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.
For an alternative Christian viewpoint, this book has been well recommended:
Understanding Scientific Theories of Origins - Cosmology, Geology & Biology in Christian PerspectiveIt's written by Christians for Christians by five authors on the faculty of Wheaton College. All authors have PhD qualifications in their respective fields.
OB
Quite clear that it is mere story telling, yes.Yes...it does. Have you never read Genesis? It is quite clear.
And you're reading it as historical-positivist narrative, an historiographical genre that wasn't even attempted by humans until a couple hundred years ago.You don't need a PhD to understand Genesis, since it was originally written to an audience that likely had an education less than that of an 8th grader. You must consider the historical context of the inspired work, it wasn't solely written for the Information Era that we currently live in today. It was written in the common speech and understanding of those who lived 3,500 years ago. It says the world was created in six days, they would not have understood it in any other way. It says Adam was formed from the dust of the earth, they had no concept of human evolution to connect this with. You are reading the text through your modern lens, that's the problem.
And you're reading it as historical-positivist narrative, an historiographical genre that wasn't even attempted by humans until a couple hundred years ago.
He quotes Genesis as authoritative. In most cases, as I remember, He makes it clear that He is referencing the texts themselves, not the events underlying them. What He thought of the historicity of those texts is nowhere recorded.How does Jesus quote the Old Testament? As historical, unless you can prove it wrong?
"What is "advanced teaching?"
Millions of Christians around the world who believe in creation, instead of evolution & the numbers are growing. Polling data to support that?
Then you must be an expert - weird, I've not seen you providing pro-creation evidence on this forum. Must have missed it.
Well, sure - to admit otherwise is seen as a failure via indoctrination.
Or, you could just read some of the threads here. Other than analogies, bible verses, out of context quotes, diversions, etc., I really think the OP is onto something.
He quotes Genesis as authoritative. In most cases, as I remember, He makes it clear that He is referencing the texts themselves, not the events underlying them. What He thought of the historicity of those texts is nowhere recorded.
No, Jonaitis, your doctrine is only for you, but it does not rule out evolution: that is quite clear in Genesis, which is not a literal but rather symbolic narrative of First Man and First Woman in the Creation.Yes...it does. Have you never read Genesis? It is quite clear.
No, Jonaitis, that is your assertion, so you have to support it before anyone can prove it wrong.How does Jesus quote the Old Testament? As historical, unless you can prove it wrong?
You don't need a PhD to understand Genesis, since it was originally written to an audience that likely had an education less than that of an 8th grader. You must consider the historical context of the inspired work, it wasn't solely written for the Information Era that we currently live in today. It was written in the common speech and understanding of those who lived 3,500 years ago. It says the world was created in six days, they would not have understood it in any other way. It says Adam was formed from the dust of the earth, they had no concept of human evolution to connect this with. You are reading the text through your modern lens, that's the problem.
Arguing that Genesis is written in simple language is not an argument that it should be taken literally.
I've given you two separate authoritative references (BioLogos and the book - Understanding Scientific Theories of Origins) Both references are written by and for Christians and support the concept of evolution.
I get the impression that you are unwilling to even consider the possibility that there is a valid, alternative Christian opinion.
OB
< shrugs > Take it if God Reveals it to you. If not, then there's nothing to take/ understand.Arguing that Genesis is written in simple language is not an argument that it should be taken literally.
I've given you two separate authoritative references xxxxxxxxx yyyyyyyyyyyy Both references are written by and for Christians and support the concept of evolution.
I get the impression that you are unwilling to even consider the possibility that there is a valid, alternative Christian opinion.
OB
Jesus spoke the Father's Word as the Father's Word, TRUTH.How does Jesus quote the Old Testament? As historical, unless you can prove it wrong?
Not.Yet figurative interpretations of Genesis are as old as the book itself....
Not.LOL! So easily you dismiss the writings of the Fathers, and even Midrash.
Oh, yes, indeed.Not.
In man's mind, like falsees, yes indeed.Speedwell said: Yet figurative interpretations of Genesis are as old as the book itself...
Oh, yes, indeed.
In reality, indeed yes.In man's mind, like falsees, yes indeed.
Not in reality. Thankfully.
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?