Walk Softly Posted February 14, 2019 Group: Members Followers: 5 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 51 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 87 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/01/2019 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 14, 2019 5 hours ago, thomas t said: Hi WalkSoftly, I believe that Genesis chapters 1-2 is true in a literal understanding. But I also think that every Christian should back up what they say. As you were praised so often in this thread, some criticism may be made: you didn't back up your claim that the fossil record was not consistent with the Theory of Evolution. I think, we should always back up what we say. This is especially true for making assessments that are meant to be scientifically relevant. I often see Christians dismissing scientific theories or data without providing one single grain of proof - I find this is arrogant. Regards, Thomas Hi Thomas! I didn't back it up because it wasn't the point of my thread. Actually the very point of my thread is quite evident in your response to my thread. I spent a great deal of time articulating why the evidential debate is usually a waste of time. If you are an unbeliever, I'm not interested in that debate because you cannot account for the preconditions of intelligibility so an evolutionary debate is pointless. If you are a brother in Christ, I'm not interested in the debate because you are free to believe as you wish. It makes no difference to me if you think God guided some kind of evolutionary process, as long as you understand and have faith in what Jesus Christ did for you. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas t Posted February 14, 2019 Group: Senior Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 46 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 944 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 170 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/05/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/20/1980 Share Posted February 14, 2019 40 minutes ago, Walk Softly said: I didn't back it up because it wasn't the point of my thread. Hi Walk, ok, it was an aside. If you don't want to back up an aside, why make them? To me, it came across like "ok guys, evolutionary biology is all bunk!" - "can you back it up?" - "no, it wasn't the point of my thread!" I am a believer. I think it is so important that we act in a polite manner to everybody to not damage the name of Christ. In my view, Christians so often come across as dumb dismissing anything and everything without even trying to back up what they say. Arrogant asides can add to our (sometimes) bad reputation, I think. This is one of my favorite verses right now: If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Romans 12:18 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk Softly Posted February 14, 2019 Group: Members Followers: 5 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 51 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 87 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/01/2019 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 14, 2019 40 minutes ago, thomas t said: Hi Walk, ok, it was an aside. If you don't want to back up an aside, why make them? To me, it came across like "ok guys, evolutionary biology is all bunk!" - "can you back it up?" - "no, it wasn't the point of my thread!" I am a believer. I think it is so important that we act in a polite manner to everybody to not damage the name of Christ. In my view, Christians so often come across as dumb dismissing anything and everything without even trying to back up what they say. Arrogant asides can add to our (sometimes) bad reputation, I think. This is one of my favorite verses right now: If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Romans 12:18 Hi Thomas, Would a debate into the merits of evolutionary theories change the status of your salvation? Do you think it would change mine? Do you think it strengthens or weakens the Body Of Christ when two believers argue over an issue that doesn't have anything to do with salvation? Notice that I haven't, and nor will I, ask you to back up your stance on evolution because your interpretation of the evidence has no bearing on mine. For we don’t live for ourselves or die for ourselves. If we live, it’s to honor the Lord. And if we die, it’s to honor the Lord. So whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. Christ died and rose again for this very purpose—to be Lord both of the living and of the dead. So why do you condemn another believer ? Why do you look down on another believer? Remember, we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. For the Scriptures say, “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord , ‘every knee will bend to me, and every tongue will declare allegiance to God. ’” Yes, each of us will give a personal account to God. So let’s stop condemning each other. Decide instead to live in such a way that you will not cause another believer to stumble and fall. Romans 14:7-13 Take care, Thomas. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 5 hours ago, Walk Softly said: The real question is whether or not we accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God. I do and I would struggle with the idea of anyone claiming to be a Christian while refusing to accept the Word of God as just that. I see no worldview issues presented here other than ones ability/inability to rest in the Truth of the Bible and its message to those who choose to follow Jesus Christ. The point of this thread was to show that without the Biblical God, there is no foundation for the laws of logic, uniformity in nature and absolute morality. No amount of fanegaling this translation vs that translation will change that. So a person with like convictions would have no problem with the Watchtower Society's New World Translation I take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk Softly Posted February 14, 2019 Group: Members Followers: 5 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 51 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 87 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/01/2019 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 14, 2019 7 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: So a person with like convictions would have no problem with the Watchtower Society's New World Translation I take it. Lol. That's a bit of a stretch. The NWT changes the meaning of the message, so no... Anyone with discernment of the Holy Spirit would correctly reject it as a viable translation. Here is just one example. John 1:1 - The original Greek text reads, "the Word was God." The NWT renders it as "the word was a god." Thats not biblical. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 45 minutes ago, Walk Softly said: Lol. That's a bit of a stretch. The NWT changes the meaning of the message, so no... Anyone with discernment of the Holy Spirit would correctly reject it as a viable translation. Here is just one example. John 1:1 - The original Greek text reads, "the Word was God." The NWT renders it as "the word was a god." Thats not biblical. The Rylands Library Papyrus P52, also known as the St John's fragment and with an accession reference of Papyrus Rylands Greek 457, is a fragment from a papyrus codex, measuring only 3.5 by 2.5 inches (8.9 by 6 cm) at its widest; and conserved with the Rylands Papyri at the John Rylands University Library Manchester, UK. Found: Egypt Script: Greek Now at: John Rylands University Library Date: 125–175 (Recent research points to a date nearer to 200 AD) So you personally translated this fragment and are eminently qualified in the field of Biblical research. I'm exaggerating here of course. We all rely on the work of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas t Posted February 15, 2019 Group: Senior Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 46 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 944 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 170 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/05/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/20/1980 Share Posted February 15, 2019 16 hours ago, Walk Softly said: Would a debate into the merits of evolutionary theories change the status of your salvation? Do you think it would change mine? Good day, Walk. No and no (although I am a grim defender of a literal interpretation of the creation story as explained in the Bible ?). 16 hours ago, Walk Softly said: Do you think it strengthens or weakens the Body Of Christ when two believers argue over an issue that doesn't have anything to do with salvation? arguing is wrong, I think. My point was, why didn't you just use a neutral wording like "we could discuss evolutionary science vs. creationism". Instead you wrote off evolutionary biology in its entirety ... in just one sentence. The problem that I had with that sentence was the following: how can a Christian actually sweep aside the whole field of biology ... in just a side note? To me, it really came across as being arrogant. And I think we need to be careful not to be arrogant. It's just that. Regards, Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk Softly Posted February 15, 2019 Group: Members Followers: 5 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 51 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 87 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/01/2019 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 15, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, thomas t said: My point was, why didn't you just use a neutral wording like "we could discuss evolutionary science vs. creationism". Instead you wrote off evolutionary biology in its entirety ... in just one sentence. The problem that I had with that sentence was the following: how can a Christian actually sweep aside the whole field of biology ... in just a side note? It's interesting to me that you are still trying to make my thread about a discussion of evolutionary theories. If I was keen on discussing that topic, I would have made that the crux of my commentary, instead of a simple statement to build the real intent of my thread. ? It seems to make you uncomfortable that, in good conscience, I can make a statement like that and not feel a need to back it up. I have spent a great deal of time evaluating the evidence for evolution and I personally found it lacking. You see, when secular scientists operate on the assumption that there is no God, they are literally forced to interpret the evidence in a way that supports their position. Christians do this too. The point I made, which you clearly missed, was that no amount of counter evidence will change their mind if they are intelligent. Therefore, the debate, much like the one you seem dead set on dragging me into, is pointless. I don't waste my time in that arena much (unless He tells me to). I'm completely comfortable with my evaluation of the evidence and there is rarely a time that I need to argue in support of said evaluation. Why? Because there is something much more powerful than evidence. It's called proof. Unbelievers cannot account for laws of logic, uniformity in nature (upon which all of science is built, including the ever so precious theories of evolution) and absolute morality. If they cannot account for those things, why waste my time debating evolution? There are plenty of very intelligent scientists that believe very much in evolution. Not because they are dumb, not because they are looking at different sets of data, but because they have to in order to support their worldview. 3 hours ago, thomas t said: To me, it really came across as being arrogant. And I think we need to be careful not to be arrogant. Twice you insinuated that I was arrogant and finally, you straight up called me arrogant. On your second post insinuating I was being arrogant, you even finished it with a verse about being nice to others... Lol. Romans 12:18 I find it much more arrogant to step into someone else's thread and tell them what they should and should not say because of your feelz. Even more so when it is quite evident that wasn't part of point of the thread. I mean, I guess it was part of the point in an ironic kind of way, but I'm assuming that irony was lost on you as well. If you want to have a discussion on the merits for and against evolutionary theories, start a thread and do so, I'd certainly read it. This particular thread is about the unbelievers inability to account for the preconditions of intelligibility as outlined in my original posts. Eventually, when I get a chance to write it up, I'll show how the other main religions can't stand up to scrutiny either. It'll be fun. Take care, Thomas. Edited February 15, 2019 by Walk Softly 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplejeff Posted February 15, 2019 Group: Mars Hill Followers: 12 Topic Count: 12 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 7,689 Content Per Day: 2.39 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 20 Joined: 06/30/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 15, 2019 Man's so-called knowledge and so-called wisdom is foolishness, even an abomination, Yahweh says, because it leads to serving creatures instead of the Creator. In the same manner, hasatan uses so-called "biology" to deceive men everywhere. Only a few are not deceived. Same in other fields. Adam and Eve should have resisted hasatan, and he would have fled. Instead , they listened.... and all mankind was subjected to sin as a result when they disobeyed Yahweh after listening to hasatan. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustPassingThru Posted February 16, 2019 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 14 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,979 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 2,112 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/23/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted February 16, 2019 On 2/14/2019 at 1:37 PM, Saved.One.by.Grace said: So you personally translated this fragment and are eminently qualified in the field of Biblical research. I'm not the original poster, but we don't have to be a Greek scholar to say the NWT of John 1:1 is wrong, ...simply because the definite article "a" is not found or used in the Greek language of the new Testament. Lord bless 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts