Where do you draw the line?

[ShilohCity]

Shiloh, agree with ALL you are saying.

i never knew there were so many Christians who would pick and choose what they believe in the bible. either its all true and God's Word or it is all a lie. i dont understand what is so hard about believing the literal creation, flood, etc.??? Isnt our God big enough to make all that happen just the way His Word says it did?? if He is great enough to send His only Son to die on the cross for our sins, what is the big deal about a talking snake or a world wide flood?? Piece of cake for Him.

Thank You. I'm glad i'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

[notto]

Nobody is saying that the bible is a lie.

Non-literal does not equal lie.

Literal does not equate to truth.

 

[ThePhoenix]

Oh, so divine intervention didn't happen in the creation?????? are you nuts????
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

This looks like miraculous divine intervention too me. There was NOTHING, God spoke and created the universe. What's so hard, bushido?

Because if God spoke the universe into existance 6000 years ago he spoke lies. All the evidence, all the signs, everything we see points to an older universe. If God lied to us in his creation then he might lie to us in any creation. At that point what can we trust?

 

[Card42]

either its all true and God's Word or it is all a lie.

this is the exact same argument
that atheists use

 

[L'Anatra]

this is the exact same argument
that atheists use

Precisely.

And that's why it scares me.

 

[PaladinValer]

A myth is a story that tells of moral and religious truths. Just because the Creation accounts aren't factually true doesn't make them unimportant.

That's the problem with literalists and literalism; they limit God's ability to speak Truth to literalism when non-literalism embrace God's Truth through both literal and non-literal means.

 

[Mary_Magdalene]

this is the exact same argument
that atheists use

Yes.....and your point is???

If God's Word says something so black and white, why try to read things into it or be confused? Just take it for what it says and know God's Word is truth and He can and did all that He said He did and move on with your life.

 

[PaladinValer]

Yes.....and your point is???

If God's Word says something so black and white, why try to read things into it or be confused? Just take it for what it says and know God's Word is truth and He can and did all that He said He did and move on with your life.

The point is this: Its a logical fallacy.

P v Q is what you say. Yet the following...

P v Q v R by rule of addition.

You limit God just as Atheists do.

 

[notto]

Yes.....and your point is???

If God's Word says something so black and white, why try to read things into it or be confused? Just take it for what it says and know God's Word is truth and He can and did all that He said He did and move on with your life.

When and why were animals created. Please give me God's black and white answer.

 

[artybloke]

What makes you think that he didn't? Did you call him? Did he reveal this information to you in a vision?

He could, but he didn't, but he wrote down that he did. It doesn't make sense.

1. Science tells us he didn't. All the evidence God left behind in His universe, in other words. It doesn't require a vision - just simple, straightforward observation and analysis.

2.God didn't write anything down. Not unless you're attributing physical attributes to a spiritual being (he didn't have hands and a pen.) The Bible was written by human beings - human beings who explained the world around them using symbolism, story, poetry and myth rather than through scientific analysis. They thought in symbols, so they wrote them down.

 

[Mary_Magdalene]

When and why were animals created. Please give me God's black and white answer.

Genesis 1:24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so.......31: God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

 

[ShilohCity]

1. Science tells us he didn't. All the evidence God left behind in His universe, in other words. It doesn't require a vision - just simple, straightforward observation and analysis.

2.God didn't write anything down. Not unless you're attributing physical attributes to a spiritual being (he didn't have hands and a pen.) The Bible was written by human beings - human beings who explained the world around them using symbolism, story, poetry and myth rather than through scientific analysis. They thought in symbols, so they wrote them down.

1. isn't that putting science ahead of God?

2. So you don't believe that scripture is inspired by God?

 

[Chi_Cygni]

No - it is putting science ahead of mythology.

 

[PaladinValer]

The Bible isn't God. The Bible isn't the Word of God; Jesus is.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

1. isn't that putting science ahead of God?

2. So you don't believe that scripture is inspired by God?

Science studies God's Creation. It can tell us about what God has created and some things about how He created.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Genesis 1:24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so.......31: God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Was their creation before or after the creation of man?

 

[gluadys]

1. Science tells us he didn't. All the evidence God left behind in His universe, in other words. It doesn't require a vision - just simple, straightforward observation and analysis.

2.God didn't write anything down. Not unless you're attributing physical attributes to a spiritual being (he didn't have hands and a pen.) The Bible was written by human beings - human beings who explained the world around them using symbolism, story, poetry and myth rather than through scientific analysis. They thought in symbols, so they wrote them down.

1. isn't that putting science ahead of God?

2. So you don't believe that scripture is inspired by God?

1. No, it is acknowledging that God is the God of science and can speak to humans through science. God is not limited to one method of communication and certainly not to one fallible human interpretation of that communication.

2. No, it is acknowledging that God may inspire writers to write using symbols, story, poetry and myth.

 

[alarmguy111]

Hi God's Chosen Girl! It is very important to understand the root language(s) of the Pentateuch. The root written language used in the scribing of Genesis was the Hebrew Pictograph Language. The meaning of each word in that language was dependent upon the context of the entire passage. I suggest you go to a web-site ancient hebrew research center.org and there you can begin youir quest for truth! By the way, the hebrew word used to denote "beasts" in Gen:1:24 was used to denote either a herbivore, or a carnivore; depending on the context that the author was attempting to communicate. The vast majority of times it was used in the OT it was used to describe carnivores, see the following web-site: godandscience.org I believe that as you begin to research the truth as written in scripture for yourself, with an open mind, and not from the mindless repitition that the YEC's continue to postulate in defense of a belief system that cannot be substantiated by anything but blind obedience to an old and outdated doctrine. I really pray that the Holy Spirit quickens your mind to investigate the Truth (and Him crucified!); I believe that when He does, you will be suprised. I may be new here, but I know the Word.