one.opinion Posted February 5, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.11 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 5, 2020 7 minutes ago, charisenexcelsis said: Good question. I originally intended to say two things. First, that the NT affirms creation "out of nothing". the second is that the OT affirms the separate creation of man. Merged the two somehow in my haste. Well, alright, then what NT passages would you say affirm creation "out of nothing"? For that matter, what do you make of the Genesis passages that read that God told the land and the water to "bring forth" living organisms? The language of the Bible seems to suggest ex nihilo creation of inanimate objects, but not for living things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 8 hours ago, The Barbarian said: Rather than the one day God said, not 930 years. This is how we know that death was not a physical death. If it was, Adam would have died physically that day. There was more to death than the spiritual, since Adam was still alive physically. The death began when they ate the fruit. But let's look at your claim here. You say that the day Adam sinned was a day. You do realize that some evolutiondunnit folks who also try to uphold a semblance of bible belief claim that the days of creation were millions of years? If you were one of those (?) it would appear hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 8 hours ago, The Barbarian said: Only if you re-interpret Genesis to be a literal history. If you accept it as it is, you accept that our bodies were created naturally, and our souls were given directly by God. Then there's no conflict at all. Ah, so that's why you harp on the spiritual death one day, rather than the physical death also. You have a theory to prop up. Would you say it is wrong to literally believe in Eve as a woman created from the bone of a man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 40 minutes ago, dad2 said: Ah, so that's why you harp on the spiritual death one day As you have learned, even a literal reading of Genesis shows that the death wasn't physical. 41 minutes ago, dad2 said: You have a theory to prop up. I'm just going with God's word. He told Adam that he would die the day he ate from the tree. Adam lives on for many years thereafter. If God is truthful, it wasn't a physical death. No way to dodge it. 42 minutes ago, dad2 said: Would you say it is wrong to literally believe in Eve as a woman created from the bone of a man? The text itself tells us that it's figurative. The genes in the rib would have made her male, if God had merely taken tissue from Adam and made another person. He would have had no reason to do so, being able to merely create a woman from nothing. But reason for this is in the text itself: Genesis 2:23 And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. [24] Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. Notice that there would have been no fathers or mothers at that time, and would have meant nothing at all to Adam. It's an anachronism, only if you revise it to be a literal account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 52 minutes ago, dad2 said: But let's look at your claim here. You say that the day Adam sinned was a day. You do realize that some evolutiondunnit folks who also try to uphold a semblance of bible belief claim that the days of creation were millions of years? Actually, God said it was a day. Again, you can change the meaning, only by asserting that God did not tell the truth. You're still stuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 3 hours ago, charisenexcelsis said: There is no "beginning to find evidence". Yes, there is. A great deal of evidence is accumulating, all of it indicating that life was indeed brought forth by the earth as God said. Would you like to learn about some of it? 3 hours ago, charisenexcelsis said: The spontaneous occurrence of life is a necessary a priori of atheistic science. There is no "atheistic science." Because of its methodology, science can't affirm or deny God. You've been badly misled there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 8 hours ago, charisenexcelsis said: It is not just Genesis. The NT affirms man's separate creation. After all, our souls are given directly by God. That "separate" enough for you? On the other hand, our bodies are created exactly the way the bodies of other animals are created. You've accepted one aspect of God's creation,but not both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 1 hour ago, The Barbarian said: the death wasn't physical. Quote It became physical also of course. Just as eternal life will also become physical as well as spiritual. Quote The text itself tells us that it's figurative. The genes in the rib would have made her male, if God had merely taken tissue from Adam and made another person. Claiming that God would be required to be using modern DNA and be limited by what you think you know about it is patently ridiculous. He could have made her from a rock. You just don't believe it. Quote He would have had no reason to do so, being able to merely create a woman from nothing. We do not need you to give Him permission to create woman from man as He says He did. Nor do we need you to be able to see the reasons. He is higher than you. Quote Genesis 2:23 And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. [24] Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. Notice that there would have been no fathers or mothers at that time, and would have meant nothing at all to Adam. It's an anachronism, only if you revise it to be a literal account. The verse says "shall" which is future tense. You are abusing meanings to try and support your unbelief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,504 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 1 hour ago, The Barbarian said: Actually, God said it was a day. Again, you can change the meaning, only by asserting that God did not tell the truth. You're still stuck. I know it was a day just as the days of creation were. It is not I that is butchering meanings here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted February 6, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2020 25 minutes ago, dad2 said: I know it was a day just as the days of creation were. It is not I that is butchering meanings here. Clearly you are. If God says that Adam will die the day he eats from the tree, and Adam lives on physically for many years thereafter,there are only two choices; either God does not tell the truth, or the death God spoke of was not physical. Instead of trying to dodge this fact, accept it and go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts