Suspicion Against Scientists?

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, one.opinion said:

Have I provided plain evidence that contradicts a "face-value" interpretation?

Have I sprinkled clearly non-literalistic language in my post?

 Genesis 1-3 doesn't have any non-literalistic language in it, but that doesn't stop you from assigning non-literalistic values to the text.

And you haven't answered the question.  The question is, are we free to assign non-literal values to your words the way you do to Genesis 1-3, or do you prefer that we understand you in the manner in which you intend to be understood?  

[one.opinion]

5 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

That implies that there are non-essential truths and that would be a fallacy.

Would you consider the doctrine of "do not work on the Sabbath" to be as essential as the doctrine of "the Godhood of Jesus Christ"? I am going to boldly say "no" to that.

[one.opinion]

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

Genesis 1-3 doesn't have any non-literalistic language in it, but that doesn't stop you from assigning non-literalistic values to the text.

Genesis 3 does not say that the serpent was Satan. Making that connection absolutely requires a non-literalistic interpretation.

[Guest shiloh357]

1 minute ago, one.opinion said:

Would you consider the doctrine of "do not work on the Sabbath" to be as essential as the doctrine of "the Godhood of Jesus Christ"? I am going to boldly say "no" to that.

Everything in the Bible is essential.   God did not give us anything that is not essential.   Is it a salvation issue?  No.  But that is not mean it is "non-essential."   We don't get to sit in judgement on the Bible as to which parts are essential and which parts are expendable.

[one.opinion]

4 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

The question is, are we free to assign non-literal values to your words the way you do to Genesis 1-3, or do you prefer that we understand you in the manner in which you intend to be understood?

I understand the basic truth of Genesis 1-3 in the same way that you do. You just dislike that fact. It is true that we will disagree about whether or not anything physically died before Adam's sin. Otherwise, like it or not, we agree.

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, one.opinion said:

Genesis 3 does not say that the serpent was Satan. Making that connection absolutely requires a non-literalistic interpretation.

Actually the Bible does say it was Satan and the Bible treats the events of the Garden of Eden as literal history.   You assigning a non-literal value, and the text does not indicate any non-literal devices are in play in the text.   Simply because you don't believe it as written, doesn't justify assigning values to the text that are not warranted by the text.

[one.opinion]

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

Everything in the Bible is essential.   God did not give us anything that is not essential.   Is it a salvation issue?  No.  But that is not mean it is "non-essential."   We don't get to sit in judgement on the Bible as to which parts are essential and which parts are expendable.

My fault - I should have asked a while ago what you meant by "essential". So in what sense would you say the question of whether or not to work on the Sabbath is essential? Essential to what, and in what way?

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, one.opinion said:

I understand the basic truth of Genesis 1-3 in the same way that you do. You just dislike that fact. It is true that we will disagree about whether or not anything physically died before Adam's sin. Otherwise, like it or not, we agree.

The difference, is that since I am internally consistent, I don't have to modify the Bible and re-interpret the text to make room for an ungodly, unchristian, atheistic theory like Evolution.   I have a coherent theology based on taking God at His Word.  You do not.   And we differ wildly about Genesis 1-3.  

[one.opinion]

2 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Actually the Bible does say it was Satan

Genesis 3 does not say that it was Satan.

[Guest shiloh357]

1 minute ago, one.opinion said:

My fault - I should have asked a while ago what you meant by "essential". So in what sense would you say the question of whether or not to work on the Sabbath is essential? Essential to what, and in what way?

Essential to understanding Jesus as our Sabbath, understanding our rest from sin, as well understanding it prophetically regarding the millennial rest. Everything is essential because every part of the Bible is relevant to the Christian even if it isn't applicable.