[_ Old Earth _] One of my arguments

[jasoncran]

If God is truly omnipotent, then He would know Adam was going to sin. If He is not truly omnipotent, then His promises to us are merely somewhat more likely than the promises we tell each other.



I don't see that it matters. Apes can use sign language. It doesn't mean they have immortal souls.




god does lie, he murders barb?

in him theres no shadow barb. you once again

so once agiain how do we know what eternity is without exerciencing it

so the actual man to the moon mission a triumph of testable science wasnt something that was proving anything

the astronauts apperently werent sure they were on the moon?

sorry a death can very slow for man

hear per clarke and the same link

Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
God had said that in the day they ate of the forbidden fruit, dying they should die-they should then become mortal, and continue under the influence of a great variety of unfriendly agencies in the atmosphere and in themselves, from heats, colds, drought, and damps in the one, and morbid increased and decreased action in the solids and fluids of the other, till the spirit, finding its earthly house no longer tenable, should return to God who gave it; and the body, being decomposed, should be reduced to its primitive dust. It is evident from this that man would have been immortal had he never transgressed, and that this state of continual life and health depended on his obedience to his Maker. The tree of life, as we have already seen, was intended to be the means of continual preservation. For as no being but God can exist independently of any supporting agency, so man could not have continued to live without a particular supporting agent; and this supporting agent under God appears to have been the tree of life

and its dying ye shall die barb. not in death in one day.

why then ressurection barb, why do you bother with eternity since none of us understand it?

we cant understand what will be in the new age now do we so therefore we must also live forever in order to understand what eternity is!

that makes no sense.

i know what that verse means i did read the commentary , barb. but again he is using satan to glorify him

ah so when the apes evolve and do this?

[video=youtube;VjcpRHuPjOI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjcpRHuPjOI[/video]

they there seem to have a society and order and a LAW GIVER! APE SHALL NOT KILL APE.


i have no moral qualms with god doing what he does after the fall but to say that he ordained it prior to the fall that he created adam to sin is a bit much.

he had to allow it but he didnt want us to sin. he wants us to love him and have the options to sin or come to him. your position simply says that man by darwinism has no choice to sin as that is his nature. rape per dawkins is mans and animals attempt to spread his genes.

remember ere adam that according to you there was death and killing and stealing and lying and no morality.

what is a soul according to you?

i would like to know..

 

[jasoncran]

from a one hundred plus year old catholic commentary
on genesis 3:19

Ver. 19. Dust, as to the visible part; and thy soul created out of nothing. This might serve to correct that pride, by which Adam had fallen; and the same humbling truths are repeated to us by the Church every Ash-Wednesday, to guard us against the same contagion, the worm of pride, to which we are all so liable. Thus Adam was again assured that he should die the death, with which God had threatened him, and which the devil had told Eve would not be inflicted. (Ver. 4.) God created man incorruptible, (inexterminabilem, immortal). But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world, Wisdom ii. 23. (Haydock)

it seems the rcc even believes i do!

http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id329.html

 

[Barbarian]

god does lie, he murders barb?

If "acts of God" take lives, does that mean He is a murderer? If God says He creates evil, do yoiu believe Him or not?

Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
God had said that in the day they ate of the forbidden fruit, dying they should die-they should then become mortal, and continue under the influence of a great variety of unfriendly agencies in the atmosphere and in themselves, from heats, colds, drought, and damps in the one, and morbid increased and decreased action in the solids and fluids of the other, till the spirit, finding its earthly house no longer tenable, should return to God who gave it;

But that's not what He said, was it? He said that day, Adam would die. So we know it was a spiritual, not physical death. Indeed, God expresses concern that Adam might become immortal, and prevents it.

 

[jasoncran]

If "acts of God" take lives, does that mean He is a murderer? If God says He creates evil, do yoiu believe Him or not?



But that's not what He said, was it? He said that day, Adam would die. So we know it was a spiritual, not physical death. Indeed, God expresses concern that Adam might become immortal, and prevents it.

sorry barb that isnt what your church teaches see that old commentary on it. take it up with your magisterum or contact the catholic apologist francisdales.

its called original sin

barb. like i said

god allows evil and uses it he doesnt make it.

he allowed satan to attack job, did god attack and place illness on job?

job one

Job 1


1There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.
2And there were born unto him seven sons and three daughters.
3His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household; so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the east.
4And his sons went and feasted in their houses, every one his day; and sent and called for their three sisters to eat and to drink with them.
5And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually.
6Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
7And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
8And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
9Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?
10Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.
11But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

god's jugdments of man arent evil barb and that is what that verse you quote meant!

evil didnt exist then and tell why you arbitrarily deny that death can be from the spirit of men first and then(sin and lust do produce death do they not?) finally mortal death.

and then accept without any seeing or understanding of eternal that we will live for forever?

have you seen anyone that didnt die and was born and lived forever?

 

[jasoncran]

and here from that same link that i pulled from that rcc old commentary.

seems i would love this guy and that rcc.

one corinthians 15

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times,serif]Ver. 13-23.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times,serif] He brings many reasons to convince them of the resurrection. 1. If there be no resurrection for others, Christ is not risen again: but his resurrection (as he tells them ver. 4) was foretold in the Scriptures. 2. And if Christ be not risen again,...your faith is also in vain, this being one of the chief articles of your belief. 3. We shall be found guilty of lies and impostures; and yet we have confirmed this doctrine by many miracles. 4. It would follow that you are not freed from your sins; i.e. unless Christ, by his resurrection, has triumphed over sin and death. 5. Without a resurrection we Christians, who live under self-denials and persecutions, would be the most miserable of all men, neither happy in this world nor in the next, for the happiness of the soul requires also a happy resurrection of the body. 6. Christ is the first-fruits, and the first begotten of the dead, of those who have slept: and by his being the first-fruits, it must be supposed that others also will rise after him. 7. As death came by the first man, (Adam) so the second man (Christ) came to repair the death of men, both as to body and soul; and without Christ's resurrection, both the souls of men have remained dead in their original sins, and their bodies shall not rise again. (Witham)[/FONT]

repair means that it was broken and then it must fixed. death wasnt gods plan.

let the christians that are likeminded as i see this clearly now!

FOR THE RECORD I HAVE ACCEPTED WHAT GOD DEEMS JUST AND have no problems just what you call just (evolution) isnt what god says he envisioned.

http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id176.html

 

[Barbarian]

Your "Catholic source" lacks the imprimature indicating that it is in accordance with Catholic belief. Indeed, the site warns readers to be careful about some statement on the site.

 

[jasoncran]

Your "Catholic source" lacks the imprimature indicating that it is in accordance with Catholic belief. Indeed, the site warns readers to be careful about some statement on the site.

see the other thread barb,

well its the only free one i can find.

pathetic for you do that. so it has to be well "kosher" with the catholics.

its oec, yec and te or any of those dogma?

here we have had local parish priest that didnt teach that mary was the mother of god as you all espouse , just the basics. i guess he wasnt a real catholic.

he taught prayer to god and him alone and none to the saints.

well historically that is what the jews believe and the church
one adam.

i doubt i will change you nor convince you.

what god does i have i dont have a problem with., its the confusion of your renderings that is the issue.

so how long did adam live?

969 years. i meant to go back on another thread and read that but i am asking again

barb, the church 200 years ago didnt even teach that the mary was sinless as they do today.

all the more reason i wont be a catholic.

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Your "Catholic source" lacks the imprimature indicating that it is in accordance with Catholic belief. Indeed, the site warns readers to be careful about some statement on the site.
see the other thread barb,

well its the only free one i can find.

pathetic for you do that. so it has to be well "kosher" with the catholics.

its oec, yec and te or any of those dogma?

The Church has no dogma on any of that, although a number of popes have acknowledged the evidence for evolution. But it's not part of the magisterium.

Here we have had local parish priest that didnt teach that mary was the mother of god as you all espouse , just the basics. i guess he wasnt a real catholic.

That is part of the magesterium. Normally, a priest denying it would be visiting the bishop, and be asked to decide if he wanted to be a Catholic priest or not.

i doubt i will change you nor convince you.

I've spent a lot of time researching and thinking about it.

what god does i have i dont have a problem with., its the confusion of your renderings that is the issue.

It's quite orthodox. And in the Bible:
18 Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things as gold or silver, from your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers: 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb unspotted and undefiled, 20 Foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but manifested in the last times for you, [1 Peter 1:18-20]

so how long did adam live?

969 years. i meant to go back on another thread and read that but i am asking again

And yet God told him he would die the day he ate from the tree. So we know the death God is speaking of is not a physical death.

barb, the church 200 years ago didnt even teach that the mary was sinless as they do today.

Although widely-held since at least Late Antiquity, the doctrine was not formally proclaimed until Pope Pius IX did so in 1854 in Ineffabilis Deus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception

all the more reason i wont be a catholic.

Since God can save you, even if you remain apart from His Church, I have no great need to convert you.

 

[jasoncran]

not this site.

it has the claimer here.

and also the same commentary

http://www.veritasbible.com/
genesis 3:19

Dust, as to the visible part; and thy soul created out of nothing. This might serve to correct that pride, by which Adam had fallen; and the same humbling truths are repeated to us by the Church every Ash-Wednesday, to guard us against the same contagion, the worm of pride, to which we are all so liable. Thus Adam was again assured that he should die the death, with which God had threatened him, and which the devil had told Eve would not be inflicted. V. 4. God created man incorruptible, ( inexterminabilem, immortal). But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world. Wisdom ii. 23. H.

and also has this!

What we believe


We know and believe that the Catholic Church was established by Jesus Christ and teaches the fullness of Christian truth. The Catholic Church bases her teaching upon one source: The Word of God. This divine revelation is transmitted in two ways: through Scripture and through apostolic tradition. Many assume that only apostolic writings are the word of God. However, according to Scripture, their oral transmission is also considered the word of God (e.g., 1 Thess 2:13, 2 Tim. 2:2, and 1 Peter 1:25).

We acknowledge that the Catholic Church, with the Pope at its head, is the infallible teaching authority of that truth through the Magisterium, which relies on both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
In faithful submission to the Gospel, our beloved Pope, the teaching Magisterium of the Church, and our local Ordinary,
-- the Veritas Bible team

from here

http://www.veritasbible.com/resources/articles/Statement_of_Faith

im not privy to all of it but is that what you mean?

 

[jasoncran]

Barbarian observes:
Your "Catholic source" lacks the imprimature indicating that it is in accordance with Catholic belief. Indeed, the site warns readers to be careful about some statement on the site.
see the other thread barb,



The Church has no dogma on any of that, although a number of popes have acknowledged the evidence for evolution. But it's not part of the magisterium.



That is part of the magesterium. Normally, a priest denying it would be visiting the bishop, and be asked to decide if he wanted to be a Catholic priest or not.



I've spent a lot of time researching and thinking about it.



It's quite orthodox. And in the Bible:
18 Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things as gold or silver, from your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers: 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb unspotted and undefiled, 20 Foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but manifested in the last times for you, [1 Peter 1:18-20]



And yet God told him he would die the day he ate from the tree. So we know the death God is speaking of is not a physical death.



Although widely-held since at least Late Antiquity, the doctrine was not formally proclaimed until Pope Pius IX did so in 1854 in Ineffabilis Deus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception



Since God can save you, even if you remain apart from His Church, I have no great need to convert you.

that same "church' that killed my family? hmm barb, the jews.

yes i hold the the luther and the eu era of say the 1900s to that as well.

sorry both protestants killed jews and we wonder why the jews of today hate christ. i dont mention him to much when i did see my family. if i did i wouldnt be welcome at all.

in my reasearch its this and i was told this by my dad, though he oddly did marry a catholic, and my grandparents for a while didnt like here at all. it changed when i was born

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/160992/jewish/Can-a-Jew-believe-in-Jesus.htm

that sentiment runs deep in the jews of today despite any attempt by the pope and the protestants to reconcile.

i say that is its easy to see that the church and protestants can deviate so easily.

sorrry barb. i am not a calvinist, im arminist , i dont think that god would design man to sin. he allowed it of course. he had to. its like having a kid and they make a bad decision and allow them to rot in jail for their crimes. you are broken hearted but they have a lesson to learn.

crudely that is what had to be done with adam.

oddly you didnt answer the age of adam. by jewish tradition noah taught abraham. how is that possible if man didnt live that long?

 

[jasoncran]

well hmm i wont go to deep into this but that makes a point, how does the bible show that the woman mary had to be sinless. she was the seed of adam was she not?

yes therefore she wasnt sinless.

that is my point as well. do you see how way out that stuff is.

also one of many reasons i wont go full catholic, i have been to mass but i wont be a full commited catholic.

when your done with that sinless mary doctrine it would have to go back to eve. sorry the bible doesnt mention that at all. otherwise she could be that perfect sacrifise and stand in the gap.

i hope you see that, the kinsmen redeemer(goel) has to be related to all man or the man (per the book of ruth) and also able to purchase the the land or the slave.

that said. she could do the trick. she being sinless would have such power or authority to be that priest.

but i will drop that as well this isnt the right forum. just wanted to say.

ok lets go back to if evo did occur then whom was the first wife of seth and cain. where did they come from?

so how did god violate the laws of sciences on genetics then?

surely death was and diseases occured and it was from incest etc. a problem for you not me as the yec says that the decay occured slowly. we can see this with the ages of men in the bible that were prior to noah.

 

[MarbleShooter]

Eric, can you explain why you think that since the theory of evolution dosen't explain the origin of life or the origin of DNA, it shouldn't be taught in schools? Since the theory of evolution dosen't deal with either, I see no reason to use that stance to make such a claim. If you don't want the theory of evolution by natural selection taught in schools, then I think it would be best to find a model that works and fits all the data and evidence that has been collected in biology. Demanding a working theory to be thrown out for your stated reason is nonsense and will not work because the footing is really loose.

 

[EricTheBaptist]

Eric, can you explain why you think that since the theory of evolution dosen't explain the origin of life or the origin of DNA, it shouldn't be taught in schools? Since the theory of evolution dosen't deal with either, I see no reason to use that stance to make such a claim. If you don't want the theory of evolution by natural selection taught in schools, then I think it would be best to find a model that works and fits all the data and evidence that has been collected in biology. Demanding a working theory to be thrown out for your stated reason is nonsense and will not work because the footing is really loose.

Because, all this other "evidence" for Evolution is all pointless when the biggest point of all is not identified. The Theory of Evolution does deal with both of these, I'm taking biology in school right now.

 

[Barbarian]

no barb, he may have studied but did he get a degree

that is like me after years of listening to you teach me on biology then apply for a position of science.

he never was formally educated. thats my point.

Actually, he was. Learn about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin's_education

 

[Barbarian]

Because, all this other "evidence" for Evolution is all pointless when the biggest point of all is not identified.

So all the evidence for chemistry is pointless, because it doesn't say where atoms came from? I think you already realize that's a specious argument.

The Theory of Evolution does deal with both of these,

You think so? Where in Darwin's four points does that occur? Or if you want to consider the modern theory, where does the New Synthesis make such a claim?

That's not a rhetorical question; I'd like an answer.

I'm taking biology in school right now.

I've been "taking biology" for nearly 50 years, and I can tell you that evolutionary theory is not about the origin of life.

 

[EricTheBaptist]

So all the evidence for chemistry is pointless, because it doesn't say where atoms came from? I think you already realize that's a specious argument.
But then again where atoms came from is pointless. It's not going to make or break the biggest religions in the world and prove them false.


You think so? Where in Darwin's four points does that occur? Or if you want to consider the modern theory, where does the New Synthesis make such a claim?

That's not a rhetorical question; I'd like an answer.
Doesn't occur in Darwin's four points. But I consider it to be part of the Evolutionary Theory.


I've been "taking biology" for nearly 50 years, and I can tell you that evolutionary theory is not about the origin of life.

It's about species evolving over time, contrary to what God claims.

 

[MarbleShooter]

Because, all this other "evidence" for Evolution is all pointless when the biggest point of all is not identified. The Theory of Evolution does deal with both of these, I'm taking biology in school right now.

The theory of evolution is about how organisms change and specialize into niches. The Theory of evolution dose not state anything about the origin of life. That is the abiogenesis hypothesis and the origin of the universe is the Big Bang theory. Faulting the Theory of evolution for not explaining where life came from is like tossing out special relativity because Einstein didn't explain the origin of gravity and light.

 

[Barbarian]

It's about species evolving over time, contrary to what God claims.

Show us where God claims new species don't evolve over time. Since we have directly observed speciations, that would be more than odd.

 

[jasoncran]

so would barbarian allow a dropout to teach science.

he did some work but seriously.. yes had a theology degree.

i could go on the both talkorigins who had two amateurs that reasearched and came to conclusion and aid in attacking believers and yet had no degree in biology.

but thats ok they believe in evolution.

yet if not, well then they are stupid..

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/06/1/l_061_01.html

darwin didnt know of mendel yet mendel know of him. oddly.

go figure.

 

[MarbleShooter]

so would barbarian allow a dropout to teach science.

Is there a reason you are dragging this on this long? I already know I answered Darwin's validity and so did Barbarian earlier. It seems you want to retro fit today's standards during a time when these standards didn't exist. Like having an evolutionary Biology degree before their was even a field of Evolutionary biology. In science a degree will get you into a lab, but the results and accuracy is what gets you notoriety. Darwin Studied and collected data for years and then published a book stating his theory that was quickly tested. The Data he collected was corrected over the last 150+ years and the theory has grown in both supportability and stability. Can we move on?

he did some work but seriously.. yes had a theology degree.

Not to mention a hefty tome of a book with which was highly referenced and mountains of data. Moving on.

i could go on the both talkorigins who had two amateurs that reasearched and came to conclusion and aid in attacking believers and yet had no degree in biology.

Talk origins dose have heavily referenced work from biologists in the field and has access to many many papers on the subject. The website is also updated based on the most current available information. Moving on.

but thats ok they believe in evolution.

Nope, its because the site dose its best to source all its information and uses scientists in the fields of the presented information to comment on it.

yet if not, well then they are stupid..

I have yet to see someone in this thread call someone stupid. So I would put a hault on the libel.

darwin didnt know of mendel yet mendel know of him. oddly.

go figure.

That is correct. Darwin was unaware of Mendel's works in genetics. If Darwin knew, he probably would have went to great lengths to work with Mendel in the construction of both of their theories.