Posted on 01/22/2006 8:12:41 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez
the point being missed i beleive is that Genesis as well as all other books of the Bible were were written by man.....but...."Inspired by God". Genisis says exactly what God intended it to say......being God, he could have spelled it out in terms no man would misunderstand or be able to deny.....
God's whole premise for salvation is based on FAITH....not full and complete understanding of how each and every little detail was brought about.
It is man's nature to search for absolute answers.....a nature he gave us by the way.....it is his desire and command that we overcome this and just believe, thru faith.....that's all it takes to enter his kingdom.
becoming bogged down in argueing the details....is it literal?.....is it an anolgy?....is counter productive to his "mission statement" to man.
For me i could care less how he did it......7 literal days.....or 7 million years of evolution....makes no difference...he designed it and put it in place and here we are.
with that said.....for me, if "evolution" is a part/process of creation, it is an even more impressive act by God than his just snapping his fingers and saying....let there be light....
either way.....makes no difference to me.....he said he created us.....period.....how he did it will be an interesting revelation one day when i join him.
"I do have a bit of trouble, though, with folks who cannot stand any disagreement. When the name-calling startes, I'm rarely amused."
**** You hit the nail on the head, that's been my problem. I'm like you, expressive and opinionated, but have back up info...however, it seems to make no difference. Here comes the name calling, cliches', zo forth and zo on....Even if two people disagree, so what? just agree to disagree and move on.....:) It's simple.
Anyway, I have two very good references for anyone interested..I use them for my background. Written by Dr. Hugh Ross who is an Astrophysicist turned Christian. He cites actual principles of space, time, and physics and their application to Christianity....and the Bible....As a suggestion for additional reference.....
"Creation and Time" by Dr. Hugh Ross.
http://www.parable.com/tbn/item_0891097767.htm
"The Fingerprint of God"
http://www.parable.com/tbn/search.asp?searchType=4&criteria=At~Ross,%20Hugh:A1~1
Take a look at the passages and you will see this simple explaination satisfies the straightforwardness of the text. I think what throws people off is the special creation God exhibited for Adam in the naming process. This left no confusion as to who the Creator is for Adam (also significant is the fact that Eve had not been created from Adam yet).
When chapter two begins describing the creation of animals it pertains to the naming process. These animals were created in the Garden of Eden, whilst the others were created outside of Eden as was Adam.
Right. He's very much like The Jesus Seminar, which I've called cutting-edge 19th century radical scholarship. It's as if the last century never happened.
Dan
I do not see two different accounts. I see one account, written twice. One is an overview and one is in detail. I only came to that conclusion after carefully studying scripture passage by passage with study tools, and armed with the knowledge of how stories were written in that time period.
"I've noticed that the fire-breathing literalists tend to appear at the beginning of these threads, spew all over the place, and quietly disappear as the discussion begins to become more cogent and coherent, and begins to bring in logic and examples."
I am not here to debate the literality of Genesis. I was only giving an honest answer to a question that was posed. I will not debate it and I am no teacher of Scripture. As far as I'm concerned, it's not open to debate.
I was neither rude to you, nor was I spewing. And as far as not answering you right away...some of us do have children, husbands, and jobs that are of more importance than sitting for hours on end in front of a computer screen debating the literality of the bible and putting down other people.
You've addressed your post to the wrong person. I did not say that Genesis contradicts itself. I'm the one who said that the Genesis creation story is an allegory. I'm sure you disagree with that, too, but it's a different issue.
BTW - allegory? based on what?
"BTW - allegory? based on what?"
Uh, that'd be the fossil record and the knowledge that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old. It wasn't created and populated with critters, including humans, in 6 days.
What evidence proves that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old?
Dr. Kurt Wise (Ph.D. in Geology)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/isd/wise.asp
Neither the fossil record nor the age of the Earth are proved to support an old Earth. Those statements are as much faith statements as your assertion that there is no God.
You post a link. I'll post a link:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html
"What evidence proves that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old?"
Do you not have access to Google? Try a search for "age of earth" (no quotes). You'll find hundreds of web pages with the information, along with all the supporting evidence. I am not a geology teacher, nor do I care to be.
The information is there for you. You may choose to read it or not.
The difference is...I'm actually going over to read your link!
"Neither the fossil record nor the age of the Earth are proved to support an old Earth. Those statements are as much faith statements as your assertion that there is no God."
Oh, never mind. You believe whatever you want. That is your right. I don't care what you believe. It affects me not one whit, no more than what I understand affects you.
If you are a Young Earth Creationist, so be it. Please don't apply for a job as a science teacher, though.
"The difference is...I'm actually going over to read your link!"
Actually, there is no difference. I have read your link already. I read it some time ago.
The evidence presented by your author is the Bible. By faith, he rejects all other evidence. That's fine, but it is not science. It is religion.
A pity he has wasted his PhD.
-30-
I thought you said there were several interesting discussions here and that you respect others beliefs, even if you don't agree with them? No one was rude to you (as someone was to me earlier). Keep the discussion thoughtfully going and don't just get angry and throuw in the towel!
"I thought you said there were several interesting discussions here and that you respect others beliefs, even if you don't agree with them? No one was rude to you (as someone was to me earlier). Keep the discussion thoughtfully going and don't just get angry and throuw in the towel!"
My friend, I respect your beliefs. I simply know them to be untrue, so by refusing to debate with a Young Earth Creationist, I am being polite. You are welcome to your beliefs. I do not share them, and I know that you are not going to change them based on information provided to you by me.
So, what's the point? Believe as you choose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.