• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Was Adam the FIRST Food Producer??? GENERATIONS ???

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by joshua 1 9, Dec 14, 2017.

  1. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,864
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    NO that is not what I said so I will explain it to you again. YOU opinion means nothing to me IF you are trying to fight against Science and rejecting what the Universities are teaching. I am going to take a stand for what is good & right & true. God represents life, health, healing and prosperity. If you reject that then your only alternative is the appositive of what is good, right, proper and true. That is your choice to make if you want to live a life of rebellion.
     
  2. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,864
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Good then take a stand for the truth and quit fighting against it.
     
  3. DogmaHunter

    DogmaHunter Code Monkey

    +8,431
    Atheist
    In Relationship
    The point is that all literature and mythology is valuable in at least a historical sense.
    And the same can be said about movies and other forms of art.

    I can look at Star Wars and reflect on the "moral of the story" and the social implications of the conceptual idea behind Darth Father being Luke Skywalker's father.

    But that is something entirely different from taking those stories and assuming their relation to reality is anything other then reflecting/communicating personal ideas on society, mankind, etc.

    Because what you are doing is entirely different. You do the equivalent of watching star wars and then insisting that The Force is real, or that the story is dramatized but that there really IS a galactice empire with an evil emperor. Etc.

    cfr: your insistence on taking the flood story at least partially literal.

    I have no problem with seeing the bible (or any other religious book) as important literature, as those books in a real way determined our socio-cultural background.

    But that doesn't mean what you want it to mean.
     
  4. DogmaHunter

    DogmaHunter Code Monkey

    +8,431
    Atheist
    In Relationship
    Euh.... actually that was EXACTLY what you said... you were replying to a quote that read "it doesn't matter what people believe, what matters is the evidence".

    I'm happy moving on assuming you meant differently and simply worded it badly. But don't say that it is not what you said, because it is exactly what you said.

    Then why do you constantly throw your beliefs out there, instead of actual evidence?

    Like here, for example. This is just what you believe.

    I don't believe a god exists, did you forget?
    I don't require alternatives for entities that I don't even consider real.
     
  5. DogmaHunter

    DogmaHunter Code Monkey

    +8,431
    Atheist
    In Relationship
    The truth is demonstrable. The things you declare here as "truth" concerning your religion, are just asserted as truth. They aren't demonstrated as truth.

    I can make an infinite amount of unsupported assertions.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  6. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,864
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Then why do you disregard the Bible when you admit to it's value as literature? My mom was of the opinion that we should read anything, as long was we were reading. I do not agree with that. I think that clearly some books are a better investment of my time compared to others. That is why they gave us reading lists in school. So we could invest our time in what they felt were the best books to read.
     
  7. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,864
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    I know what you think I said is not what I said. Nice try though but you have only built yourself another straw-man and failed to grasp the point of the conversation.
     
  8. DogmaHunter

    DogmaHunter Code Monkey

    +8,431
    Atheist
    In Relationship
    Do you even read what is being said?
    I disregard it in the religious sense.

    I value the bible as literature in the exact same way as I value Star Wars as movie art.
    I don't disregard Star Wars in the art sense, but I disregard it in the sense of it being fictional.

    I can find ethical and moral lessons in Star Wars.
    100 years from now, I think we'll say that Star Wars also had a lot of cultural/historical/sociological value.

    That's quite different from considering Jedi's and The Force to be actually real.....................

     
  9. DogmaHunter

    DogmaHunter Code Monkey

    +8,431
    Atheist
    In Relationship
    Did you not read the next sentence?

    Where I say I have no problem moving forward assuming you didn't mean it like that and/or simply worded it badly?

    If you did, you would have realised I'm not using a straw-man, as I acknowledged that you didn't mean it like you said. My objection was to you claiming you did NOT say it, because you did.... You might not have meant it like that, but you did say it like that.


    Reading comprehension, is not your strong side it seems.
     
  10. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,617
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    Just once, I'd like someone to recreate the big bang theory--then it would no longer be called a theory.
    Just once I'd like to have science create a living anything from absolutely nothing. Something as simple as an amoeba would do. No--the 2 sides will never be able to see eye to eye. It's not possible to recreate an amoeba from nothing and then have it evolve into an ant, an elephant and a whale. And it is not possible to convince anyone there is a God who could do all the above---He has to be experienced. It is a choice and I can not in any way believe that an ant and an elephant evolved out of the same primordial sludge----no matter how many millions of years went by. The universe they say is millions of years old----no life anywhere else they can see. Just this one lonely little speck with just the right distance from the sun, with a moon that has just the right affect on it,just the right atmosphere that also allows us to be the only planet from which space itself can be seen in the clarity we do. (Sorry, can't remember the NASA article I got that from). An explosion (of nothing) created the earth, the moon and the sun with the perfect atmosphere on this planet to support, then, nonexistent life and they all work together for just that perfect balance. It's positively amazing what a vacuum can do.
    Science can not reproduce how a leaf eating, caterpillar becomes a chrysalis and emergences totally and completely transformed into an entirely different creature that now only drinks nectar and now knows not only how to fly, but where to fly to in order to reproduce, and it does it in considerably less than several million years.
    It staggers the mind the complexity of a simple creature as an ant, and what it does, not to mention an elephant. Just the human eye alone is a marvel. And there is not one single organ of the human body where everything about it is known, not until the last few years was it even known that the heart contains neurons, even though we know enough to even transplant one. The brain itself is not fully known---I know it's clear as mud to you who have all the scientific answers to everything---to me it is incredibly silly to think all this came from nothing but time and an explosion. Not to mention the fact that when presented with Dolly Parton and a gorilla, science says they are the basically same thing. You laugh at us--we totally laugh at you---never will reconcile these 2 trains of thought.
     
  11. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +9,289
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Your mistake here is to suppose that this discussion, this board, is about theism vs. atheism. It's not. You assume that anyone who does not buy into your literal interpretation of Genesis must be an atheist. But many of us are theists who don't buy it, Christians who don't buy it, just like the majority of Christians worldwide.
     
  12. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,617
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    Yes, I know. You see, growing up, you either were atheist or Christian. Back then, there was no evolution believing Christians---I forget sometimes. But then, I still find an evolutionistic Christian a bit of a oxymoron. I am, nor ever will be, any ones judge and jury. I express only the thoughts of myself and those (and there are many!) who think as I do.
    Luk_18:8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?
     
  13. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +9,289
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Back when? Before Darwin? Of course not--no one had ever heard of evolution. Most people believed that the creation stories were true. But there was a difference. Most Christians thought the stories were true, but not "literal and inerrant" because literal inerrancy had not yet been invented. Most Christians thought the stories were true, but figurative interpretations were tolerated as not injurious to one's faith nor part of a satanic conspiracy to deny the existence of God. Do you begin to see the difference?
     
  14. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,617
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    I'm 67. And we did think they were literal and still do. You are of course entitled to your opinion. As I said---it will never be me you answer to.
     
  15. bhsmte

    bhsmte Newbie

    +11,554
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others
    The majority of Christians have gotten to the point, where they accept the theory of evolution because of the overwhelming evidence.

    I would get used to that and not let it ruin your day.
     
  16. mmksparbud

    mmksparbud Well-Known Member

    +4,617
    United States
    SDA
    Widowed
    US-Others
    Hardly anything ruins my day! I do not view this as a problem for me. I may not agree with this concept, but it's up to each of us to decide. I choose to view the bible as literal--except, of course where it obviously indicates prophetic or allegorical, parable. No flat earth for me.
     
  17. bhsmte

    bhsmte Newbie

    +11,554
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others
    That's cool.
     
Loading...