JHERB Posted April 8, 2010 Group: Senior Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 82 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 789 Content Per Day: 0.15 Reputation: 123 Days Won: 4 Joined: 11/06/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/23/1971 Share Posted April 8, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC10 Posted April 9, 2010 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 80 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/15/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted April 9, 2010 (edited) Why is this in "Faith vs Science"? May. . .be because its an issue that has to do with faith and science? Lurker Well, it does include the word "science" a few times, it's true, but it seems more a topic on doctrine - and it could be an interesting one at that. But if it's really about faith and science, which aspects of the science content do you think HalP was trying to bring to readers' attention? Edited April 9, 2010 by DC10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted April 9, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 683 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 11,128 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 1,352 Days Won: 54 Joined: 02/03/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/07/1952 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Why is this in "Faith vs Science"? May. . .be because its an issue that has to do with faith and science? Lurker Well, it does include the word "science" a few times, it's true, but it seems more a topic on doctrine - and it could be an interesting one at that. But if it's really about faith and science, which aspects of the science content do you think HalP was trying to bring to readers' attention? Nothing, his sole intent is to try and sow discord, and he is unable to argue something like this in a coherent manner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted April 9, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted April 9, 2010 Why is this in "Faith vs Science"? May. . .be because its an issue that has to do with faith and science? Lurker Well, it does include the word "science" a few times, it's true, but it seems more a topic on doctrine - and it could be an interesting one at that. But if it's really about faith and science, which aspects of the science content do you think HalP was trying to bring to readers' attention? Nothing, his sole intent is to try and sow discord, and he is unable to argue something like this in a coherent manner Well, I was going to say that but....good call, fez! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlelambseativy Posted April 9, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 230 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,941 Content Per Day: 0.95 Reputation: 2,003 Days Won: 14 Joined: 02/08/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted April 9, 2010 My belief is that since God Almighty is 'perfection' His Word inspired by the Holy Spirit (also perfection) can be nothing but inerrant. The fact that men wrote what the Holy Spirit directed, in the language that they spoke at the time using terms and concepts that they understood does not nullify the inerrancy of the Bible. Certainly translations have come along and have attempted to rewrite the Bible in the vernacular of the day but the basic truth behind the Word has not changed - the words and wording - yes otherwise we would be lost and have not hope of eternity. The fact that what is in the OT is corroborated in the NT and vice versa only proves that the Bible is Truth itself - a full and clear view of the Trinity, the past, present and guide to the future if one is but willing to be open to its truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyguy Posted April 9, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 373 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 3,331 Content Per Day: 0.59 Reputation: 71 Days Won: 10 Joined: 10/15/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/24/1965 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Attacking the veracity of the Bible again, Lurker? Gosh, how uncharacteristic of you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Probably the aspects that contradict certain interpretations of scripture. For instance, some people read Genesis and say that because scripture is "perfect" we are bound to a belief in a 6,000 year old earth. Others look at that same text and note that a face value interpretation of this book is probably not the best one given how the story was originally written and how it has been historically transmitted to the present. Inerrancy would only apply if the Bible claimed the earth was 6,000 years old. Inerrancy does not apply to assumptions made by certain readers. The only real claim that Bible makes is that God created the earth and all that is in it. Furthermore, it reveals a pattern of creation that precludes evolution if one takes God at His word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyguy Posted April 9, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 373 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 3,331 Content Per Day: 0.59 Reputation: 71 Days Won: 10 Joined: 10/15/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/24/1965 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Attacking the veracity of the Bible again, Lurker? Gosh, how uncharacteristic of you! So. . .saying the earth is not 6,000 years old is attacking the veracity of the Bible? I'm just trying to get a handle on (spoiler alert) how consistently you apply these accusations. Lurker Attacking the stated genealogies in the Bible that point to a young age of the earth is indeed attacking the veracity of the Bible. And you use the word "accusations" as if what we point out what you have said isn't true. And you have stated you don't believe: In a literal Adam and Eve A less than 4.5 billion year old earth The Flood of Noah The Creation account in Genesis Anything untrue in those "accusations?" Oh, and just for the record. Do you believe these accounts are true? 1. Jonah and the great fish 2. The 10 plagues of Egypt and The Exodus 3. Moses parting the sea 4. Jesus rising bodily from the tomb 5. The fall of Lucifer and a literal Satan A simple "yes" or "no" after each will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted April 10, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted April 10, 2010 Attacking the veracity of the Bible again, Lurker? Gosh, how uncharacteristic of you! So. . .saying the earth is not 6,000 years old is attacking the veracity of the Bible? I'm just trying to get a handle on (spoiler alert) how consistently you apply these accusations. Lurker What else CAN he accuse you of, Lurker? You ARE attacking the inerrancy of the Bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted April 10, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted April 10, 2010 So. . .if someone were to say something like, oh I don't know, "I believe the earth, in a primeval state, was here 4.5 billion years ago." they would be attacking the veracity of the Bible? Any comments Morning Glory? You KNOW I always have a comment, Lurker. Saying that the earth itself is 4.5 bllion years old is not contrary to Genesis. You will not be able to create discord that way. Genesis 1: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. All we know from this passage is that God created the heavens and the earth. It gives no date when He did so. He is not constrained by space and time as we are.....remember? I believe He created and then decided to do other things later. He IS God, after all. He can do anything He wishes to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts