Posted on 02/27/2011 8:08:19 PM PST by Natural Law
I'm talking about you specifically -- is this statement not correct? You came to your conclusions by learning from someone else, correct?
You did not start off a blank slate and pick up a Bible and come to your conclusions on your ownsome -- is that not a correct statement?
Genesis1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
The first 24 hr day of the earth as we know it today. And all days after that have been.
However, if you include verse 1 in that first 24 hr day you cannot deny that Gods first act turned out to be a mess that then had to put in order.
>>What do you believe?<<
There was a world that then was prior to verse 2 that Satan had so corrupted that God destroyed it almost completely just as He will do at the end of this world as we know it.
hmmmm.... ok, I had never thought of it that way.
Is this a common belief of Calvinists or Pentecostals?
I came to my conclusions from reading scripture with guidance from the Holy Spirit. If someone tries to teach me something I go directly to scripture and find the truth.
There was an entire earth age that existed between the first two verses of Genesi...I don't know enough about this to comment, CB -- can you simply state how this is possible? Do you take this to also explain the Elohim in plural point?Some.... will insist the Bible states the earth is 6000 years old.
The Bible DOES NOT state this. You simply cannot document that God's Word says the earth is 6000 years old. It says quite the contrary.
...These foundations go back million's of years.....
you’ve given me a lot of think about and read over the next few days. I need to leave for home now. Thank you and God bless.
Genealogies have been done ad nausea from written record both from scripture and other early writings. There is only a 45 year discrepancy between beliefs. All end up somewhere around 6075 years since Adam.
There was a world that then was prior to verse 2 that Satan had so corrupted that God destroyed it almost completely just as He will do at the end of this world as we know it.
hmmmm.... ok, I had never thought of it that way.
Is this a common belief of Calvinists or Pentecostals?
Looks like CynicalBear subscribes to the "gap theory." I wouldn't rule it out dogmatically (some great Jewish sages, like the late Rabbi 'Aryeh Kaplan, believed in it), but I don't personally believe in it because it's simply unnecessary.
Note that CynicalBear is basing his belief on a quotation from the "new testament" and on the chr*stian belief that "Satan" is an enemy of G-d who "corrupts" things--a false dualistic belief alien to Judaism.
Other then to be willingly ignorant?
"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." (2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)
It seems to me wise to not want to be willingly ignorant. Denying clear scientific findings proving the age of the earth to be much longer then the 6-7 years certainly puts so called Christians in a position of being ignorant and a poor witness.
It seems to me wise to not want to be willingly ignorant. Denying clear scientific findings proving the age of the earth to be much longer then the 6-7 years certainly puts so called Christians in a position of being ignorant and a poor witness.
You put an awful lot of faith in the "objective findings" of "scientists," don't you?
Between the "objective findings of scientists" and Divine Revelation, I'll take Divine Revelation. Cosmogony is beyond the purview of science anyway. It can only be known via Revelation and theology.
Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void (tohuw); and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain (tohuw), he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
How can you believe such nonsense? We have folks debating it in our church but this is not related to our salvation and I believe God created the world over a longer period of time as the days do not have to be human like days, these are much longer, millions or billions of years.
How can you believe such nonsense? We have folks debating it in our church but this is not related to our salvation and I believe God created the world over a longer period of time as the days do not have to be human days, these are much longer, millions or billions of years.
Right. The same people who can't figure out how to assemble a bicycle on Christmas Eve, or make a decent souffle from the cook book are going to read a translation of a translation of a translation, without knowing the cultural imperatives or language structure of the previous versions and arrive at a high fidelity interpretation. YOPIS is the idiots Magesterium.
Now what makes you think that by relying only on scripture for truth doesnt allow a person to look at other beliefs or interpretations (not languages but views, beliefs, etc) to then go back to scripture to find how they agree or disagree?
And why not investigate the languages that it has come through to watch how closely it compares to the original. The following verses all say the same thing dont they?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. [English]
31 [g]»Glaube an den Herrn Jesus, dann werden du und alle, die in deinem Haus leben, gerettet [Dutch]
οἱ δὲ εἶπαν πίστευσον ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν, καὶ σωθήσῃ σὺ καὶ ὁ οἶκός σου.[Greek]
ויאמרו האמן באדון ישוע המשיח ותושע אתה וביתך׃ [Hebrew]
at illi dixerunt crede in Domino Iesu et salvus eris tu et domus tua [Latin]
Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Could you tell me when, since Genesis 1:5 the evening and the morning changed from your do not have to be human days theory to our current 24 hour days if they were not in Genesis 1:5?
Thank you for so eloquently making my point for me. What you attribute to "Dutch" is actually "Deutsch" (German).
How interesting. My lineage is Dutch, “Deutsch” as you put it. My grandfather and father spoke fluently the language. There was always a mix. Many referred to the language as Friesian. Check out where many of the ancestors who called themselves Dutch came from. I doubt I made your point at all.
Now you are just babbling and furthering my point in the process. If you get things this screwed up with living languages and existing populations just think how badly you are misinterpreting Scripture.
Dutch and Deutsch are definitely not the same thing. Although some do refer to the Pennsylvania Germans as Pennsylvania "Dutch" it is an error. Deutsch is the German word for German.
Friesian is something altogether different. It is a primitive Germanic language spoken by less than 500,000 people in localities in Germany and the Netherlands adjacent to the North Sea. It is most closely related to Old English.
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.