DailyBlessings
O Christianos Cryptos; Amor Vincit Omnia!
- Oct 21, 2004
- 17,775
- 983
- 39
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
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.
What may seem as contradictions usually aren't when interpreted in the right way.
AV1611VET said:What may seem as contradictions usually aren't when interpreted in the right way.
Seems to me you explained a perfect contradiction. I don't see how you've reconciled it at all.
What may seem as contradictions usually aren't when interpreted in the right way. At first, the Bible seems to be full of errors and contradictions; until you read it over, and the more you read it and study it, the more the contradictions fade away.
What did he lose? Should we help him look for whatever it was he lost? Far to often what gets lost is the truth when people exchange the truth for a lie.Yes, this means that you lost.
Yes, this means that you lost.
In my personal opinion, a lot of the times that contradictions are 'resolved', it seems to me this resolution is just extremely far-fetched. Which means the contradictions are just that, contradictions, and the resolutions are actually just far-fetched attempts to make the text say something it doesn't. But maybe you can convince me otherwise by resolving the contradiction you gave above?No --- Satan loses when we resolve "contradictions" in the Scriptures.
It's much easier to just call something a contradiction, than it is to do the research, isn't it?
"Contradictions" = lazy mens' interpretations.
What is the difference between a contradiction and a paradox?In my personal opinion, a lot of the times that contradictions are 'resolved', it seems to me this resolution is just extremely far-fetched.
No --- Satan loses when we resolve "contradictions" in the Scriptures.
It's much easier to just call something a contradiction, than it is to do the research, isn't it?
"Contradictions" = lazy mens' interpretations.
Euh, a paradox is an apparant contradiction, that's the difference.What is the difference between a contradiction and a paradox?
On the other hand, not every contradiction is a paradox. Sometimes contradictions are just that, contradictions.One thing is for sure, it is a sign of intelligence to be able to deal with paradoxes.
I'd say that every single contradiction can probably be 'resolved' or treated as a paradox if one really wants to. The question is whether this resolution of the contradiction is anywhere near likely or logical.So if you want to say the appearent contradictions can not be resolved then we will understand.
In my personal opinion, a lot of the times that contradictions are 'resolved', it seems to me this resolution is just extremely far-fetched. Which means the contradictions are just that, contradictions, and the resolutions are actually just far-fetched attempts to make the text say something it doesn't.
Tomk80 said:But maybe you can convince me otherwise by resolving the contradiction you gave above?
So what do you call it when God just does not show something to someone.Euh, a paradox is an apparant contradiction, that's the difference.
Your point being?So what do you call it when God just does not show something to someone.
Matthew 18:3
and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
What if you did indepent research and stuck to the old one?But then, you wouldn't know, would you? Not until you did independent research and came to another conclusion, could you make such a statement.
Fair enough.Maybe I'll just wait and let Daily Blessings answer it, since he's the one that gave the the DOH smiley.
If not, I'll be glad to, since that particular one appears to be a glaring contradiction, yet is one of the easiest to clear up.
What if you did indepent research and stuck to the old one?
Why would God not show his existence? What kind of cruel God are you describing here?A persons lack of understanding could just be that God is not showing them. As Christians we run into this all the time. God shows us things that He does not always snow to people who are perishing.
What may seem as contradictions usually aren't when interpreted in the right way. At first, the Bible seems to be full of errors and contradictions; until you read it over, and the more you read it and study it, the more the contradictions fade away.
That is correct --- there are passages that are literal and passages that are figurative.
See? You use the context. I agree. Thats what you are supposed to do. When I use the context of genesis, it tells me not to take it litarally. When YOU look at the context of genesis, it tells you the oppisite.Context --- context --- context --- I cannot stress enough letting the context decide how a passage is to be interpreted. You don't interpret the phone book figuratively, and you don't interpret Alice in Wonderland literally.
Yes, you can also rely on the opinion of others.Independent third parties, Bible dictionaries, Bible commentaries, Bible churches, and the like.
(emphasis mine)Because there's a real devil out there using divide-and-conquer tactics to ruin the New Testament church. Also, other denominations exist depending on what parts of Scripture they place their emphases.
That is why I asked you to describe the process. You call them checks and balances, thats fine. Describe them.As I said, there are checks and balances in place that make it hard to go astray.
Ok... you can beleive that, I dont have a problem. Just as long as you agree that natural selection exists.The earth used to be one tropical paradise before the Fall, thanks to the water canopy. After the Flood, natural selection took its toll.
Yes. They disobeyed God, and so, he created natural selection. Again, as long as you agree that natural selection exists.Yes and no. The organisms couldn't die, so long as Adam obeyed God. If he didn't obey God --- death would be the result.
In a sense? Either he did, or he didn't. The alternative is that he and the devil teamed up to create natural selection. Again, I don't REALLY care, as long as you agree that natural selection exists.In a sense, yes.
Ok.[bible]Isaiah 45:7[/bible]
And like I said, even though that verse is primarily talking about war, it can be applied to natural selection, in my opinion.
Ok. I should have been clearer. Thats basically what I meant. When I said 'faith', I was speaking to the set of rules and guidelines prescribed by your specific brand of religion.My faith can waiver, and even change. Therefore, I refrain from saying things like that, and prefer instead to say "...it is against the Bible".
This is disturbing to me. You ADMIT that you know nothing about evolution. (And consequently about bioligy and science in general.)I'm sure you don't --- but until this country starts endorsing censorship, I'll say what's on my mind, as long as I abide by the rules.
Are you saying that evolution is not against your faith? What exactly is the problem then?Wait until I claim it's against my faith, first.
Since micro and macro evolution is the same thing, if it exists for the one, it exists for the other. Simple logic.I said it exists on a microevolutionary level. It does not exist on a macroevolutionary level.
I rarely hear people who know what they are talking about use the words macro- and micro evolution. They only use it in response to people who DONT know what they are talking about using it.Then why the distinction? Why not just call it evolution, like they used to?
Thats another problem. Analogies are meant to help someone who does not understand visualise something complex. You take something unfamiliar to the person, and compare it to something familiar. Then this happens. What on earth are you going on about?That's right. And after the walk, a kilometer is still a kilometer, and I'm still a walker. I can even walk back, if I want; and if others walk faster than I do, I won't be victimized by 'natural selection'.
If God set up boudaries it would be impossible. Since it is NOT impossible, since it HAS BEEN OBSERVED God did not put up boundaries.Not if God set up boundaries. You'll eventually reach a dead-end before you macroevolve.
Do you agree that nothing happens without God deciding that it should happen? Speciation happens, so God MUST have wanted it to happen. Evolution HAPPENS so God must have wanted it to happen.He has decided, and put His decision in writing. Now the decision-making process is over, and it's time to abide by His decisions.
Why would God not show his existence? What kind of cruel God are you describing here?
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?