[_ Old Earth _] Evolutionism and Evolution; some essential differences

[Barbarian]

If you want to believe the whales," manatees, seals, sea lions, etc.", then that is your decision. I prefer to use the common sense that God gave.

I have a problem with insisting that the flood story is literally true,when one can dismiss a passage as violating common sense if taken literally.

 

[dirtfarmer]

I have a problem with insisting that the flood story is literally true,when one can dismiss a passage as violating common sense if taken literally.

hello Barbarian, dirtfarmer here

In Genesis 7:21 the statement is made: " and all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth". Where is it stated that the fish and great whales were destroyed?

On the fifth day is when "the great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth were created.
On the sixth day is when the earth, not the waters, brought forth the living creatures; cattle, creeping things, and the beast of the earth. It was also on the sixth day that man was created.

There is nothing mentioned about earth on the fifth day.

 

[brujaq]

I have a problem with insisting that the flood story is literally true,when one can dismiss a passage as violating common sense if taken literally.

Pretty much says it all and I can relate ... I had that problem too 40 yrs ago ..

 

[brother Paul]

The Tanakh puts it like this "All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, whatsoever was in the dry land, died.

The KJV writers rendered it "All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died"

The word "charabah" is used meaning "dry" land...thus not in the seas (or even all in the air)....

 

[Barbarian]

Genesis 6:17 Behold I will bring the waters of a great flood upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, under heaven.

So a contradiction to the verse you cited, if you take it literally.

 

[Barbarian]

On the fifth day is when "the great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth were created.
On the sixth day is when the earth, not the waters, brought forth the living creatures; cattle, creeping things, and the beast of the earth. It was also on the sixth day that man was created.

There is nothing mentioned about earth on the fifth day.

Yes, if it's a literal description, we have a problem. But if we take it as the early Christians did, it's not a literal history. And then the contradictions don't even exist.

 

[Cygnus]

Genesis 7:22 ..

To bad it didn't say blowholes.

 

[brujaq]

Genesis 6:17 Behold I will bring the waters of a great flood upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, under heaven.

So a contradiction to the verse you cited, if you take it literally.

You are being willfully ignorant , You can't flood seas you can only raise water level ? You can flood dry earth Genesis 1:10

 

[dirtfarmer]

Yes, if it's a literal description, we have a problem. But if we take it as the early Christians did, it's not a literal history. And then the contradictions don't even exist.

hello Barbarian, dirtfarmer here

What problem do you have with a literal description?

 

[Barbarian]

What problem do you have with a literal description?

As in this "breath of life" business, it leads to logical contradictions where it was never intended to be literal.

 

[brujaq]

Breath of life simply distinguished land creatures like insects were not included .. It's not complicated ..

 

[dirtfarmer]

As in this "breath of life" business, it leads to logical contradictions where it was never intended to be literal.

hello Barbarian, dirtfarmer here

OK, I believe that it is to be taken literally, but if you don't, then that is your business, but I have one question; How do you know when to take scripture to be literal or not?

 

[Barbarian]

OK, I believe that it is to be taken literally, but if you don't, then that is your business, but I have one question; How do you know when to take scripture to be literal or not?

St. Augustine wrote that one should take scripture to be literal, unless there were logical problems in doing so. And yes, it's not a salvation issue, so there's no reason to be concerned if others don't take it as we do.

 

[dirtfarmer]

St. Augustine wrote that one should take scripture to be literal, unless there were logical problems in doing so. And yes, it's not a salvation issue, so there's no reason to be concerned if others don't take it as we do.

hello Barbarian, dirtfarmer here

Don't base my beliefs on St. Augustine. To me it is a salvation issue. If scripture is not to be taken literally, except when we are told that it is parables, or a type, then how do we know that we can take the resurrection of Jesus Christ as literal?

 

[Barbarian]

Don't base my beliefs on St. Augustine. To me it is a salvation issue.

Fortunately it's not. Jesus makes it very clear what it is that saves you, and it's not your opinion on the way God made the diversity of living things. Be very careful not to put up obstacles in the way of people who might otherwise come to Him.

If scripture is not to be taken literally, except when we are told that it is parables, or a type,

So you're very sure that there was a Good Samaritan? We know parables from the context, not by a label.

then how do we know that we can take the resurrection of Jesus Christ as literal?

Because figurative verses don't make everything in the Bible figurative.

 

[brother Paul]

Genesis 6:17 Behold I will bring the waters of a great flood upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, under heaven.

So a contradiction to the verse you cited, if you take it literally.

Which I do not...but where does it say sea life has Neshamah? Only Nephesh...

 

[dirtfarmer]

Fortunately it's not. Jesus makes it very clear what it is that saves you, and it's not your opinion on the way God made the diversity of living things. Be very careful not to put up obstacles in the way of people who might otherwise come to Him.



So you're very sure that there was a Good Samaritan? We know parables from the context, not by a label.



Because figurative verses don't make everything in the Bible figurative.

hello Barbarian, dirtfarmer here

What obstacles are "put up" in taking scripture as it is written. My opinion hasn't been given as to how God made the universe nor the diversity that he gave to the "kinds".

 

[Barbarian]

What obstacles are "put up" in taking scripture as it is written.

None whatever. Only when someone adds something to God's requirements for salvation are there obstacles put up. The problem is, creationism is not in God's word, (nor is evolution; the Bible takes no stand on those things) and telling people that one must believe in that modern revision, is causing many to assume Christianity is false.

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]
St. Augustine De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim

No matter what the extra requirements are, they are an obstacle to people coming to God. And they are a reason for many to leave the faith.

Glenn Morton is an evangelical Christian, a graduate of the Institute for Creation Research graduate school, and a former YE creationist. Here's his story:

But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

"From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ,"

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.

And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.
http://www.oldearth.org/whyileft.htm

This is the real harm that comes from young Earth creationism.

 

[Barbarian]

Which I do not...but where does it say sea life has Neshamah? Only Nephesh...

It appears that the Israelites assumed whales had gills. So they were unaware of the contradiction.

 

[brother Paul]

It appears that the Israelites assumed whales had gills. So they were unaware of the contradiction.

Where in the scriptures do you find that whales had gills?