Break the chains

[BobTriez]

I choose to believe exactly what is stated in God's Word. Everyone has a right to believe what ever they want, but that does not change God's Word. To argue against God's Word is what seems foolish to me. But alas, that is the way of the world and of man. I guess that's why there are so many denominations with so many different doctrines all based upon ONE word of God.

There is only ONE truth, so which is it? My view, your view, the baptists, the catholics, the islams, the hindu's, the buddists, the satanists, the atheists?

I am not challenging God's Word. There is a difference between challenging God's Word which is what evolutionists do, and those who just see things differently than you do. What I find disingenuous and really somewhat dishonest, is that people such as yourself, take what amounts to a difference in interpretation and paint it as a rejection of the Bible, slandering God, etc. That is wrong. I not only see it here, but in other areas of discussion as well. There is no room for this ridiculous notion that says "If you disagree with me, then you disagree with God." That is not debate. That is just shoving your opinions down people's throat. You can be right , and yet be wrong in the way you go about communicating it. I could have been open to being convinced that I was wrong. I am not going to brow beaten into agreeing with you or anyone else.

I don't think that's what he was saying. By his own admission he said -

There is only ONE truth, so which is it? My view, your view, the baptists, the catholics, the islams, the hindu's, the buddists, the satanists, the atheists?

None of the above.....it is God's Truth that has ultimate authority over what anyone believes.

So why the defensive strike ? I don't think anyone blamed anyone of anything here....do you ?

Blessings,

Bob

[VRSpock]

I choose to believe exactly what is stated in God's Word. Everyone has a right to believe what ever they want, but that does not change God's Word. To argue against God's Word is what seems foolish to me. But alas, that is the way of the world and of man. I guess that's why there are so many denominations with so many different doctrines all based upon ONE word of God.

There is only ONE truth, so which is it? My view, your view, the baptists, the catholics, the islams, the hindu's, the buddists, the satanists, the atheists?

I am not challenging God's Word. There is a difference between challenging God's Word which is what evolutionists do, and those who just see things differently than you do. What I find disingenuous and really somewhat dishonest, is that people such as yourself, take what amounts to a difference in interpretation and paint it as a rejection of the Bible, slandering God, etc. That is wrong. I not only see it here, but in other areas of discussion as well. There is no room for this ridiculous notion that says "If you disagree with me, then you disagree with God." That is not debate. That is just shoving your opinions down people's throat. You can be right , and yet be wrong in the way you go about communicating it. I could have been open to being convinced that I was wrong. I am not going to brow beaten into agreeing with you or anyone else.

I'm sorry, but I did not write the Word of God, so it is not my opinion or my view that is questioned when someone tries to take the 6 24-hour days of creation in Genesis 1 and turn it into something else.

[Guest shiloh357]

I'm sorry, but I did not write the Word of God, so it is not my opinion or my view that is questioned when someone tries to take the 6 24-hour days of creation in Genesis 1 and turn it into something else.

Well, since God did not say they were twenty-four hours long, I have the right to believe that they might have been longer. It is YOUR opinion that they were twenty-four hours. Besides, what if they were longer? Why would that be a threat?

[VRSpock]

I choose to believe exactly what is stated in God's Word. Everyone has a right to believe what ever they want, but that does not change God's Word. To argue against God's Word is what seems foolish to me. But alas, that is the way of the world and of man. I guess that's why there are so many denominations with so many different doctrines all based upon ONE word of God.

There is only ONE truth, so which is it? My view, your view, the baptists, the catholics, the islams, the hindu's, the buddists, the satanists, the atheists?

I am not challenging God's Word. There is a difference between challenging God's Word which is what evolutionists do, and those who just see things differently than you do. What I find disingenuous and really somewhat dishonest, is that people such as yourself, take what amounts to a difference in interpretation and paint it as a rejection of the Bible, slandering God, etc. That is wrong. I not only see it here, but in other areas of discussion as well. There is no room for this ridiculous notion that says "If you disagree with me, then you disagree with God." That is not debate. That is just shoving your opinions down people's throat. You can be right , and yet be wrong in the way you go about communicating it. I could have been open to being convinced that I was wrong. I am not going to brow beaten into agreeing with you or anyone else.

I don't think that's what he was saying. By his own admission he said -

There is only ONE truth, so which is it? My view, your view, the baptists, the catholics, the islams, the hindu's, the buddists, the satanists, the atheists?

None of the above.....it is God's Truth that has ultimate authority over what anyone believes.

So why the defensive strike ? I don't think anyone blamed anyone of anything here....do you ?

Blessings,

Bob

No, I am not trying to place blame on anyone or prove anyone wrong. All I am stating is that it's God's word that has ultimate authority and thus, it is God that will prove who is right and who is wrong within their own beliefs.

It does not matter what one believes about the creation of the universe, but how that belief effects God's place in their life. What matters most is where God is in that persons life and what level of importance that person places on His Word.

In my life, I have found it to be the most important truth I will ever know.

[VRSpock]

I'm sorry, but I did not write the Word of God, so it is not my opinion or my view that is questioned when someone tries to take the 6 24-hour days of creation in Genesis 1 and turn it into something else.

Well, since God did not say they were twenty-four hours long, I have the right to believe that they might have been longer. It is YOUR opinion that they were twenty-four hours. Besides, what if they were longer? Why would that be a threat?

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night, And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And the evening and the morning were the second day.

And the evening and the morning were the third day.

And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

It seems, God knew people would try to question the 24-hour day way before anyone ever thought about it.

Later on in Genesis 5:3, it states that Adam was 130 years old. So, if Adam was created on the 6th day, yet at some point after the 7th day he was 130 years old, how likely is it that these were more then 24-hour days?

Is there some great mystery of the Bible that I am missing here?

I give credit to one of artsylady's posts about Adams age after the 7th day, because I did not know that until I looked it up for myself. Had I known that 17 years ago it might have made an effect on me, then again it might not because I was so intent and choosing not to believe His Word at the time.

Edited May 31, 2004 by vrspock

[BobTriez]

I am not challenging God's Word.

Edited May 31, 2004 by BobTriez

[nebula]

Later on in Genesis 5:3, it states that Adam was 130 years old. So, if Adam was created on the 6th day, yet at some point after the 7th day he was 130 years old, how likely is it that these were more then 24-hour days?

Is there some great mystery of the Bible that I am missing here?

I give credit to one of artsylady's posts about Adams age after the 7th day, because I did not know that until I looked it up for myself.

Genesis 5

3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. (NIV)

Genesis 5

3 When Adam had lived one hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. (NASB)

Genesis 5

3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth: (KJV)

I don't get it - it sounds to me like Adam had lived on the Earth for 130 years before he became the father of Seth. I fail to see how this correlates with the days of Creation.

What am I missing here?

[BobTriez]

Later on in Genesis 5:3, it states that Adam was 130 years old.

Edited May 31, 2004 by BobTriez

[VRSpock]

Later on in Genesis 5:3, it states that Adam was 130 years old.  So, if Adam was created on the 6th day, yet at some point after the 7th day he was 130 years old, how likely is it that these were more then 24-hour days?

Is there some great mystery of the Bible that I am missing here?

I give credit to one of artsylady's posts about Adams age after the 7th day, because I did not know that until I looked it up for myself.

Genesis 5

3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. (NIV)

Genesis 5

3 When Adam had lived one hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. (NASB)

Genesis 5

3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth: (KJV)

I don't get it - it sounds to me like Adam had lived on the Earth for 130 years before he became the father of Seth. I fail to see how this correlates with the days of Creation.

What am I missing here?

That there is NO WAY that the 7 days could be 1,000 or 1,000,000,000 years long since that would make that verse a lie. Unless there is something about basic arithmetic I am missing.

[nebula]

What concerns me a lot about this, is what happens to a Christian? When a Christian starts thinking the earth is billions of years old it destroys their confidence in the Bible.

For what it is worth, my confidence in the Bible is as strong as it has ever been. seeing the words as poetic illustrations rather than scientific terminologies does not cause me to believe God is a liar or any other claims people have made of me.

I wish somebody could understand that.

Goodness, I'd be dead if I didn't cling to the Bible. There were a few times that certain passages of Scripture were all that stood between me and suicide.

Look, I have studied science. I have been instructed in the cultural history of the people of the Bible. I've been exposed somewhat to the creation stories of the surounding cultures of the people of the Bible (ie. Sumerians, Babylonians) and know that there are many similarities but with key differences in the accounts. Adjusting my interpretation of Gen. 1 is the only means I have been able to reconcile the seemingly inconsistencies. Telling me that the scientific account is all a bunch of lies does not make sense compared to what I have learned about and from science. If it science is a failure with the age of the Earth, than how can I trust science for anything - including cleanliness and medicine and technology? I might as well believe pseudo -science and their claims that a pixel distortion in the SOHO (telescope that views the sun) images are flying suacers! Or that Planet X is going to destroy us.

If your goal was to run me off and shut me up - congratulations. You all win!

Other than to see an answer to the last question I posted, I'm done.

Just as I am done in the science bulletin board trying to convince everyone that Christians are a bunch of peons. My efforts are just as fruitless and vain there as here.