Guest Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 shiloh- you've stated this before and at this point is kind of meaningless rhetoric to me. You can accuse me of smorgasbord reasoning all day but you have yet to convince me that I am in error that way. Looking- I should check out the Collins book. So you do think it is up to man to decide which parts of the Bible are true and which parts are expendable? No. The truth is what it is, regardless of what we think or how in error we are. 1 Corinthians 13:9,10 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. Well let's test that claim. Do you believe that man was created from the dirt separate from the rest of the created order, as the Bible says, or do you believe that man evolved from an ape-like ancestor that we alledgedly have in common with chimps? The truth of the situation is what it is, regardless of what you or I think about it. Your question doesn't relate to my claim at all. ~ The For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:21 Claim Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Proverbs 30:5-6 And The Answer But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 Is 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. Genesis 1:31 Jesus Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Revelation 4:11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 14, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? ~ Beloved, A Star When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; Matthew 2:9-11 A Very Special Star For A Very Special Child Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Matthew 1:23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? The star was a supernatural event and it was intended for the Magi, given the description of its movement. It is observed as a star, but again, they are telling us what was seen. It would have been how they described what they saw. Remember the Magi were not astronomers. They were astrologers. From the perspective of an observer, the "star" did exactly what they said they saw it do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 shiloh- you've stated this before and at this point is kind of meaningless rhetoric to me. You can accuse me of smorgasbord reasoning all day but you have yet to convince me that I am in error that way. Looking- I should check out the Collins book. So you do think it is up to man to decide which parts of the Bible are true and which parts are expendable? No. The truth is what it is, regardless of what we think or how in error we are. 1 cor 13:9, 10 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. Well let's test that claim. Do you believe that man was created from the dirt separate from the rest of the created order, as the Bible says, or do you believe that man evolved from an ape-like ancestor that we alledgedly have in common with chimps? The truth of the situation is what it is, regardless of what you or I think about it. Your question doesn't relate to my claim at all. It absolutely relates to your claim, particularly since you claim to be an evolutionist. It's really simple. Do you agree that man was created from the dirt as the Bible says he was, or did man evolve from an ape like ancestor?? I mean, if you are not picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to accept or reject, the answer should be an easy one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted February 14, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? The star was a supernatural event and it was intended for the Magi, given the description of its movement. It is observed as a star, but again, they are telling us what was seen. It would have been how they described what they saw. Remember the Magi were not astronomers. They were astrologers. From the perspective of an observer, the "star" did exactly what they said they saw it do. This is an awesome topic and I have something for you to ponder with this, You may know it but..... How did the Magi know who/what/where/why and when to start traveling towards Israel? This is AWESOME: The MAGI were a Blood Line Priesthood (you had to be born into it) from around 600 BC. Question: Who was put IN CHARGE of this Priesthood in Babylon??: DANIEL Who predicted Christ's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem 500 years before to the EXACT DAY? Gabriel to Daniel. It is my CONJECTURE that Daniel Instructed these MAGI who then passed it from Generation to Generation until the TIME!!!!!! It's an AWESOME CONJECTURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted February 14, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 14, 2014 shiloh- you've stated this before and at this point is kind of meaningless rhetoric to me. You can accuse me of smorgasbord reasoning all day but you have yet to convince me that I am in error that way. Looking- I should check out the Collins book. So you do think it is up to man to decide which parts of the Bible are true and which parts are expendable? No. The truth is what it is, regardless of what we think or how in error we are. 1 cor 13:9, 10 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. Well let's test that claim. Do you believe that man was created from the dirt separate from the rest of the created order, as the Bible says, or do you believe that man evolved from an ape-like ancestor that we alledgedly have in common with chimps? The truth of the situation is what it is, regardless of what you or I think about it. Your question doesn't relate to my claim at all. It absolutely relates to your claim, particularly since you claim to be an evolutionist. It's really simple. Do you agree that man was created from the dirt as the Bible says he was, or did man evolve from an ape like ancestor?? I mean, if you are not picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to accept or reject, the answer should be an easy one. No, it's a strange response to my assertion that, essentially, these truth claims are objective and at least one of us is wrong. How do you go from "these are not subjective truth claims" to "do you accept Genesis as a historical factual account of creation or not?". There is no clear lineage of thought here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted February 14, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 14, 2014 By the way, there's been precious little discussion about the actual OP. I want to know if, for example, there are forms of OEC that allow for some evolution along with God's creating of animals over long periods of time. Or, does this position necessarily entail a quick creation of all life at once? From what I have seen of OEC positions there seems to be a lot of diversity in different areas. I want to know what distinguishes, in particular, an ID type from a theistic evolutionist (if there is a distinguishing factor?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 14, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? ~ Beloved, A Star When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; Matthew 2:9-11 A Very Special Star For A Very Special Child Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Matthew 1:23 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? The star was a supernatural event and it was intended for the Magi, given the description of its movement. It is observed as a star, but again, they are telling us what was seen. It would have been how they described what they saw. Remember the Magi were not astronomers. They were astrologers. From the perspective of an observer, the "star" did exactly what they said they saw it do. Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? The star was a supernatural event and it was intended for the Magi, given the description of its movement. It is observed as a star, but again, they are telling us what was seen. It would have been how they described what they saw. Remember the Magi were not astronomers. They were astrologers. From the perspective of an observer, the "star" did exactly what they said they saw it do. This is an awesome topic and I have something for you to ponder with this, You may know it but..... How did the Magi know who/what/where/why and when to start traveling towards Israel? This is AWESOME: The MAGI were a Blood Line Priesthood (you had to be born into it) from around 600 BC. Question: Who was put IN CHARGE of this Priesthood in Babylon??: DANIEL Who predicted Christ's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem 500 years before to the EXACT DAY? Gabriel to Daniel. It is my CONJECTURE that Daniel Instructed these MAGI who then passed it from Generation to Generation until the TIME!!!!!! It's an AWESOME CONJECTURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, but was it a LITERAL star? Or are you going to give it a different set of rules than you do for what is written in Genesis 1? (P.S. Astrologers back then were not like the astrologers of today. Back then they were also mathematicians, created star charts, and performed many other tasks we now deem as astronomy.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted February 14, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? ~ Beloved, A Star When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; Matthew 2:9-11 A Very Special Star For A Very Special Child Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Matthew 1:23 Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? The star was a supernatural event and it was intended for the Magi, given the description of its movement. It is observed as a star, but again, they are telling us what was seen. It would have been how they described what they saw. Remember the Magi were not astronomers. They were astrologers. From the perspective of an observer, the "star" did exactly what they said they saw it do. Throwing in a new question here: Was the "star of Bethlehem" a literal star that literally "went on before them" and literally "stood over" the particular place where Jesus was? Or was it possibly an astronomical configuration of some sort that would not have been recognized as having any significance to most people? The star was a supernatural event and it was intended for the Magi, given the description of its movement. It is observed as a star, but again, they are telling us what was seen. It would have been how they described what they saw. Remember the Magi were not astronomers. They were astrologers. From the perspective of an observer, the "star" did exactly what they said they saw it do. This is an awesome topic and I have something for you to ponder with this, You may know it but..... How did the Magi know who/what/where/why and when to start traveling towards Israel? This is AWESOME: The MAGI were a Blood Line Priesthood (you had to be born into it) from around 600 BC. Question: Who was put IN CHARGE of this Priesthood in Babylon??: DANIEL Who predicted Christ's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem 500 years before to the EXACT DAY? Gabriel to Daniel. It is my CONJECTURE that Daniel Instructed these MAGI who then passed it from Generation to Generation until the TIME!!!!!! It's an AWESOME CONJECTURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, but was it a LITERAL star? Or are you going to give it a different set of rules than you do for what is written in Genesis 1? (P.S. Astrologers back then were not like the astrologers of today. Back then they were also mathematicians, created star charts, and performed many other tasks we now deem as astronomy.) Yes, but was it a LITERAL star? My opinion....No. If it were it would have been in somewhat of a fixed position then moved based on Earth's Rotation. So just from a common sense standpoint, I think it was a SuperNatural event. Or are you going to give it a different set of rules than you do for what is written in Genesis 1? LOL, you just can't help yourself. Really, whatever do you mean....... SPECIFICALLY?? (P.S. Astrologers back then were not like the astrologers of today. Back then they were also mathematicians, created star charts, and performed many other tasks we now deem as astronomy.) Can you please highlight the relevance of this to my point? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts