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.
Ark Guy said:Well I don't know bushido...when the bible says Adam was created from the dust in Genesis, then again in 1CO 15:47...I have to say my interpretation is pretty accurate.
When I study works done by other New Testament individuals such as Barnabus I find that barny also believed that man was formed from the dust just as mentioned in Genesis.
See Barnabus 6:9
So tell me why my interpretation is wrong?
But He clearly stated what he was doing. It is CLEARLY recorded what he did. In your version of what happened, God created the appearance of dead stars for no particular reason.Ark Guy said:Whats wrong with light from a supernova?
..I predict the old....God deceived us if he created supernova light and no supernova.
Then again Jesus deceived us if he created wine...and used no grapes.
Then again bushidos last post clearly shows he filters his bible through mans fallible science.
Hey did I mention that the resurrection according to science was and still is impossible? Why don't you filter that story through your science? Hmmmmmmm
Ark Guy said:The problem is that lucaspa always seem to forget to use the bible in his debates.
We've told you several times. Are you going to listen this time?He changes the bible to conform to evolutionISM. I would love to know how lucaspa and the other Theo-Evos can tell just which verses to accept as truth and which one to accept as simple myths.
Nope. What you keep insisting on is the Bible, not God. We simply don't worship the Bible. We remember that God really did create. That what science studies is also God's Word. We also remember that a literal interpretation is also man-made and is fallible.If I quessed that they filter their bible through mans fallible science would I be right?
We've addressed both these points in other threads. You never discuss our points but simply repeat the same old refuted claims again here.Ark Guy said:Whats wrong with light from a supernova?
..I predict the old....God deceived us if he created supernova light and no supernova.
Then again Jesus deceived us if he created wine...and used no grapes.
You've mentioned it several times. And each time we've shown you that you have the wrong view of science and the Resurrection is not impossible at all. Again, you don't answer our responses, but simply keep repeating the same old false witness again and again. Let me use the Bible, Ark Guy. Isn't what you are doing against the 9th Commandment?Hey did I mention that the resurrection according to science was and still is impossible?
Bushido216 said:But He clearly stated what he was doing. It is CLEARLY recorded what he did. In your version of what happened, God created the appearance of dead stars for no particular reason.
If he created the dead star, then he fabricated the phenomena that shows us the act of the start dying. The star never died (which is what we see it do) but was dead all along. Is that your position?Ark Guy said:No, he actually created the dead star, or what would have been the dead star.
Who are you to claim he had no particular reason? Were you there during the creation? Do you know the mind of God?
No, you can't. You can say my ideas are wrong. But this simply says that I am insane. That is flaming. I reported the post.Ark Guy said:lucaspa, your off your rocker (moderators, can I say that?)
And I gave the reasons why I claim it ain't so. And the reasons and data that contradict your claims about the Bible.The bible claims something, then backs it up in other portions of the bible..and you claim it ain't so.
Ark Guy, who created? What did God create? Didn't God create the physical universe? What does science study? The physical universe! What you call "man's fallible science" is God's Book of Creation. Science reads it somewhat like we read the Bible.WHY? because you filter your bible through mans fallible science.
What "would have been" a dead star isn't one in reality, is it? It's an illusion.Ark Guy said:No, he actually created the dead star, or what would have been the dead star.
The Bible has a long history of men questioning God. It is permissible. David even argues with God and gets God to change His mind about killing all the cattle of the Amelekites.Who are you to claim he had no particular reason? Were you there during the creation? Do you know the mind of God?
Jonathan David said:Did He also create fossils that date back before 6000 years ago?
JD
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?