Politically Correct Practice

[Free]

And the Creation account in Genesis makes it clear that trees are trees. There is absolutely no Scriptural justification, or reason, why the trees in Eden were actually people.

 

[researcher]

And the Creation account in Genesis makes it clear that trees are trees. There is absolutely no Scriptural justification, or reason, why the trees in Eden were actually people.

The creation account also says that Adam was made before there were plants. Gen 2:5-9.
But we know, that man was created after. Day 3 - Gen 1:11 Plant life, Day 6 - Gen 1:27 man, or, mankind.

There are discrepancies because there are parables. It isn't all literal. Jesus spoke in parables when he was here, and, he spoke in them in the beginning. He is the same forever.

Not everyone can handle deeper truths (Joh 16:12). It's a shock to the system. The first reaction is typically incredulity. But when we're ready, the HS shows us the truth in everything(1Jn 2:27). Even what happened in the beginning.

It should be evident from looking at nature and its evolution (progress, not the theory), that man does not change color on his own, not even because of environmental factors. If he did, then, the Dutch Afrikaaners who have lived in Africa for 400 years would have turned black by now. And the offspring of the slaves brought to America 400 years ago would have turned white. Same with the Asian and the Indian. God didn't changed people's skin color. And man's skin color doesn't change (or facial features etc) unless different races marry and have children together.

If all men came from two people, there would have had to be a magical transformation somewhere along the line to get all of the nationalities because two people of one race don't all of the sudden start having babies of another race. And, the Bible doesn't say that that happened. God made all of the races, unique and different. Why do you think the blood line of Israel was so protected, especially that to Christ? The OT was written to the Hebrews & Israel who came from Adam. A history of their nation, not the world. God was their God, and, other nations had their own gods. The Hebrew word for "God" and "gods" is Elohim, meaning, God, angels, or gods (same as angels).

Deu 26:7 and we cried unto Jehovah, the God (Elohim) of our fathers, and Jehovah heard our voice,

2Ki 17:31 and the Avvites made Nibhaz and Tartak; and the Sepharvites burnt their children in the fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods (Elohim) of Sepharvaim.

The gods (elohim) of the other nations were most likely fallen angels. Ancient history is replete with stories of "gods" coming down from the sky and various people worshipping them. The sons of God (angels) were on the earth in the ancient past as the Bible describes(Gen 6:4) Which is probably how human sacrifice and idol worship was begun. God had Israel sacrifice animals, fallen angels or Satan would have had the nations sacrifice people.

At any rate, it should be evident just looking at the world that not all people come from the same two people. The Bible explains it. It's just in parable. And the HS can show anyone who wants to know why things are the way they are today. Some are ready, some not. It's a major paradyme shift for the mind to grasp and God won't show us stuff we're not ready to handle. Don't wanna have mentally overloaded Christians running around causing havoc!

 

[Vic C.]

The creation account also says that Adam was made before there were plants. Gen 2:5-9.

We must be reading a different Bible. I read Genesis 1 as a chronological order of events. I do not read Genesis 2 as being chronological at all. I read it to be more of an elaboration on Creation. In no stretch would I consider this a parable. Even if I were to not view this as a six literal day creation would I label it a parable.

Anyway, what has any of this to do with political correctness?

 

[shad]

Anyway, what has any of this to do with political correctness?

:biglaugh

 

[Drew]

Again, Jesus followers are not of this world, Christians should not get involved with politics.

I do not think this is the correct reading of the New Testament. Jesus initiated a kingdom, that while not "from the world", is definitely for the world.

This idea that the world is divided into the realms of the "spiritual / personal" and the "politcal" is not a Biblical one.

Paul announced Jesus as Ceasar's replacement, not as merely a king of some mysterious "other world".

Having said this, I have some sympathies with other things you post. More in subsequent posts.

 

[Drew]

Anglo-Saxon America is supposed to lead the world.

I am surprised - shocked actually - that this statement was not responded to by the moderators.

This seems to be a statement with racial overtones that I think needs to be challenged. There is, of course, not a smidgen of scriptural evidence for this outrageous statement.

We civilize nations, and bring light to those who are crushed under dictatorships.

I think you are taking your own propaganda a little too seriously.

 

[Drew]

Adam was the beginning of the Caucasian race. And he was supposed to "dress it and keep" the garden, which means to "tend and protect it." Adam was supposed to look after all of the races that God put on earth. He was the overseer if you will.

That is the duty of the Caucasian people. Sometimes they go wrong though. But, for the most part, we are fulfilling our duty today.

Goliath hated David because he was a young, rosy complected (white) kid.

Moderators - I would have thought this kind of racially insensitive material would not be allowed.

 

[Rick W]

Sounds a lot like the "Curse and mark of Cain" rubbish to me.

 

[LostSoul]

Sounds a lot like the "Curse and mark of Cain" rubbish to me.

Agreed.