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.
The big deal is no death before sin.
If you could show no change in the fossil record over time, for example, you would disprove the ToE.
Human fossils aren't found alongside dinosaurs, so we conclude that they didn't live together.
That's easy to test. God told Adam that he would die the day he ate from the tree. Adam eats and lives on physically for many years. So the death God was talking about was a spiritual one, not a physical one.
If God tells the truth, physical death existed long before Adam.
There are several possibilities here:
- Adam began to die the day he ate the fruit. He lost his immortality. Bodily decay began.
One day is as 1,000 years to God. And 1,000 years is as one day. There are Old Testament and New Testament verses about this. A day on Earth is 24 hours, but a day in Heaven seems to be 1,000 years. Adam lived 930 years, and died before one day in Heaven had elapsed.
Adam's death was figurative, as you suggest.
Derek1111 said: ↑
If you could show no change in the fossil record over time, for example, you would disprove the ToE.
Sure. They are called "living fossils".
The big deal is no death before sin.
Or do you believe that for millions of years while evolution took place that there was no death?
The very reason that death is the last enemy to be placed under Christ's feet after the second coming, and will be done away with in the lake of fire is because death is an enemy that came in. It was a stranger, an interloper and enemy. God did not finish creating and look out at millions of years of bones and blood and rotting flesh and call it "very good", God didn't use death to achieve his goals. When God finished his creative work there was no death.
Death only came into being due to man's sin.
I've always thought that was one of the most important points. The time and mode of creation has never mattered as much as how theistic evolution rips out the foundation of the need to even have a Gospel...
that death is an evil and corrupt thing to be conquered, and was clearly not a dominating influence in God's original creation before the fall.
If such foundational and overarching dynamics are nothing but literary devices, it renders the whole bible as little more than the same... allegory and symbolism and works of literature and philosophy to be inspired by. Only real in the imagination.
The big deal is no death before sin.
Or do you believe that for millions of years while evolution took place that there was no death?
The very reason that death is the last enemy to be placed under Christ's feet after the second coming, and will be done away with in the lake of fire is because death is an enemy that came in. It was a stranger, an interloper and enemy. God did not finish creating and look out at millions of years of bones and blood and rotting flesh and call it "very good", God didn't use death to achieve his goals. When God finished his creative work there was no death.
Death only came into being due to man's sin.
finding that there was a meteor strike in the vicinity of the dead sea a few thousand years ago in not evidence of the destruction of SodomAnd most of them will also deny the Biblical accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Exodus. Even though those accounts are irrelevant to Evolution theory. These are professing Christians who really do not like the idea of God executing judgment upon the earth, and they find some kind of solace in a uniformitarian model of earth and human history.
Even with the overwhelming evidence of the destruction at Sodom that has been recently published, it's not going to make these Christians reevaluate their overarching philosophy of interpreting history (and actually entertain the possibility that the Old Testament could be true). Instead, they will just argue that the Biblical authors happened to witness a natural disaster and mythologized it as divine wrath from God.
Because it's not really about following the evidence, but instead maintaining a certain philosophy of uniformity of earth history. If God is not actually judging the earth, then us humans are in a lot more authority here to live the way we want to. That's why uniformitarianism is so attractive to professing Christians and Atheists alike.
what real data is there that doesn't support evolution?The data could be virtually anything and you would still be trying to force it into a model of an evolutionary, uniformitarian universe. That is the whole point of 'methodological naturalism' as an applied philosophy to science. You will keep arriving at the same essential conclusion because you cannot interpret reality any other way. "the evidence would be different".... and the conclusion would still be Evolution. Always Evolution. Only Evolution. The illusion is in force when you keep believing the data is leading you to that conclusion, when the conclusion was decided on beforehand.
The example I recall often is how the enlightenment philosophers of the 18th century were already enthralled by the idea of an evolutionary story of the universe and earth history before the advent of a 'scientific theory' for it. The constant pretending that it is all disinterested objective scientific research leading to more and more supposed confirmation of this naturalistic model of history is really nonsense.
and we will just ignore the fact that dinosaurs looked nothing like mythical dragonsSure. They are called "living fossils".
And you conclude wrong. There is an enormous amount of evidence worldwide for people seeing dinosaurs alive. Try taking a look around and reading history. Before Richard Owen renamed them "dinosaurs", they were called "dragons".
but if death didn't exist then Adam being warned about his death if he ate the fruit would be completely meaningless to him.There are several possibilities here:
- Adam began to die the day he ate the fruit. He lost his immortality. Bodily decay began.
- One day is as 1,000 years to God. And 1,000 years is as one day. There are Old Testament and New Testament verses about this. A day on Earth is 24 hours, but a day in Heaven seems to be 1,000 years. Adam lived 930 years, and died before one day in Heaven had elapsed.
- Adam's death was figurative, as you suggest.
Scripture.
No. The devil is just making you believe you have faith in scripture, when it's really just ignorance and refusal to accept things that contend to your interpretation or what you want scripture to be, hence you getting christianity laughed at and believed to be false.The devil laughs as Christians again and again prove to have no faith in scripture.
Revelation 18:4
Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “’Come out of her, my people,’ so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;
If someone came along and 'proved' that Jesus never existed and your faith disappeared then you didn't have faith to begin with, you had belief, belief that was contingent on factors around you. Faith and belief are two different things. If you believe in God only because of facts and proof then you don't truly have faith.
You are quoting from people who lived thousands of years ago, who had no knowledge or even intention of revealing scientific truths, and then saying "it's from God" to make you feel secure in your arguments.
You have a very bad understanding of what "faith" means. Why would you or anyone have faith in something that you know for fact isn't true, that makes no sense? That is like saying I have faith in Zeus, Vishnu, Thanos, or Batman even though I know they never existed.
Faith isn't continuously believing in something that is proven to be untrue, it's believing something to be true regardless of any lack of proof.
We believe God is fact because of what we see as evidence for him, whether it be academical to personal experience; we don't have proof but we can counter with compelling evidence to support our views on our theological beliefs.
It actually has been, you just don't want to acknowledge it has because of your religious bias. You also shouldn't be pointing fingers at what doesn't have proof, you know genesis does not have any proof and you made a post as to why its not biggie to have no evidence/proof for scripture.Except it hasn't been proven.
Running tests on base assumptions isn't proof when the base assumptions can't be proved.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
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?