all that the author says, of course, and the material is presented in such a way that you can turn to any of the 22 itemised chapters to study and contemplate any particular area you are studying.
Having read the reviews before purchasing I was a bit skeptical but the book proves to be an extremely good buy."

"This is an excellent commentary on the origins of all peoples. It was first written in 1973 and amongst the treasures Mr Morris deals with some aspects of technology and science that were in use for various reasons at that time and busts the myths of there use. Again it is an excellent work full of truth and detail and I would recommend this to anyone interested in gaining a deeper understanding (with the help of the Lord Jesus) of the book Genesis."

"have read countless books on creation/evolution an by far this is the best book i have ever read!!! i highly recomend it for armorment for witnessing to evolutional atheism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! excellent book!!!!!!!!!!!"

and from the US site...

"Please ignore all of those bad reviews!! I thought this book was marvelous and I soaked up every page, loving it all the way! I thinks it's the best book I've ever read!
It is a detailed commentary that is most excellent for illuminating bizarre and difficult passages in Genesis, doing it in a language that will not loose the average Joe. I particularly enjoyed the beginning chapters addressing creation, but also loved the journeys of the patriachs through to the beginnings of the nation of Israel.
I now have a special love for the book of Genesis, the book that the entire Bible is based on. I certainly now weight it's importance at the equivalence of any other book in the bible.
I find myself reaching for it often to witness to others and remind myself of answers to tough questions. I am now trying to read a commentary on Exodus, and miss the marvelous writing style of Henry! It just doesn't compare!! I'm attempting to get my hands on his other commentaries, particularly, the Revelation Record. God truly blessed Henry with wisdom and a grounded unshakable faith, not to mention a big brain!!
The Genesis Record is a must read for any Christian who likes to think deeply and who wants answers for many tough questions that come out of the Genesis story.
FYI, I believe that Jesus is God, is the Creator, and saves my soul through the work on the Cross! I believe that the triune God created the universe in 6 days.
The Genesis Record puts up a very good argument against Christian thinking that Genesis can include evolution theories and allegories. Now you can believe that every word and story actually happened and have the scientific logic to back it up! How on earth did all those animals fit on the ark?
Why not believe God at His word? If you can't believe every word in Genesis, then can you believe the rest of God's Word? Get to know the infinate wisdom found in the book of beginnings. You will be caught up in awe at the perfection of God's word, and will praise Him for His ominescent power.
To understand this book is to understand God's overall purpose in a deeper way. It is a good grounding to understand your salvation from the perspective of Genesis. Jesus and the disciples referenced Genesis many times!
Read the following quotes from the book's introduction:
"No other book of the Bible is quoted as copiously or referred to so frequently, in other books of the Bible, as is Genesis" - it is a foundational authority! "There are at least 165 passages in Genesis that are either directly quoted or clearly referred to in the New Testament. Many of these are alluded to more than once, so that there are at least two hundred quotations or allusions to Genesis in the New Testament." "It is significant that the portion of Genesis which has been the object of the greatest attacks of skepticism and unbelief, the first eleven chapters, is the portion which had the greatest influence on the New Testament. Yet there exist over one hundred quotations or direct references to Genesis 1-11 in the New Testament. Furthermore, every one of these eleven chapters is alluded to somewhere in the New Testament, and every one of the New Testament authors referes somewhere in his writings to Genesis 1-11. On at least six different occasions, Jesus Christ Himself quoted from or referred to something or someone in one of these chapters, including specific reference to each of the first seven chapters. Furthermore, in not one of these many instances where the Old or New Testament refers to Genesis is there the slightest evidence that the writers regarded the events or personages as mere myths or allegories. To the contrary, they viewed Genesis as absolutely historical, true and authoritative. It is quite impossible, therefore, for one to reject the historicity and divine authority of the Book of Genesis without undermining, and in effect, repudiating, the authority of the entire Bible."
Amen to that! This book will leave you with a faith that is deepend and strengthend, and you will want to praise your Creator! It did for me!! Surely, "scientific & devotional" sums up this book well. It has my rave review, 10 out of 10."

"
This book must be hitting home judging by the incredibly intemperate reviews by professing Christians. Clearly some people can't tell the difference between allegories and alligators.
As Morris points out, everywhere else in the Bible where Genesis 1 is quoted, including by Jesus Himself, it is quoted as straightforward history. The Hebrew of Genesis 1-11 it very clear, with the frequency of the vav consecutive and other features of the verbs pointing to historical narrative. Conversely, if it were Hebrew poetry there would be lots of parallelism, which there is not.
One must also wonder about professing Christians who, in effect, say Jesus was wrong when he said "Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35), quotes Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 to assert that people were made male and female "from the beginning of creation" (Matthew 19:3-6, Mark 10:4-6), and that the Flood and Ark were things that really "occurred" in the days of Noah (Luke 17:26-27).
It's also absurd to use indefinite time words to overrule the plain meaning of Genesis. After all, how old is old? I think anyone over 40 is old -- it's a relative term! The words used to describe mountains etc. as "old" are always in relation to a human lifetime. 3000 years really is OLD -- it's only the indoctrination of millions of years that has persuaded people to think of this huge stretch of time as "young".
And of course, the usual SDA canard is raised. FACT: the straightforward interpretation of Genesis was the main view of the Church Fathers and Reformers, not to mention the 19th Century Scriptural Geologists. Here are just two of many quotes:
1. Basil the Great, 4th century Church Father:
`"And there was evening and there was morning: one day." And the evening and the morning were one day. Why does Scripture say "one day the first day"? Before speaking to us of the second, the third, and the fourth days, would it not have been more natural to call that one the first which began the series? If it therefore says "one day", it is from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now ***twenty-four hours fill up the space of one day***-we mean of a day and of a night; and if, at the time of the solstices, they have not both an equal length, the time marked by Scripture does not the less circumscribe their duration. It is as though it said: ***twenty-four hours measure the space of a day***, or that, in reality a day is the time that the heavens starting from one point take to return there. Thus, every time that, in the revolution of the sun, evening and morning occupy the world, their periodical succession never exceeds the space of one day.'
2. Martin Luther, 15th-16th Century Father of the Reformation:
"We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago."
"He [Moses] calls 'a spade a spade,' i.e., he employs the terms 'day' and 'evening' without Allegory, just as we customarily do... we assert that Moses spoke in the literal sense, not allegorically or figuratively, i.e., that the world, with all its creatures, was created within six days, as the words read. If we do not comprehend the reason for this, let us remain pupils and leave the job of teacher to the Holy Spirit."
Martin Luther in Jaroslav Peliken, editor, "Luther's Works," Lectures on Genesis Chapters 1-5, Vol. 1 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1958), pp. 3, 6.
Finally, it is an outright falsehood to claim that Morris believes in the divine inspiration of the KJV, which indeed would be a belief in extrabiblical revelation. In The Genesis Record, he criticises the KJV in a few places, e.g. the "unfortunate" translation "replenesh the Earth" in Gen. 1:28, and in Genesis 1:20. Also, Morris is always tentative when discussing the "Gospel in the Stars" idea, with which I disagree also."

"This is one of the finest books I have ever read. When I finished, I finally felt that I had a great grasp on Genesis."
 
Upvote 0

lasthero

Newbie
Jul 30, 2013
11,421
5,795
✟236,977.00
Faith
Seeker
Well, it's an indication that people who have purchased the book, regard it as being a worthwhile purchase.

That just means people who bought it liked it. That tells us nothing about the actual quality of the book. People give bad books good reviews all the time.
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟173,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
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?

Just a general thought, don't you think it makes sense that during the end times(now), satan would want us focusing on how everything began, rather than how everything is going to end? I suggest you stop focusing on the beginning and start focusing on the end. God created this universe and only He knows exactly how he did it. He doesn't want us focusing on something that's already done, He wants us focusing on what He's currently trying to do and that is to show us that satan is still at work in this world and that we need to understand him so we can avoid falling for his tricks.

If you have a good understanding of the Bible then now is the time to figure out why Revelation still has so many people confused. Where does confusion come from? Evil. Let's listen to what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell us in these end times.

Revelation 2:29
"Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches"
 
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
That just means people who bought it liked it. That tells us nothing about the actual quality of the book. People give bad books good reviews all the time.
So basically, reviews are of no value to you at all. I wonder how you decide to buy anything if you dismiss everything others have to say. There's only one thing for it then isn't there - go buy the book and judge for yourself.
 
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Just a general thought, don't you think it makes sense that during the end times(now), satan would want us focusing on how everything began, rather than how everything is going to end? I suggest you stop focusing on the beginning and start focusing on the end. God created this universe and only He knows exactly how he did it. He doesn't want us focusing on something that's already done, He wants us focusing on what He's currently trying to do and that is to show us that satan is still at work in this world and that we need to understand him so we can avoid falling for his tricks.

If you have a good understanding of the Bible then now is the time to figure out why Revelation still has so many people confused. Where does confusion come from? Evil. Let's listen to what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell us in these end times.

Revelation 2:29
"Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches"
I think Satan is using several ways to attack God's word. He's sowing discord amongst the world's population in general and Christians in particular ("Did God really say...?"); he's responsible for monstrous crimes against humanity and as you say, he's probably trying to keep us distracted from keeping our eyes on the unfolding of the revelation (Revelation is one of the Bible's books that I keep promising to myself to read from beginning to end). I think the main point regarding beginnings is that if Satan can promote the idea that parts of the Bible are not what they seem or can't be trusted then we might as well throw out the rest. He must be laughing over the fact that we are arguing over what exactly the Bible is trying to tell us.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
The Bible would indicate that it's a group of creatures or plants that are able to have similar offspring (in the case of non-plants it suggests fertile offspring, so that there can be continuing generations):-

So does evolution.

Humans, chimps, and baboons are all able to have similar fertile primate offspring.

Humans, bears, and echidnas are all able to have similar fertile mammal offspring.

Humans, birds, and fish are all able to have similar fertile vertebrate offspring.
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟173,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I think Satan is using several ways to attack God's word. He's sowing discord amongst the world's population in general and Christians in particular ("Did God really say...?"); he's responsible for monstrous crimes against humanity and as you say, he's probably trying to keep us distracted from keeping our eyes on the unfolding of the revelation (Revelation is one of the Bible's books that I keep promising to myself to read from beginning to end). I think the main point regarding beginnings is that if Satan can promote the idea that parts of the Bible are not what they seem or can't be trusted then we might as well throw out the rest. He must be laughing over the fact that we are arguing over what exactly the Bible is trying to tell us.

Satans only weapon is deception. I'm constantly asking Jesus to protect my mind heart and soul from deception, this is all I can do to protect myself and find hope, faith and love that only comes from God. If the Holy Spirit lives in you, then your being lead to expose satan's lies and reveal God's Truth. The bible should be looked at as a whole. So if we decide to study genesis we should not just focus on genesis, but look at other scripture throughout that can support what genesis says. Scripture should always support scripture and only the Holy Spirit can discern what's true and what's satan trying to use the bible to lie to us. I'd like to start a thread on revelation based on what God has been pressing on my heart , God willing! Trust in Him, He's got it covered :)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.