Questions for evolution believers

[RV_Wizard]

57 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

I've overloaded you with what all the translations say about "tohu wabohu".

None of which say what you want them to say.  You're adherence to Gap theory is not convincing anyone.

[FreeGrace]

2 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said:
I've overloaded you with what all the translations say about "tohu wabohu".

None of which say what you want them to say.  You're adherence to Gap theory is not convincing anyone.

I suggest you make an appt with an ophthalmologist then.  Because the evidence is crystal clear.  Or you won't read what you don't want to read.

Either way, you have no evidence at all, just a lame translation.  I have proved what "tohu wabohu" means from many translations of Jer 4:23 and Isa 34:11.

To deny something that is right before your eyes doesn't help with your credibility.

Are you really that desperate to hold on to your erroneous translation?

Where is the verse that clearly indicates that "tohu wabohu" is describing original creation?  And Gen 1:2 isn't it.  Only context would indicate that is was.  So you'll have to find other passages where the 2 Hebrew words were used to describe a creative process.

But you already know that there aren't any.  That EVERY verse that contains "tohu" describes "chaos" "waste", "desolation", "unsightly" and etc.

How in the world would anyone think that such translations could EVER be used for a creative process? 
Maybe yours, but certainly NOT God's creative process.  His is good.  Always.

 

[RV_Wizard]

28 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Notice it says "eretz" for "land."      The word for "world" would be "tebel."

If all the land was flooded, wouldn't that mean everything was flooded?  I'm quite sure the flooding didn't bother the oceans very much.  Seriously, that's about the lamest argument ever.  Everything in which there was the breath of life died.  Could God have been MORE specific?

28 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

what evidence do you have that nothing died before the fall?

I already presented it.  What evidence do you have that Paul was incorrect in Romans?  Further, if you reject everything else in Genesis, why would we expect you to not reject this?

28 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Yes, God tells Adam that he will die the day he eats from the tree.  Adam eats, but he lives on physically for many years thereafter.   If we can trust God to tell the truth, that death is not a physical one.

You and Satan made the same point.  However, surely die and immediately die are different words.  Did they not teach you that in school?  When Jesus returns to reign for 1,000 years, there will be no more death.  Not of anything.  If such will be the end result without sin, why would one not presume it to be the original intention before sin?

Edited March 4, 2024 by RV_Wizard

[The Barbarian]

44 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

If all the land was flooded, wouldn't that mean everything was flooded?

If all the world was, it would be.   Land is a smaller area than the entire world.   But since it doesn't say the world was flooded, we shouldn't change it so make it so.   We should accept scripture as it is.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Seriously, that's about the lamest argument ever.

We'll just have to disagree about that.   As you have seen, there is no scriptural evidence that says nothing died before the Fall.

47 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

I already presented it. 

No, you merely assumed something it never said.   You mention Paul in Romans, but he doesn't say what you want him to say, either.   You reject everything else in Genesis, so it's not surprising that you reject what Paul actually says as well.

God tells Adam that he will die the day he eats from the tree.  Adam eats, but he lives on physically for many years thereafter.   If we can trust God to tell the truth, that death is not a physical one.    You and the serpent made the same point.   Like you, the serpent is a Biblical literalist.   Because he knew that Adam would not die physically, he told Eve that they wouldn't die at all.    Like YE creationism, the serpent deceived by telling part of the truth.

53 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

However, surely die and immediately die are different words. 

You edited God's actual words by only showing part of the verse.   

Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

By removing "in what day soever though shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death", you hoped to hide His words from us.

 

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

You and Satan made the same point.  However, surely die and immediately die are different words.

The literal Hebrew can be looked up by googling it on your computer.  This is how it goes:  on the day that you eat of it, dying, you shall die.

There are 2 deaths in view.  The "dying" is a process, and refers to Adam's physical death 930 years later.  The "on that day...you shall die" obviously cannot be a physical death but a spiritual death.  

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

 When Jesus returns to reign for 1,000 years, there will be no more death.

Where did you learn that bit of fluff?  Certainly not the Bible.  Please read Matt 5, where Jesus explains how the Law will be applied.  

Matt 5:29  If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.

30  And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

The word "hell" here is Hades.  It is the holding tank for unbelievers who have died.  Their souls are awaiting the GWT judgment.  So yes, there will be capital punishment during the Millennial Reign.

Who do you think will populate the earth that Jesus will be King over?

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

 

 

[RV_Wizard]

53 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Land is a smaller area than the entire world.   But since it doesn't say the world was flooded,

Okay, so it you are willing to concede that all of the land was covered with water but the seas were not, go for it.

56 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

You mention Paul in Romans, but he doesn't say what you want him to say, either. 

I believe I'm the one who quoted Paul.  Paul is the one who said sin and death came into the world through one man.  You can disagree with Paul, but what he wrote doesn't disagree with him.

59 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

You edited God's actual words by only showing part of the verse.  

No, I wasn't quoting.  When I quote I use specific references.  To wit, Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.  Surely, yes.  Immediately, no.  Satan used the same argument to trick Eve.  He knew death would not be immediate.  Why are you quoting Satan?

 

[RV_Wizard]

33 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

The literal Hebrew can be looked up by googling it on your computer.  This is how it goes:  on the day that you eat of it, dying, you shall die.

IN, not ON.  Satan knew death would be certain but not immediate.  Now you and your colleague are both quoting Satan against the Scriptures.  Why do you think that is?

35 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Where did you learn that bit of fluff?  Certainly not the Bible.  

Revelation 21: 4-5 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Revelation 22:3-5 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.

46 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Who do you think will populate the earth that Jesus will be King over?

Only the saved.  The unsaved will be gone.

[RdJ]

36 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

IN, not ON.  Satan knew death would be certain but not immediate.  Now you and your colleague are both quoting Satan against the Scriptures.  Why do you think that is?

Revelation 21: 4-5 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Revelation 22:3-5 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.

Only the saved.  The unsaved will be gone.

That is after the 1000 years. During the 1000 years even the bad one will only die at 100 years old and after the 1000 years satan is loosed and they try to fight God again.

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

No, I wasn't quoting

No kidding.   You completely reversed the meaning of the scripture you quote-mined.   You're starting to repeat yourself again.    Why not just let it be God's way?

 

[RV_Wizard]

3 hours ago, RdJ said:

That is after the 1000 years. During the 1000 years even the bad one will only die at 100 years old and after the 1000 years satan is loosed and they try to fight God again.

Yes, he will try and he will fail.  Then he and his angels will be cast into the lake of fire.  The earth will pass away and there will be a new heaven and a new earth; one without pain, death, tears or sadness.