|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 05/05/2006 : 09:26:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
I do not believe it is metephorical. I believe that the earth was created as written in Genesis 1 AND 2.
Perhaps "not literal" would have been a better word choice on my part than "metaphorical." Because it's fairly clear that what scientists have discovered about the order in which various forms of life appeared on Earth conflicts with the order described in Genesis. As you say, the Bible isn't a science textbook, but it seems that the beginning of the Bible isn't a particularly accurate history, either.
I'm curious, Robb: what do you think of the religious scientists who say that their work (in geology, evolution, cosmology, etc.) is actually an attempt to discover how God did His creating? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2006 : 10:07:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
I do not believe it is metephorical. I believe that the earth was created as written in Genesis 1 AND 2.
Perhaps "not literal" would have been a better word choice on my part than "metaphorical." Because it's fairly clear that what scientists have discovered about the order in which various forms of life appeared on Earth conflicts with the order described in Genesis. As you say, the Bible isn't a science textbook, but it seems that the beginning of the Bible isn't a particularly accurate history, either.
I believe it is literal for now. My beliefs have changed over the last couple of months and maybe they will change on this issue as well. There have been books written by Hugh Ross, Chuck Missler and others that have tackled this issue satisfactorilly for me. I have not come to a conclusion as to how long ago the creation took place.
quote:
I'm curious, Robb: what do you think of the religious scientists who say that their work (in geology, evolution, cosmology, etc.) is actually an attempt to discover how God did His creating?
If God has called them to that I think it is great. God has not called me to that or to defend Genesis 1 and 2 as a career. He has called me to do other things. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2006 : 10:20:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Thank you, Robb. After my debate with John Schroeder, your words are music to my ears…
My views of God and the Bible have changed over the last couple of months. I used to be like him and think that if you don't believe my theology then you don't worship the same God I do. I have a real problem with him saying that Kenneth Miller is not saved because his views are not the same as his. If that was the criteria, then only John would be saved.
I have come to realize that if you have accepted Jesus as your saviour, you will be saved no matter what else you believe. You can believe that Genesis is literal, metephorical or wrong and still be saved. I am not saying that all three views are correct, one is correct but it does not disqualify you from heaven if you believe the wrong one. I am also not saying that you can believe anything and be saved. You must believe in Jesus and that he died for your sins and rose again and is living today.
I enjoyed reading the e-mails. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2006 : 11:31:47 [Permalink]
|
Well said, Robb. Well said indeed. 
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2006 : 08:57:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
quote:
I will take it on faith that there is an explaination to the contradictions (could there be a reason that God put them in there?).
Hmm, I like that. God wanted to teach people not to believe everything they read. God is a skeptic!
Not really. It is clear that he Bible has contradictions in it that cannot be explained satisfactorily (Such as who killed Goliath, did the disciples take sandals and a staff, who killed King Saul etc.). The Bible states that God hides some truths from us and reveals truths to anyone he chooses.
At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. (MT 11:25-27 NIV)
In 1 Corinthians Paul writes:
For now we are looking in a mirror that gives only a dim (blurred) reflection [of reality as in a riddle or enigma], but then [when perfection comes] we shall see in reality and face to face! Now I know in part (imperfectly), but then I shall know and understand fully and clearly, even in the same manner as I have been fully and clearly known and understood [ by God]. (1Cor 13:12 AMP)
What riddles is he talking about? Jesus talked in parables but parables and riddles are not the same thing. There are riddles in the Old Testament like Sampson's riddle in Judges
"Let me tell you a riddle," Samson said to them. "If you can give me the answer within the seven days of the feast, I will give you thirty linen garments and thirty sets of clothes. If you can't tell me the answer, you must give me thirty linen garments and thirty sets of clothes."
"Tell us your riddle," they said. "Let's hear it."
He replied,
"Out of the eater, something to eat;
out of the strong, something sweet."
For three days they could not give the answer. (JDG 14:12-14 NIV)
They had to threaten Sampson's wife to get the answer from him. When they get the answer, Sampson replies:
"If you had not plowed with my heifer,
you would not have solved my riddle."(JDG 14:18 NIV)
Meaning, they could not have possibly solve the riddle without knowledge from the one who wrote the riddle. The one who wrote these riddles (contradictions) is Jesus. If you ask Jesus he can tell you the meaning of these riddles if he chooses to. This is not my own original idea, and it is just a summary, but it makes the most sense to me after I have studied the bible. Of course this is al predicated on the belief that the Bible is the word of God.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2006 : 22:23:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Of course this is al predicated on the belief that the Bible is the word of God.
I'm curious if you've got anything for those who don't share this idea as axiomatic.
Obviously, if the riddler is willing to give up the answer, then you'll understand. But if the riddler is dead or otherwise unavailable, then whatever answer one might come up with through whatever means may not be correct. And even when one is presented with the correct answer, one may be tempted to argue about it, due to personal desires.
So, does asking Jesus whether Judas fell to his death or hanged himself really resolve the "riddle" of that apparent contradiction? The standard apologetics response is that he hanged and then fell, but that response is - whether it comes from asking Jesus or not - extrabiblical, and so there's no way we can be sure it is the "Word of God" even if we grant your axiom for the sake of argument, Robb. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 17:15:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Of course this is al predicated on the belief that the Bible is the word of God.
I'm curious if you've got anything for those who don't share this idea as axiomatic.
Nothing that you probably have not heard before. I said this to give my assumptions for my opinion. There is evidence that God exists from science as well as non scientific evidences. I am sure you do not agree.
quote:
Obviously, if the riddler is willing to give up the answer, then you'll understand. But if the riddler is dead or otherwise unavailable, then whatever answer one might come up with through whatever means may not be correct. And even when one is presented with the correct answer, one may be tempted to argue about it, due to personal desires.
There is this possibility. But if you accept my assumption that it was written by God, there must be a reason for the contradictions. Also, people may not agree about the solution, but there is correct answers as well as wrong answers. Christians argue about the meaning of scriptures all the time. This does not make them invalid. This is why the message of salvation is straight forward and easy to understand. I don't know any Christians or denominations that do not believe that Jesus is the one that saves. Some think it takes more than Jesus but why would you call yourself a Christian if you did not believe this?
Thanks for the link, I have never read the story but the frenzy it caused is interesting.
quote:
So, does asking Jesus whether Judas fell to his death or hanged himself really resolve the "riddle" of that apparent contradiction? The standard apologetics response is that he hanged and then fell, but that response is - whether it comes from asking Jesus or not - extrabiblical, and so there's no way we can be sure it is the "Word of God" even if we grant your axiom for the sake of argument, Robb.
Yes, I think I agree. You are saying that any answers that do not come from the Bible cannot be known that they are from God (if you believe the Bible is from God). I agree, that is why we must use the scriptures to solve the contradictions. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 18:22:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
I'm curious if you've got anything for those who don't share this idea as axiomatic.
Nothing that you probably have not heard before. I said this to give my assumptions for my opinion.
I understand that. I was simply wondering if you might have something that those who don't share you faith might find compelling.quote:
There is evidence that God exists from science as well as non scientific evidences. I am sure you do not agree.
Well, we really can't know whether I agree or not unless you share what you consider to be evidence.  quote:
There is this possibility. But if you accept my assumption that it was written by God, there must be a reason for the contradictions.
Okay. Granting your assumption for the sake of discussion, do you think there's a way of learning the reason(s) for the apparent contradiction(s) without the benefit of death?quote:
Also, people may not agree about the solution, but there is correct answers as well as wrong answers. Christians argue about the meaning of scriptures all the time. This does not make them invalid.
The Scriptures themselves may not be invalid, but what about one person's interpretation of Scripture? Or, better yet, what if two groups of people are more-or-less constantly at odds about what the Bible says about how one should live one's life? Irreconcilable differences split the Church hundreds of years ago, to the point where many Baptists think that the Catholics are all going to Hell - despite the Catholics' undeniable faith in Jesus Christ.quote:
This is why the message of salvation is straight forward and easy to understand. I don't know any Christians or denominations that do not believe that Jesus is the one that saves. Some think it takes more than Jesus but why would you call yourself a Christian if you did not believe this?
But it is more than that. I know people who believe that if you, at (for example) age 12, accept Jesus as your personal saviour, then no matter what you do later in life, you're still "saved." Even if you become an evangelical atheist guilty of multiple murders.
You may think the message of salvation is straightforward, Robb, but there are at least 1,500 different twists on it in just the United States alone. Which ones are correct?
But this is actually sort of beside the point. The reason that evolution is so threatening to many people's Christian beliefs is that it means that what appears to call for a simple and straightforward interpretation (Genesis) actually requires a more metaphorical approach, and if that is true, then how can one be sure that the apparently simple and straightforward message of salvation is really that simple and straightforward? In other words, what if God is more of a poet than a storyteller? What could "have faith in Jesus to be saved" mean to the Grand Lyricist who even says that mere mortals cannot know His mind?
So we're back to the example of Lewis Carroll, or even to more modern puzzlers like "American Pie." We can't get the real message without - as in that link - the "answer key." You may say that the Bible is God's "answer key," but if it differs so drastically with what we can find in His own Creation (on matters like the age of the Earth or the Flood), then something has gone horribly wrong somewhere.quote:
quote:
So, does asking Jesus whether Judas fell to his death or hanged himself really resolve the "riddle" of that apparent contradiction? The standard apologetics response is that he hanged and then fell, but that response is - whether it comes from asking Jesus or not - extrabiblical, and so there's no way we can be sure it is the "Word of God" even if we grant your axiom for the sake of argument, Robb.
Yes, I think I agree. You are saying that any answers that do not come from the Bible cannot be known that they are from God (if you believe the Bible is from God). I agree, that is why we must use the scriptures to solve the contradictions.
And how can we do that? How many places, other than Luke and Acts, is Judas' method of death even alluded to, much less described? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 18:56:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
I'm curious if you've got anything for those who don't share this idea as axiomatic.
Nothing that you probably have not heard before. I said this to give my assumptions for my opinion.
I understand that. I was simply wondering if you might have something that those who don't share you faith might find compelling.quote:
There is evidence that God exists from science as well as non scientific evidences. I am sure you do not agree.
Well, we really can't know whether I agree or not unless you share what you consider to be evidence. quote:
There is this possibility. But if you accept my assumption that it was written by God, there must be a reason for the contradictions.
Okay. Granting your assumption for the sake of discussion, do you think there's a way of learning the reason(s) for the apparent contradiction(s) without the benefit of death?quote:
Also, people may not agree about the solution, but there is correct answers as well as wrong answers. Christians argue about the meaning of scriptures all the time. This does not make them invalid.
The Scriptures themselves may not be invalid, but what about one person's interpretation of Scripture? Or, better yet, what if two groups of people are more-or-less constantly at odds about what the Bible says about how one should live one's life? Irreconcilable differences split the Church hundreds of years ago, to the point where many Baptists think that the Catholics are all going to Hell - despite the Catholics' undeniable faith in Jesus Christ.quote:
This is why the message of salvation is straight forward and easy to understand. I don't know any Christians or denominations that do not believe that Jesus is the one that saves. Some think it takes more than Jesus but why would you call yourself a Christian if you did not believe this?
But it is more than that. I know people who believe that if you, at (for example) age 12, accept Jesus as your personal saviour, then no matter what you do later in life, you're still "saved." Even if you become an evangelical atheist guilty of multiple murders.
You may think the message of salvation is straightforward, Robb, but there are at least 1,500 different twists on it in just the United States alone. Which ones are correct?
But this is actually sort of beside the point. The reason that evolution is so threatening to many people's Christian beliefs is that it means that what appears to call for a simple and straightforward interpretation (Genesis) actually requires a more metaphorical approach, and if that is true, then how can one be sure that the apparently simple and straightforward message of salvation is really that simple and straightforward? In other words, what if God is more of a poet than a storyteller? What could "have faith in Jesus to be saved" mean to the Grand Lyricist who even says that mere mortals cannot know His mind?
So we're back to the example of Lewis Carroll, or even to more modern puzzlers like "American Pie." We can't get the real message without - as in that link - the "answer key." You may say that the Bible is God's "answer key," but if it differs so drastically with what we can find in His own Creation (on matters like the age of the Earth or the Flood), then something has gone horribly wrong somewhere.quote:
quote:
So, does asking Jesus whether Judas fell to his death or hanged himself really resolve the "riddle" of that apparent contradiction? The standard apologetics response is that he hanged and then fell, but that response is - whether it comes from asking Jesus or not - extrabiblical, and so there's no way we can be sure it is the "Word of God" even if we grant your axiom for the sake of argument, Robb.
Yes, I think I agree. You are saying that any answers that do not come from the Bible cannot be known that they are from God (if you believe the Bible is from God). I agree, that is why we must use the scriptures to solve the contradictions.
And how can we do that? How many places, other than Luke and Acts, is Judas' method of death even alluded to, much less described?
Wow, alot to think about Dave. I will have to get back with you, maybe not until next week though because I am going out of town. I am looking forward to more discussion. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 19:31:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Wow, alot to think about Dave. I will have to get back with you, maybe not until next week though because I am going out of town.
Please, take all the time you want, especially since I'm going to be short on time this weekend, also.quote:
I am looking forward to more discussion.
I am, as well. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 05:53:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Well, we really can't know whether I agree or not unless you share what you consider to be evidence.
Good point.
A summary of some non biblical reasons I believe that there is evidence (not proof) for a God or creator.
The universe came into being from nothing (or nothing like we can know) at a moment in time. There was a beginning, the Big Bang. The following is some evidence for the big bang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang):
The universe is expanding.
Radiation can be detected from the big bang
Temperature differences in the Universe that allowed galaxies to form.
Abundance of helium predicted by models.
There are others as well.
If something came from nothing (or nothing like we can know), this is evidence of a creator.
Anthropic constants. The idea that over 100 known constants are in place to support life on earth is more evidence of a creator. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
Moral or Natural Law we all have. I think we all have a sense of right or wrong whether we live by it or not. Quoting CS Lewis
“Think of a country where people were admired for running away on battle, or where a man felt proud of double crossing all the people who had been kindest to him. You might as well try to imagine a country where two and two make five.”
Some of the evidence for a moral law are our reactions to situations, how could we know what justice is without it, it is the basis of our rights we believe in and without it all moral positions would be acceptable like human sacrifice, the holocaust, etc.
Another thought is that for us to exist without a creator, some kind of spontaneous life generation would have to have happened. We have no evidence for this; we cannot or have not combined chemicals together to form life. Even if we could some day, isn't that evidence for a creator? The fact that it took our intelligence to create life. We have not ever observed life being created from non life in nature.
quote:
Okay. Granting your assumption for the sake of discussion, do you think there's a way of learning the reason(s) for the apparent contradiction(s) without the benefit of death?
Yes, but not with 100% certainty as in all things with faith.
quote:
You may think the message of salvation is straightforward, Robb, but there are at least 1,500 different twists on it in just the United States alone. Which ones are correct?
The ones that believe what Jesus said. You don't have to believe in anything else. Don't all denominations at least believe the Jesus was God and can forgive our sins? Some add more to it and infighting ensues, but the Bible is clear that we should accept each others differences in the faith. I don't think these verses need interpretation. They are clear in their teaching.
Consider these scriptures:
"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us."
"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward. (Mark 9:38-41 NIV)
Notice John was not offended because they were using Jesus name, but th |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 06:53:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
A summary of some non biblical reasons I believe that there is evidence (not proof) for a God or creator.
The universe came into being from nothing (or nothing like we can know) at a moment in time. There was a beginning, the Big Bang. The following is some evidence for the big bang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang):
The universe is expanding.
Radiation can be detected from the big bang
Temperature differences in the Universe that allowed galaxies to form.
Abundance of helium predicted by models.
There are others as well.
If something came from nothing (or nothing like we can know), this is evidence of a creator.
You must understand that this is hardly compelling evidence for a "creator"-- super-magical god or otherwise. All you've done is describe some aspects of the natural world, note that we don't understand all of them, and assert therefore that Yahweh is real.
quote:
Anthropic constants. The idea that over 100 known constants are in place to support life on earth is more evidence of a creator. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
This is similarly not compelling. As it notes in the wiki article, the principle "is simply tautological reasoning, an elaborate way of saying "if things were different, they would be different". If this is granted, the WAP becomes a truism saying nothing and explaining nothing, because in order for us to be here to ponder the universe, that universe has to be structured so that we can exist."
If I were to roll a six-sided die ten times and came up with the sequence 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3, and were to do it again but come up with the sequence 2 4 6 1 4 2 5 3 6 1, which would be more significant? The answer of course, is that neither is; the probability of rolling the first sequence is the same as rolling the second. But we see some significance in the first (10 3's in a row!), and so attach greater value to it.
So the universe happened to fall into a range that allowed for the formation of planets like earth, and on earth, things happened to fall into a range the led to the development of life, etc. But besides our attaching significance to our creation, is that any more rare (or not rare?) than some other outcome? |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 07:26:08 [Permalink]
|
Cuneiformist remarked:quote:
If I were to roll a six-sided die ten times and came up with the sequence 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3, and were to do it again but come up with the sequence 2 4 6 1 4 2 5 3 6 1, which would be more significant? The answer of course, is that neither is; the probability of rolling the first sequence is the same as rolling the second. But we see some significance in the first (10 3's in a row!), and so attach greater value to it.
I would say the first set of die rolls would be the most significant. Simply because this sequence gives a pretty fair statistical indication of a heavily loaded die.
"God doesn't play with dice," said Einstein. Correct: Using loaded dice is not "playing," it's work by a professional cheater. Not that I'm contradicting your main point, though. "Just busting your balls," as the New York mobster on "The Sopranos" said just before Tony's boys had enough of it and murdered him. ["Ducking" smiley]
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 08:03:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Don't all denominations at least believe the Jesus was God
Early christians did not necessarily believe that (I think the Gnostics fell into this category). That point of view "won out" over a couple hundred years. There may be others today too, not sure. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
