Creation Theology

[Enoch2021]

 

 

=================================================================

 

 

study the Word in greater depth and understanding.

 

I'll stick with just a PLAIN reading myself; thanks, however.

 

 

This is obviously not true at all

 

 

Not true @ all, eh?

 

Pick a Random Thread here in Science and Faith (most invariably fall back to Genesis, maybe a couple outliers; not many) and then tell me it's not True @ All, LOL

 

 

unless of course you are confessing to "conjuring and imposing" as well?

 

Sorry, you got to conclusion "C" without A and B.  Please provide A and B.

[Sheniy]

It is interesting that Bible scholars too can view with different interpretations.

 

Well there is no 'Private" interpretation....

 

(2 Peter 1:20) "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

 

And please don't say this only speaks to 'Prophecy".  That is too say..."there are no Private interpretations of Prophecy but many of Scripture"

 

There is only ONE TRUE interpretation of THE WORD....That's the PLAIN WORD OF GOD.

That verse in context is clearly referring to a prophet's revelation of prophecy. It's saying that the promises of God that we hope in (the prophecies of His return) were given by God and not made up by humans.

If you suggest it means something else, aren't you adding your own interpretation to the text?

Just saying...

[Tolken]

Enoch2021 - I'll stick with just a PLAIN reading myself; thanks, however.

 

Ok, the PLAIN reading of Genesis 1:24 is that God commands "The land to produce..." that explicitly states mediate creation. So a plain reading would not only allow but would strongly suggest a process...what we call evolution.

 

Not true @ all, eh?

 

You seek to "impose" ulterior motives on those who disagree with your interpretation, I'm simply suggesting your views are not exempt.

 

Sorry, you got to conclusion "C" without A and B.  Please provide A and B.

 

What you simply need to accept is that there are valid differing interpretations of Genesis 1 based on scripture. "C" is simply inducting you into the same club that you seek to place others in. 

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

============================================================================

 

 

Ok, the PLAIN reading of Genesis 1:24 is that God commands "The land to produce..." that explicitly states mediate creation. So a plain reading would not only allow but would strongly suggest a process...what we call evolution.

 

Are you ascribing sentience and Intelligence to the Land?  And it's A Logical Fallacy (Reification).  It's only the vehicle..... GOD is the PRIME MOVER....and ONLY MOVER

 

And evolution is HOGWASH!!!!  Please Define what you mean by "evolution" so we're not equivocating.

 

 

Not true @ all, eh?

 

You seek to "impose" ulterior motives on those who disagree with your interpretation, I'm simply suggesting your views are not exempt.

 

Noo,they are not exempt; the question is.......  It's real simple....If "Your/MY/Whoever's Interpretation" doesn't line up with the PLAIN WORD, then off the reservation "they" are.

 

And I've given you the "Private Interpretation" spiel.

 

 

Sorry, you got to conclusion "C" without A and B.  Please provide A and B.

 

What you simply need to accept is that there are valid differing interpretations of Genesis 1 based on scripture. "C" is simply inducting you into the same club that you seek to place others in.

 

There is No Valid "Differing" Interpretations. There's only ONE VALID. Please don't induct me into any "Clubs".  And I'm not putting anyone in a "Club".  You offered a Baseless Assertion....Support it.  That is you have to show where I'm straying from the PLAIN WORD.

[Tolken]

Enoch2021 -Are you ascribing sentience and Intelligence to the Land?  And it's A Logical Fallacy (Reification).  It's only the vehicle..... GOD is the PRIME MOVER....and ONLY MOVER

 

*You are much too quick on the fallacy trigger, as no such reification exist in my comment.  I did not either implicitly or explicitly attribute “sentience or intelligence” to the land. 

 

I'm simply quoting what is plainly stated in scripture, the "land, water, etc" were commanded by God “... to produce...”.   Where have I denied God as the “prime mover”?  What does “only the vehicle” mean exactly? 

 

Noo,they are not exempt; the question is.......  It's real simple....If "Your/MY/Whoever's Interpretation" doesn't line up with the PLAIN WORD, then off the reservation "they" are.

 

Exactly, there are no exemptions.  I am simply pointing out that there exist a number of interpretations of Genesis 1 that do line up with scripture. How does my interpretation not line up with scripture?

 

There is No Valid "Differing" Interpretations. There's only ONE VALID.

 

False, as any Christian forum will prove.

Edited March 12, 2014 by Tolken

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

=============================================================

 

*You are much too quick on the fallacy trigger,

 

Because it was and is.

 

 

I did not either implicitly or explicitly attribute “sentience or intelligence” to the land.

 

I'm afraid you did, with this comment....."God commands "The land to produce..." that explicitly states mediate creation. So a plain reading would not only allow but would strongly suggest a process...what we call evolution"

 

You hedge a little with "mediate creation" but then off the reservation with this..... "strongly suggest a process...what we call evolution"

 

And you forgot to Define "evolution".  You also have a problem with Adam and Eve Fully Formed.  Or, are you saying they didn't "evolve" but everything else did?

 

 

What does “only the vehicle” mean exactly?

 

Well either GOD creates "things" from nothing or as in this specific case the Vehicle ("out of" or "from" or "medium"/ Blind Agent) was the Land. The Land is not making decisions here.

 

There is No Valid "Differing" Interpretations. There's only ONE VALID.

False, as any Christian forum will prove.

 

 

True.  You missed the part where I Qualified it....."VALID".  There may be many "Differing" Interpretations as you call them....but only ONE TRUE/VALID.

 

If there wasn't ONE VALID/TRUE, there would be no way for someone or groups to ascertain Absolute TRUTH.  That is Absurd.... and Renders the Bible of Null Effect and left to Relativism or "What I Think" mentality.

[Tolken]

Enoch2021 - Because it was and is.

 

No, I did not in any way suggest that the “land” was/is sentient/intelligent”, in fact let us look at what you define as “vehicle”:

 

("out of" or "from" or "medium"/ Blind Agent) was the Land.

 

You simply defined “mediate” creation so why is it then that “process” is not accurate? Why is it that evolution, not defined beyond the point of a God commanded dynamic process, as a “vehicle” is not applicable? 

 

True.  You missed the part where I Qualified it....."VALID". 

 

False, the “qualification” is purely subjective on your part. As your judgments are based on relevant authorities so are the valid interpretations that differ from yours. We can not claim knowing the absolute truth of Genesis 1 as we are incapable of knowing God “from beginning to end”.

 

If there wasn't ONE VALID/TRUE, there would be no way for someone or groups to ascertain Absolute TRUTH.  That is Absurd.... and Renders the Bible of Null Effect and left to Relativism or "What I Think" mentality.

 

There is a qualitative difference between knowing the “who” – God - and knowing the “how”.  How does varying interpretations of Genesis 1 render the entire Bible of null effect?  Does one's interpretation of Genesis 1, as concerns the "natural world/universe, have any effect on soteriology? I think you would admit that humankind comprehending all "Absolute truth" is a fallacious notion ...again, we can not know God or his ways from "beginning to end". (Isaiah 55:8-9 / Ecc. 3:11)

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

 

===================================================================

 

 

No, I did not in any way suggest that the “land” was/is sentient/intelligent”, in fact let us look at what you define as “vehicle”:

 

Already illustrated it, see previous post

 

 

Why is it that evolution, not defined beyond the point of a God commanded dynamic process, as a “vehicle” is not applicable?

 

It's demonstrably defined by Adam and Eve.  And HE brought the animals by for ADAM to Name on Day 6.  Are you postulating some type of PARABOLIC "evolution" ??

 

As your judgments are based on relevant authorities

 

Wrong.  The only Authority is the WORD OF GOD

 

 

We can not claim knowing the absolute truth of Genesis 1 as we are incapable of knowing God “from beginning to end”.

 

Your Quibbling.  And I think you're attempting some type of equivocation of Absolute TRUTH with "Specific Details" and "Comprehensive Knowledge of GOD.  There's enough "Light" in Genesis directly and comparing Scripture with Scripture from other Books of The Bible to attain it.

 

 

How does varying interpretations of Genesis 1 render the entire Bible of null effect?

 

I've explained that in the previous post

[Tolken]

Enoch2021 - Already illustrated it, see previous post

 

You're previous post and illustration obviously proved by your own term "vehicle" dismisses any notion of fallacy, and supports mediate creation...OK.

 

It's demonstrably defined by Adam and Eve.  And HE brought the animals by for ADAM to Name on Day 6.  Are you postulating some type of PARABOLIC "evolution" ??

 

You will need to clarify...as you noted by "vehicle", your term - mine is mediate, clearly it suggests a process. There is no need, explicitly or implicitly in scripture, that demands a set time for God's commands to be fulfilled other then that He commanded them on a given day.  Day 6 at some point will require an argument from meaningfulness.

 

How does varying interpretations of Genesis 1 render the entire Bible of null effect?

I've explained that in the previous post

 

OK, understand that the explanation is logically lacking, sort of a false dilemma. If A isn't true then nothing is true) If the scripture states that we can NOT know God from "beginning to end", how could we know ALL absolute truth? Would you admit that God has not revealed everything in scripture? Does one's interpretation, aside from God the creator, have any effect on one's salvation?

 

 

 

Wrong.  The only Authority is the WORD OF GOD

 

The question arises why you use quotes from various "Authorities" to support your various other discussions? Further with out some base of theological understanding the Bible is easily mis-interpreted...it raises the quesion why would we need pastors and teachers?

 

Your Quibbling.  And I think you're attempting some type of equivocation of Absolute TRUTH with "Specific Details" and "Comprehensive Knowledge of GOD.  There's enough "Light" in Genesis directly and comparing Scripture with Scripture from other Books of The Bible to attain it.

 

No, you are making the false assumption that God has completely revealed ALL TRUTH in scripture, which He has decidedly not done...otherwise we would not be having this discussion. And No equivocation, one can have "absolute truth" in regards to what God has revealed without knowing ALL absolute truth...clearly we are told that in scripture.

[Enoch2021]

 

 

==============================================================================

 

 

I'll tell ya I'm about posted out...feels like I gave birth today

 

 

You're previous post and illustration obviously proved by your own term "vehicle" dismisses any notion of fallacy, and supports mediate creation...OK.

 

Whatever

 

 

It's demonstrably defined by Adam and Eve.  And HE brought the animals by for ADAM to Name on Day 6.  Are you postulating some type of PARABOLIC "evolution" ??

 

You will need to clarify...as you noted by "vehicle", your term - mine is mediate, clearly it suggests a process.  

 

 

The question is pretty clear.

 

 

Day 6 at some point will require an argument from meaningfulness.

 

Here ya go.....

 

(Genesis 1:27-31) "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.  {28} And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.  {29} ¶And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.  {30} And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.  {31} And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."

 

Meaningful enough?

 

There is no need, explicitly or implicitly in scripture, that demands a set time for God's commands to be fulfilled other then that He commanded them on a given day.

 

Preposterous.  See previous response

 

 

OK, understand that the explanation is logically lacking, sort of a false dilemma. If A isn't true then nothing is true) If the scripture states that we can NOT know God from "beginning to end", how could we know ALL absolute truth? Would you admit that God has not revealed everything in scripture?

 

No it's not a False Dilemma.  Ahh, I see (Bolded/Increased font for easier view) you snuck in ALL to somehow mask the previous equivocation.  Nice Try.  Everything before and after it is a Strawman... and obvious.... and has nothing to do with the specific point

 

Now watch this, I just copied and pasted the first thing i saw.....

 

(Genesis 1:3) "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."

 

There's an Absolute TRUTH.  Now I don't need to know that Jonah was in the Great Fish for 3 Days to know that "Let there Be Light" came from GOD and Is an Absolute Truth.  And I don't need to know EVERY Absolute Truth to know that One.  It's a cumulative type of Concept.  Follow?

 

The question arises why you use quotes from various "Authorities" to support your various other discussions?

 

Do I really need to answer this?  I quote "Various Authorities" regarding Science for Support of my postulates or claims, it's standard in the Industry.  I Use SCRIPTURE Directly from the WORD OF GOD never anyone's "Interpretation".  HE IS THE ONLY AND FINAL AUTHORITY.  See the difference?  You're comparing Apples to Oranges.

 

 

Further with out some base of theological understanding the Bible is easily mis-interpreted...it raises the quesion why would we need pastors and teachers?

 

Funny, it was only when I was listening to what other people told me what the Bible Plainly Said that I fell into those "Mis-Interpretations"  See the NT for the Rationale behind Pastors and Teachers. 

 

**Also take Special Note of the Bereans in Acts......  That Clearly demonstrates my position, by the way.

 

 

No, you are making the false assumption that God has completely revealed ALL TRUTH in scripture

 

Actually that's a Strawman you created.

 

 

And No equivocation, one can have "absolute truth" in regards to what God has revealed without knowing ALL absolute truth...clearly we are told that in scripture.

 

It was before and Yes, I know.... I just described the scenario above.  Nice "stick save" attempt...but it's too late.  In fact...it's a direct contradiction see above ALL (Bolded)