Is God a liar, or is the creation account true?

[one.opinion]

48 minutes ago, dad2 said:

Your notion that God somehow endowed a creature that evolved from animals over great time simply does not fit Scripture.

You are making an assumption that is contrary to what I wrote just a few posts ago. I don't know if God used evolution to create Adam and Eve. He quite possibly did not.

50 minutes ago, dad2 said:

Your link was nonsense and handwaving.

But did you actually read it? with an open mind? I suspect not.

It is clear you that are not reading what I'm writing with anything more than a search for points to denounce since I find I must repeat myself.

If you are truly interested in a discussion, then you must read and consider what I write. If you are not interested in a discussion, then say so. I won't make the effort of responding to your posts.

[one.opinion]

46 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

According to God's Word in the comparative given in Exodus it is...

As I previously explained, there is textual evidence suggesting that the "week" observance is symbolic. Any observance is symbolic to its antecedent, but Exodus 23 uses the 6+1 pattern suggesting additional symbolism.

¹⁰ “Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce, ¹¹ but the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, that the poor of your people may eat; and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat. In like manner you shall do with your vineyard and your ^[b]olive grove. ¹² Six days you shall do your work, and on the seventh day you shall rest, that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female servant and the stranger may be refreshed.

Clearly, there is pattern to remind us of God's work and God's rest. The reminder of God as Creator is more important than a strict observation of 6 work days + 1 rest.

 

[David1701]

9 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Neither of those assertions are true. Otherwise, how could I accept both creation by God and the truth of scripture?

Creation by God is what the truth of Scripture states, that is how you can accept both.  It does not support evolution.

Edited September 24, 2021 by David1701

[one.opinion]

2 minutes ago, David1701 said:

Creation by God is what the truth of Scripture states

And I completely agree with Creation by God, so we have no disagreement over that issue.

[David1701]

15 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

You are making an assumption that is contrary to what I wrote just a few posts ago. I don't know if God used evolution to create Adam and Eve. He quite possibly did not.

 

That is unbelief.  It is not merely "quite possible" that God did not use evolution to create Adam and Eve; the Bible states categorically that God did not use evolution to create them!

God created Adam directly from the earth and he made Eve from one of Adam's ribs.

[teddyv]

4 hours ago, dad2 said:

Where did this get made? In the holy place? Would that be possibly spiritual? I think that vase held the water needed for cleansing, that seems possibly somewhat spiritual also. Then there is the old fashioned issues like what exactly in the vase was measured.. Do we really know? For example if we put a line measure inside a rim or something, we might get a slightly smaller measure. Why seize upon the unknown to try and make it look like God makes mistakes?

I know it's a bit of a silly argument, but it is what happens when a literal reading is demanded of the Bible. And this is something very real and tangible - a large bronze bowl built for the temple (for holy purposes, but not spiritual). The Creation story is a different genre of writing and, while narrative, is not a textbook document.

[one.opinion]

14 minutes ago, David1701 said:

That is unbelief.

No. There is a difference between believing the message of the Bible (I do) and believing that a literal interpretation of the creation of Adam/Eve is most appropriate (I’m not sure on this point). It is important to my theology to acknowledge God as Creator. It is not important to my theology that He create in a specific time period.

[dad2]

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

You are making an assumption that is contrary to what I wrote just a few posts ago. I don't know if God used evolution to create Adam and Eve. He quite possibly did not.

But did you actually read it? with an open mind? I suspect not.

It is clear you that are not reading what I'm writing with anything more than a search for points to denounce since I find I must repeat myself.

If you are truly interested in a discussion, then you must read and consider what I write. If you are not interested in a discussion, then say so. I won't make the effort of responding to your posts.

There is no 'quite possibly'. God created Adam. There is no possibility that He did not and that man descended from animals. If you think your link had something in it of merit, simply post the quote. 

[dad2]

38 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I know it's a bit of a silly argument, but it is what happens when a literal reading is demanded of the Bible. And this is something very real and tangible - a large bronze bowl built for the temple (for holy purposes, but not spiritual). The Creation story is a different genre of writing and, while narrative, is not a textbook document.

How would you know? What was the Shakina Glory over the temple, physical? What was the cloud in the wilderness leading them, physical? What lit the sacrifices from heaven, something natural? What ripped the curtain in the holy place from top to bottom, some natural occurrence? What made the land dark when Jesus was killed? What was the voice from above when Jesus was baptized, physical? What shape precisely was the bowl and how big was the edges? Where exactly was the measure taken? As I said you act as if we know all this and more and that God is mistaken.

[one.opinion]

11 minutes ago, dad2 said:

If you think your link had something in it of merit, simply post the quote. 

Fair enough, maybe later.