[_ Old Earth _] Early homosapiens and salvation

[jasonc]

And this is why I haven't been here in 6 years, because having a discussion is next to impossible. See ya.

I figured it was because of being a mother of two cute kids

 

[civilwarbuff]

So, according to their God given moral compass?

If man has a moral compass then almost everyone lost theirs. God had to destroy man with a flood because he had become so evil.

 

[Cygnus]

And this is why I haven't been here in 6 years, because having a discussion is next to impossible. See ya.

The question becomes....wy do you a christian disagree with what the Bible teaches? Do you filter your bible through science? If that's the case applying such a filter severely damages ones salvation. For instance it denies the resurrection.

 

[Cygnus]

I agree, there is nothing in scripture to support a position of salvation prior to Adam and Eve unless one believes humans existed prior to Adam and even then it is only sheer speculation.

I agree, there is nothing in scripture that supports a pre-Adamic race. One must present a false Genesis....and it still doesn't work.

 

[Barbarian]

If man has a moral compass then almost everyone lost theirs.

No, everyone has a moral compass. Some people just ignore it. God gives every one of us natural law, which we all understand.

God had to destroy man with a flood because he had become so evil.

Evil is knowing what is right and not doing it, or knowing what is wrong, and doing it. Animals are innocent because they have no moral compass.

 

[Cygnus]

Evil is knowing what is right and not doing it, or knowing what is wrong, and doing it. Animals are innocent because they have no moral compass.

And here lies one of your problems Barbarian....according to you man was once an animal...no moral compass...So, keeping in line with the Bible and not having to introduce your false Genesis, when/how did man receive this moral compass?
Keep in mind if. you can't back it up with scripture....or when you disagree with scripture....red flags go up concerning your theology on this subject..

 

[Barbarian]

And here lies one of your problems Barbarian...

I think you're going to be unhappy with the way this turns out...

according to you man was once an animal...no moral compass...

The first man and first woman were directly given a living soul by God, unlike the other animals. And that made them about to made moral decisions. So, keeping in line with the Bible and not having to introduce your false Genesis, you can see that it's not a problem at all.

Let God be God and stop telling Him how to do things. You've ignored what He told you in scripture about the way He created man.

That said, even if you don't approve of the way God did it, it doesn't mean you aren't a Christian or that you can't be saved. You're just not happy with part of his creation.

Theology won't save you. Loving God and your fellow man, that will do for you. Be as good an imitation of Christ as you can do, and the theology will take care of itself.

 

[civilwarbuff]

So, keeping in line with the Bible and not having to introduce your false Genesis, when/how did man receive this moral compass?

But we notice you simply dodge the primary question that was asked. So, how about it?

 

[jasonc]

The biggest problem if God used evolution then he is a eugenecist.man murders ,lied and so forth and was judged but before said fall he had no moral compass and was an animal and these do fight fir mates,eat their young,war for territory.

.

 

[Cygnus]

The first man and first woman were directly given a living soul by God, unlike the other animals. And that made them about to made moral decisions. So, keeping in line with the Bible and not having to introduce your false Genesis, you can see that it's not a problem at all.

Your false Genesis tells us the first woman evolved rather than was created from the first mans rib....big strike for your doctrine.
Your theology would tell us there was a population of "people" living amongst the so-called first man and women who were directly given a living soul by God......once again you change scripture and introduce another segment of your false Genesis.

Let God be God and stop telling Him how to do things. You've ignored what He told you in scripture about the way He created man.

Soooooooooooooooo the Bible tells us man was created from the dust....and you say I ignored that biblical fact? the Bible doesn't teach God used lesser primates to create man and women. On the other hand, you do.....and must change scripture to force fit it to conform to your false doctrine of Genesis.

That said, even if you don't approve of the way God did it, it doesn't mean you aren't a Christian or that you can't be saved. You're just not happy with part of his creation.

As you well know, I quote the Bible....you don't.

Theology won't save you. Loving God and your fellow man, that will do for you. Be as good an imitation of Christ as you can do, and the theology will take care of itself.

Yes, Genesis will take care of itself....stop changing theology...as you said, it will take care of itself. As for me, I accept what is written and have no need to change it.

 

[Barbarian]

But we notice you simply dodge the primary question that was asked. So, how about it?

You just don't like the answer. Man was created like any other animal, but then God directly gave him a living soul and from that he was capable of moral actions unlike other animals.

Notice that God uses nature to make our bodies, but our immortal souls are given directly by Him. Once you accept it His way, the problems go away. Worth a try.

 

[Barbarian]

Yes, Genesis will take care of itself....stop changing theology...

Christians have realized that much of Genesis is figurative, for thousands of years. Your new interpretation is no older than the last century. You can change your theology, but Christian theology will remain what it has been, as God gave it to us.

Let Him be God. And this won't bother you any longer.

 

[jasonc]

Christians have realized that much of Genesis is figurative, for thousands of years. Your new interpretation is no older than the last century. You can change your theology, but Christian theology will remain what it has been, as God gave it to us.

Let Him be God. And this won't bother you any longer.

Odd jews being around longer then rcc use a calender based on the event of the creation of adam.white wasn't a jew.

Www.chabad.org note the day ,date and year.

 

[Cygnus]

You just don't like the answer. Man was created like any other animal,

That is a biblical LIE. Please retract that lie......or PROVE it.

 

[Cygnus]

Christians have realized that much of Genesis is figurative, for thousands of years. Your new interpretation is no older than the last century. You can change your theology, but Christian theology will remain what it has been, as God gave it to us.

Let Him be God. And this won't bother you any longer.

I'm beginning to think that when one mixes evolutionism with the gospel....that gospel doesn't save you. The pollution evolutionism adds to scripture....no fall in the garden is pretty much heretical.

 

[Edward]

This probably best fits into the theology section, but because I'm asking this from the assumption of an old earth and evolution I feel safer putting it here. If it needs to be moved I understand

My question is: where does salvation come into play with ancient man? We know that people could be saved before Christ by trusting in the promise of a messiah, what about ancient people before the law was ever handed down? I guess it's akin to the question of what happens to people who have never heard about Jesus. But my question is, if they couldn't be saved, why would God have waited 30,000 years to provide a way for man? Millions upon millions of lost souls...

Man can not have sin proscribed to him without law. I think all the pre-law humans are in heaven. and you're right. None of it fits the timeline for evolution. God wouldn't wait 30,000 years to give man the law, so He must have some other way that He purified them. I don't know how, but He's a merciful God and I don't think that He would give them no chance. I don't think He rolls like that. So the only thing that I can think of, is that scripture is right, and the 6000 year timeline. It wasn't 30,000 years.

 

[Cygnus]

I think all the pre-law humans are in heaven.

Would that include all the people who died in the flood?

1 Peter 3:19 in which He also went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, while the ark was being built. In the ark a few people, only eight souls, were saved through water

Just wondering.

I have to agree with this statement.... I don't think He rolls like that. So the only thing that I can think of, is that scripture is right, and the 6000 year timeline. It wasn't 30,000 years.

 

[Barbarian]

I'm beginning to think that when one mixes evolutionism with the gospel...

You get YE creationism.

that gospel doesn't save you.

Fortunately for you, even your belief in "evolutionism" won't necessarily lose your salvation for you, unless you make an idol of it.

The pollution evolutionism adds to scripture....no fall in the garden is pretty much heretical.

Creationist evolutionism isn't exactly heretical; it's merely unorthodox. But of course evolutionary theory, which does not deny the fall, has no such problems.

 

[Barbarian]

God wouldn't wait 30,000 years to give man the law, so He must have some other way that He purified them. I don't know how, but He's a merciful God and I don't think that He would give them no chance.

St. Paul explains:
Romans 2:14 For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves: 15 Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending one another,

 

[civilwarbuff]

I just love how you cut up a persons statements so you can misrepresent what they say.....hmmm.....seems like that should not be allowed, don't you think?