User Tag List

Page 40 of 40 FirstFirst ... 3037383940
Results 586 to 588 of 588

Thread: If Evolution

  1. #586
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    927
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 153 Times in 125 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3552
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    The Bible says "six days."

    It is irreconcilable with evolution.
    The first creation story as literal history is irreconcilable with the second creation story as literal history.

    The first creation story says 6 days.

    The second creation story says one day.

    And neither says these stories must be read as literal history.

    Remember how David was rescued by God from the hands of Saul?

    We have the history stories, with help from Jonathan, escaping to the Philistines, all wonderful, believable history. And then we have the figurative telling, recorded twice in the Bible! The non-literal view is found in the Psalms and in 2 Samuel 22:

    7 “In my distress I called to the LORD; I called out to my God. From his temple he heard my voice; my cry came to his ears. 8 The earth trembled and quaked, the foundations of the heavens shook; they trembled because he was angry. 9 Smoke rose from his nostrils; consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it. 10 He parted the heavens and came down; dark clouds were under his feet. 11 He mounted the cherubim and flew; he soared on the wings of the wind. 12 He made darkness his canopy around him— the dark rain clouds of the sky. 13 Out of the brightness of his presence bolts of lightning blazed forth. 14 The LORD thundered from heaven; the voice of the Most High resounded. 15 He shot his arrows and scattered the enemy, with great bolts of lightning he routed them. 16 The valleys of the sea were exposed and the foundations of the earth laid bare at the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of breath from his nostrils. 17 “He reached down from on high and took hold of me; he drew me out of deep waters. 18 He rescued me from my powerful enemy, from my foes, who were too strong for me.


    Did God really fly down on a cherubim with smoke pouring from his nostrils shooting arrows?

    No, some figurative Hebrew poetry is not meant to be taken literally.

  2. #587
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    927
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 153 Times in 125 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3552
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    Correct.Your Book is wrong.
    No, his interpretation is wrong. And his demand that the stories are literal history is wrong. And his pretending the two stories are compatible as literal history is wrong.

  3. #588
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    927
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 153 Times in 125 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3552
    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    Jesus referred to Genesis 1and 2 as the creation, and as one account, so I will stick with Him.
    I stick with Him too.
    You are also sticking with your denial of the text and incorrectly claiming that Jesus said these two creation stories must be taken literally. That didn’t happen.
    Chapter 2 is consistent with Chapter 1. Jewish Scholars and most Christians since the early fathers have always found the creation account easy to understand without contradiction.
    Two false statements.
    But if you are going to deny what the text actually says says, there is little common ground for discussion.
    Why did Jesus go to the cross? Last Adam went to the cross as our Mediator, to defeat physical death which is a result of first Adam's sin. Genesis is foundational to the Gospel and is the basis of every Christian doctrine. The physical death and resurrection of Jesus becomes meaningless without the literal history of the OT.
    Which literal history?
    The first creation story literally says plants came forth on Day 3 and man on Day 6.
    The second creation story says man was formed before the plants.

    No, you are making claims that are not true and are inconsistent with the scriptures.

    But since you deny what the Bible actually says, and it appears you accept the first creation story as literal history and then deny the second creation story, there is little common ground for discussion.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us