[_ Old Earth _] Creation

[jasoncran]

that is why im posting things from that. since my mother isn't a jew I am not a jew to the Chassidic jews. my dad is a jew and I carry that last name but I am not a jew to them.

 

[Barbarian]

My whole point free is that to accept Christ created the fish has adverse implications for evolution.

It clearly does not. Science doesn't deny the existence of miracles. So no conflict with evolution.

We see Adam being created first then Eve. To circumvent this the evolutionist must come up with other beings from which Adam was born.

That's a problem only if you revise Genesis to make a literal history. So not a problem for most Christians.

The idea that God couldn't create a universe in which things evolve has never been orthodox belief, although it's not outside of orthodoxy to adhere to that idea.

 

[Barbarian]

"creation by natural means."

Different definitions of creation.
Creation, something from nothing, differs quite a bit from the definition of creation the TE believes.

St. Augustine, who is considered one of the most knowledgeable theologians by Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox believers, said that God created the universe in an instant, from which all other things were created.

Indeed, Genesis says that living things were created from the earth, not from nothing. Do you believe you were created? God says you were, and yet you were not created from nothing.

 

[kevinmaynard]

so this jesus you claim isn't the son of joseph, mary as a women cant be a king. their fore jesus according to you wasn't a king of the jews and not their moshiac. the concept of the jewish moshiac that he will sit on the throne of david. see what my post said about that him being a son in inheritance but not related.

Jesus is king of the world not some simple King of the Jews. As far as if he is the Jewish King. What do most Jews say? What does Israel say?

I am not Jewish. I don't care what the Jews think. I don't what they wrote about prophecy or 6 days. I have met a lot of Jews and boy can they tell a story. Now their stories try to convey some moral, but I don't honestly think they are literal.

I take what I believe to be true, and use that to figure out the rest to the best of my ability. Try as I might I haven't believed Genesis is literal since I was like 10. I can't suspend disbelief. It is a wild and amazing tale. Garden of Eden, Noah's Ark, Tower of Babel.

That and I can't really believe that all my science teachers were deluded, and science is a lie. I mean I live in the modern world. I know science made this computer I am using possible. My GPS got me to the store and back. I have satellite TV.

So I believe there was a guy named Jesus. He did some amazing stuff. Most importantly He was crucified and changed the world, and the fate of mankind. I believe that is a fact. I also, think if I follow his commands that if there is a place called heaven that by those two premises being true that I am headed there.

Now if you want to argue about the world being 6000 years old, and Jesus came from the loins of the lineage of Joseph I will just disagree. I believe Jesus was't from the loins of the lineage of Joseph because he was conceived from a human woman and a non human male. That being God. See.

 

[Rick W]

St. Augustine, who is considered one of the most knowledgeable theologians by Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox believers, said that God created the universe in an instant, from which all other things were created.

Indeed, Genesis says that living things were created from the earth, not from nothing. Do you believe you were created? God says you were, and yet you were not created from nothing.

God created the universe in an instant, from which all other things were created.
And that is the basis for evolution? Again, redefinition of creation.
Was Adam created fully mature or did evolution have to occur? After Adam was created Eve joined him.

So, the fish Christ created. Were they fully mature? Of course. Did they have age? Not if they were created or if surrounding molecules were transformed. Yes, I know. No need to think about it. It's a miracle. Move on.
Did the fish evolve in an instant? I honestly believe that Christ feeding the many, twice, gives us insight of the concept of creation. Yes, something from nothing. The fish weren't there, then they were. Enough to feed 5,000. The jar of oil... same thing. The power to create didn't end at the instant the universe was created.

 

[kevinmaynard]

God created the universe in an instant, from which all other things were created.
And that is the basis for evolution? Again, redefinition of creation.
Was Adam created fully mature or did evolution have to occur? After Adam was created Eve joined him.

So, the fish Christ created. Were they fully mature? Of course. Did they have age? Not if they were created or if surrounding molecules were transformed. Yes, I know. No need to think about it. It's a miracle. Move on.
Did the fish evolve in an instant? I honestly believe that Christ feeding the many, twice, gives us insight of the concept of creation. Yes, something from nothing. The fish weren't there, then they were. Enough to feed 5,000. The jar of oil... same thing. The power to create didn't end at the instant the universe was created.

Exactly every time a sperm and egg meet, half the dna of the sperm and half the dna of the egg recombine to form a new individual life. Distinct from it's predecessors. This new life is sometimes better off genetically than: either, or both, or neither of it's parents. It's a miracle each and every time.

 

[Barbarian]

God created the universe in an instant, from which all other things were created.
And that is the basis for evolution?

No. The evidence is the basis for evolutionary theory. God is the basis for evolution. His idea, after all. The point is, creation does not require that things be created from nothing. He says that He created life from the earth. And you are a creature of God, but you did not come from nothing.

Again, redefinition of creation.

I'm just noting His word. He says creation of life was not ex nihilo. And that's pretty much the end of it, me.

Was Adam created fully mature

Since that is not said in Genesis, and since the evidence shows otherwise...

or did evolution have to occur?

That is the way He chose to do it.

So, the fish Christ created. Were they fully mature? Of course. Did they have age? Not if they were created or if surrounding molecules were transformed. Yes, I know. No need to think about it. It's a miracle. Move on.

Yep. Unless He chooses to tell us how He did it, miracles are unexplainable. And we should avoid making our own explanations.

Did the fish evolve in an instant?

Individuals don't evolve. Populations do.

I honestly believe that Christ feeding the many, twice, gives us insight of the concept of creation.

He creates in different ways, so it can show us something about some of His creation. The creation of nature was certainly ex nihilo. But you and other living things were not so created.

The power to create didn't end at the instant the universe was created.

True. He just used other methods, unless He chose to teach us by doing it in a different way. As St. Augustine noted, we are amazed about walking on water, but we don't properly appreciate what a miracle the functioning of His universe is.

 

[Rick W]

What do we have so far


1) Still trying to use another definition of create rather than the one being talked about.
2) Feeding the 5,000 was a miracle. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
3) The fish were transported.
4) The fish were regenerated. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
5) Stealing is not a sin for Jesus.
6) No girls in the lineage of Christ.
7) Multiplied 5 fish and 2 loaves to feed 5,000 with no additional anything and without an act of divine creation from nothing.
8) Use of atoms and molecules from the air.

Creation of matured fish from nothingness is something Jesus could not accomplish. Anything else ok. And I do mean anything. But that, no.


I'm not convinced.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Well, from what I read in evidence that demands a verdict, most scholars agreed there are no errors of any consequence in the bible. The original texts were written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, languages still in use today. The skepticism and criticism is a modern thing. Luke's writings are considered by many archaeologists to be extremely credible. He included so many inconsequential details about the leaders, cities, and other events that have been verified by archaeologists to be true, there's no reason to think he got the genealogy wrong.

It's interesting to meet the text in the culture in which it was written, there was no conflict considering Joseph his Dad. We view it in ours with all the paternity tests, legal implications, etc. I envy Jewish people in that respect, they have a lot of insight into the culture and perspective of the writers.

What do we have so far


1) Still trying to use another definition of create rather than the one being talked about.
2) Feeding the 5,000 was a miracle. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
3) The fish were transported.
4) The fish were regenerated. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
5) Stealing is not a sin for Jesus.
6) No girls in the lineage of Christ.
7) Multiplied 5 fish and 2 loaves to feed 5,000 with no additional anything and without an act of divine creation from nothing.
8) Use of atoms and molecules from the air.

Creation of matured fish from nothingness is something Jesus could not accomplish. Anything else ok. But that, no.


I'm not convinced.

Don't forget perhaps the extra fish and bread were only an illusion, and wasn't really there, but the people believed they ate, and thus were satisfied. That would count as a miracle too.

 

[Rick W]

Ah, yes. you're right.

1) Still trying to use another definition of create rather than the one being talked about.
2) Feeding the 5,000 was a miracle. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
3) The fish were transported.
4) The fish were regenerated. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
5) Stealing is not a sin for Jesus.
6) No girls in the lineage of Christ.
7) Multiplied 5 fish and 2 loaves to feed 5,000 with no additional anything and without an act of divine creation from nothing.
8) Use of atoms and molecules from the air.
9) The fish and bread were an illusion. The people believed and were satisfied.

 

[jasoncran]

Don't forget perhaps the extra fish and bread were only an illusion, and wasn't really there, but the people believed they ate, and thus were satisfied. That would count as a miracle too.

really? god would do that? wow!

what about the raising of lazarus? where did his pancrease come from as in one day that is gone? what about any other dead that was missing parts and was raised by jesus? an illusion? what about that jesus whom went through walls and just appeared? an illusion too?

 

[Rick W]

Have a civil discussion. It can be done.
This thread proves it. While there has been some big issues, some heated debate and many opinions presented there was not one insult or derogatory remark made toward another poster.

Catch ya all on the flip side.

God Bless

 

[kevinmaynard]

Since it just doesn't look right with just 9... We need 10 for a full list like David Letterman.

As was pointed out by Mr. Spock "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from the supernatural". Then it stands to reason maybe it was aliens. Aliens could have done it.

 

[jasoncran]

Ah, yes. you're right.

1) Still trying to use another definition of create rather than the one being talked about.
2) Feeding the 5,000 was a miracle. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
3) The fish were transported.
4) The fish were regenerated. Godly miracles are indeed awesome. No need to think about it any further.
5) Stealing is not a sin for Jesus.
6) No girls in the lineage of Christ.
7) Multiplied 5 fish and 2 loaves to feed 5,000 with no additional anything and without an act of divine creation from nothing.
8) Use of atoms and molecules from the air.
9) The fish and bread were an illusion. The people believed and were satisfied.

no women?

matthew 1

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

these are in the tanach of the jews.

 

[kevinmaynard]

really? god would do that? wow!

what about the raising of lazarus? where did his pancrease come from as in one day that is gone? what about any other dead that was missing parts and was raised by jesus? an illusion? what about that jesus whom went through walls and just appeared? an illusion too?

Actually all of those could have illusion. I am not saying they were, but they could have been.

 

[Barbarian]

Why do you think God couldn't produce mature fish?

 

[Sparkey]

As far as miracles go I like how Jesus spoke and quieted the storm. The Disciples were left wondering, "What manner of man is this?"

And he was in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a pillow: and they awake him, and say unto him, Master, carest thou not that we perish?

And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. And he said unto them, Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith? And they feared exceedingly, and said one to another, What manner of man is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?​

And they feared greatly.

So now here we are debating the process of the feeding of the multitude. Did Jesus borrow from various authors who have written about Alchemy? Maybe he said, "Hmmmm... Gold from straw? Maybe I can make fish from air?" Did He move the fish from the ocean? He might have been learning from Gene Roddenberry, the American Playwright. He could have used the Enterprise. Right? That's something we can conceive of. Something that does not cause us to fear greatly.

View attachment 3829 Our FatherGod is "Creator".

 

[Barbarian]

He is the Author of nature. He can use it as He will. Or He can intervene and change it from time to time. But He doesn't have to do that. It's a lesson for us, not a requirement on Him.

 

[Sparkey]

The Law of conservation of matter is inviolate and untouchable and must be kept safe from harm else we see all of our constructs fail at His Word. Even the wind obeys him.

They feared exceedingly.

We would do well to do the same.

 

[Barbarian]

The Law of conservation of matter is inviolate and untouchable and must be kept safe from harm else we see all of our constructs fail at His Word. Even the wind obeys him.

Ultimately, all things exist only because He continues to see that they do. The world is consistent and knowable, because we couldn't live in a world that wasn't. Your sig applies here.

They feared exceedingly.

We would do well to do the same.

It also applies here. Well done, my friend.