Why science will not (and cannot) replace faith

[Luther]

5 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

There are some figurative verses that speak of the "ends of the Earth" or the "pillars of the Earth."    But they no more mean a flat Earth than the "days" of creation mean that the Earth is only a few thousand years old.

It's true that a logically-consistent YE creationist would believe in a flat Earth, though.

I see it the same way you. I would lean towards mostly every verse being used is figurative or spiritual in nature. When I look up at the moon I see that it is round. I'm not supposed to look at the sun ( cause Momma always told me not to look into the eyes of the Sun...if you're old enough you'll get it lol) but we all know it to be round as well. So why should I believe the earth is any different. That's my first reaction. 

[RV_Wizard]

On 12/16/2024 at 1:30 PM, The Barbarian said:

Funny how people who do that, never realize that it's them.

One of us posts complete passages to show context, one posts single verses and pretends that the following verse, in context, completely destroys their argument.  The Bible clearly states that the Lord created the heaven, the earth, and all living things in six days.  You claim that the earth created life over billions of years.  Anyone with a brain knows that both cannot be true.  Either one is true or both are false.  That's why anyone who professes to believe both is either mentally disturbed or outright lying.

You have a long track record of false statements, from claiming that the writings of Moses are 19th century revisions by the Seventh Day Adventists to claiming that the evenings and mornings of the first six days of creation were not real days.... because they didn't allow for evolution.  Any verse of Scripture that contradicts what you choose to believe you pretend doesn't exist. 

When asked which of the miracles in the Bible you actually believe, you can't cite a single one.  If you were put on trial for being a believer, do you think there would be enough evidence for a conviction?

 

[The Barbarian]

Funny how people who do that, never realize that it's them.

On 12/17/2024 at 9:04 PM, RV_Wizard said:

One of us posts complete passages to show context, one posts single verses and pretends that the following verse, in context, completely destroys their argument. 

Just pointing out the obvious.   I didn't name names.    Neither did anyone else.   If the shoe doesn't fit, don't try to put it on.

On 12/17/2024 at 9:04 PM, RV_Wizard said:

You have a long track record of false statements, from claiming that the writings of Moses are 19th century revisions by the Seventh Day Adventists

That is another of your false statements.    I pointed out that the revisions of Moses by the Seventh-Day Adventists were not orthodox Christian belief.   I'm not calling you a liar; I think you get so worked up by some of this that you fail to think about what you write in response.

And I'm not claiming your denomination is not Christian; God doesn't care if Adventists don't agree with the rest of us on how creation happened.  It's not a salvation issue.   Some of the best Christians I've met have been SDA.    It's not personal.

But do try to be more accurate in your claims, eh?

 

 

[The Barbarian]

On 12/16/2024 at 5:46 PM, Luther said:

I see it the same way you. I would lean towards mostly every verse being used is figurative or spiritual in nature. When I look up at the moon I see that it is round. I'm not supposed to look at the sun ( cause Momma always told me not to look into the eyes of the Sun...if you're old enough you'll get it lol) but we all know it to be round as well. So why should I believe the earth is any different. That's my first reaction. 

A millenium before Jesus, people knew the world was round.    And many Jewish (and later, Christian) theologians in ancient times knew that the days of Creation were not literal 24-hour ones.

But none of this really has anything to do with salvation, unless one makes an idol of it.

 

Edited December 19, 2024 by The Barbarian

[Luther]

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

A millenium before Jesus, people knew the world was round.    And many Jewish (and later, Christian) theologians in ancient times knew that the days of Creation were not literal 24-hour ones.

But none of this really has anything to do with salvation, unless one makes an idol of it.

 

I agree. And you know what? Soon enough we will know for sure. 

[RV_Wizard]

4 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

  I pointed out that the revisions of Moses by the Seventh-Day Adventists were not orthodox Christian belief.  

I, of course, proved otherwise; that until the 17th century virtually NOBODY in the church disputed the six day creation.  You keep saying "revision," but you have yet to provide A SINGLE WORD of revised text.  The 1611 King James Bible proves conclusively that your claims of revision are 100%  false.

4 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

And I'm not claiming your denomination is not Christian; God doesn't care if Adventists don't agree with the rest of us

However you ARE lying, because I AM NOT an Adventist.  In fact, I don't remember ever meeting a Baptist minister who denied the six day creation.  Your claims are a perversion of the Scripture, supported ONLY by taking portions of Scripture out of context.  Case in point: you quote Genesis 1:11, but refuse to acknowledge Genesis 1:12.

4 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

the rest of us

You are in a minority am0ng Christians.  Again, more dishonesty.  The Bible teaches a six day creation, which is supported again by the fourth commandment.  As everyone else knows, GOD HIMSELF carved into stone tablets: "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it."

[RV_Wizard]

4 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

And many Jewish (and later, Christian) theologians in ancient times knew that the days of Creation were not literal 24-hour ones.

Really?  Why do you think they didn't tell God?  After all, God said He created the world in six days.  How is it that the creator of the universe didn't know how He did it?  How does it feel to claim to know something God does not?

[The Barbarian]

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

However you ARE lying, because I AM NOT an Adventist. 

I assumed you were, since you were pretty much adhering to their doctrines.    But it doesn't matter; so long as you accept the fundamental doctrines of the Church, you are a Christian.   Hint: whether or not the creation week is literal 24 hour days, is not a fundamental doctrine of Christianity.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

I, of course, proved otherwise; that until the 17th century virtually NOBODY in the church disputed the six day creation. 

St. Augustine, who is a revered theologian in all three major branches of Christianity, had tried to prove the days were literal ones, and finally admitted that they could not be.    Origen was aware that the days were not literal ones.

As you learned, even the text says they are not, since by definition, one cannot have mornings and evenings with no sun to have them.

Even ancient Jewish scholars like Philo of Alexandria were aware that one could not impose a literal interpretation on the creation account.

Moreover, if you take the Genesis account as literal, it says that God created the Heavens and the Earth in one day:

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth   5 And every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew: for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth; and there was not a man to till the earth.

I know... "It's literal unless I don't want it to be literal."

 

Edited December 20, 2024 by The Barbarian

[RV_Wizard]

9 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

St. Augustine, who is a revered theologian in all three major branches of Christianity, had tried to prove the days were literal ones, and finally admitted that they could not be.    Origen was aware that the days were not literal ones.

Citing two people who did NOT believe the Bible as written DOES NOT change the fact that the six day creation was considered to be official church doctrine until some addition dissent began in the 17th and 18th centuries.  As you know, I have documented this fact.  

Not surprisingly, your heroes were considered heretics by the church for their refusal to accept God's word as written.  Origen may have been one of the most influential, prolific (when it comes to writing), and devout Christians of his day, but two centuries after his death, Christendom retroactively declared him a heretic. Specifically, according to The Guardian, the Second Council of Constantinople deemed him a heretic in 553, after Origen had been in his grave for a couple of centuries.  source

Augustine, as I have shown before, is the founder of many heresies.  These include:  (1) the Filioque, (2) original sin, (3) the redefining of baptism, (4) predestination and irresistible grace, (5) the disavowal of free-will, (6) confusion in understanding the differences between essence and hypostases and the energies of the Holy Trinity, (7) theophanies and created energies, and, (8) the validation of heretical baptism.  source

So it is not surprising that you, who spend your days misrepresenting the Bible, would be drawn to two heretics who did much the same thing.

 

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

Augustine, as I have shown before, is the founder of many heresies.  These include:  (1) the Filioque

Actually, it's orthodoxy in the Western Church, (Catholics and Protestants).    It's in the Nicene Creed.    Maybe you should read up and learn what it is?

Calvin, for example cited Augustine as the basis for his theology on salvation.   Luther?

  Luther unquestionably perceived himself to be a faithful follower of Augustine. Indeed, in his preface to the Theologia Germanica, he places Augustine next to the Bible as a source of religious truth.l2 Even when in later works his appraisal of Augus-
tine is somewhat less glowing, he still identifies Augustine as a major theological source, especially about grace.13 Luther continued to acknowledge his debt to Augustine as the interpreter par excellence of the biblical doctrine of salvation by grace alone.

https://www.andrews.edu/library/car/cardigital/Periodicals/AUSS/1984-1/1984-1-12.pdf

In order to clarify where Augustine stands in regard to Greek Orthodoxy, my thesis in this paper is that he has been a "saint" of the Church and has never been erased from the list of saints.

https://www.goarch.org/-/saint-augustine-greek-orthodox-tradition

I guess they're all out of step but you.   Considering that they believe the Bible as written, and you do not, that's not surprising.