[_ Old Earth _] The Age of the Earth – The Helium Clock

[Tri Unity]

Well since you don't know much about me, you're not in any position to pass any judgments on any aspect of my faith or what I doubt. As you've said to others, your opinion doesn't mean anything to me.

I don't need to know anything about you. What you believe tells me all I need to know of where you are now. That doesn't mean that say that you won't grow past this point, and you should. We all must grow. During that process our faith views can also grow.

 

[Grazer]

I don't need to know anything about you. What you believe tells me all I need to know of where you are now. That doesn't mean that say that you won't grow past this point, and you should. We all must grow. During that process our faith views can also grow.

My faith has grown and continues to grow but has never been based on any interpretation of Genesis. It's based on the resurrection of Christ. 6000 years or 4.5 billion years is irrelevant to the fact of that event happening.

I have no doubts.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tri Unity]

My faith has grown and continues to grow ... I have no doubts.

Our knowledge and faith is awarded to us. Not all have the same gift. Doubts about the authenticity of Genesis are DOUBTS, regardless how you spin it. "You with little faith..." That is how Jesus summed up those in his own time who refused to believe even when He - the CREATOR - gave authority to facts. You are no different to the herodian trying to justify your half-beliefs. That's life!

 

[Grazer]

Our knowledge and faith is awarded to us. Not all have the same gift. Doubts about the authenticity of Genesis are DOUBTS, regardless how you spin it. "You with little faith..." That is how Jesus summed up those in his own time who refused to believe even when He - the CREATOR - gave authority to facts. You are no different to the herodian trying to justify your half-beliefs. That's life!

I have no doubts over the authenticity of Genesis. You seem to be very confused over meanings of words and what you want to criticize me for

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[lordkalvan]

Having faith in God and His Word is not self-righteous.

I didn't say it was.

You have too many investments in ideologies and philosophies which should be completely foreign to the evolution which you espouse.

And these 'investments' would be what, exactly?

Believing in evolution and trying to justify your self-belief to give yourself meaning shows that evolution is a philosophy and a faith system; not a mechanism.

This does not follow.

You have denied yourself this fact...

I have yet to see that, whatever this may be, it amounts to a 'fact'.

...akin to an alcoholic denying they have a drinking problem. It is not surprising that you denounce the psychiatry which attempts to snap you out of your denial.

And it is not surprising that you continue to display aspects of the self-righteousness I commented on before. Disagreeing with you does not make someone either the intellectual equivalent of an alcoholic or in denial.

 

[cupid dave]

Having faith in God and His Word is not self-righteous.

You have too many investments in ideologies and philosophies which should be completely foreign to the evolution which you espouse. Believing in evolution and trying to justify your self-belief to give yourself meaning shows that evolution is a philosophy and a faith system; not a mechanism. You have denied yourself this fact; akin to an alcoholic denying they have a drinking problem. It is not surprising that you denounce the psychiatry which attempts to snap you out of your denial.

Do you confess that God is Truth???

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the truth,…
… the way, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

 

[cupid dave]

IMO you only have partial faith. You have nurtured doubt which gave birth to your trust in atheistic scientists. I do not nurture such doubt.

Do you confuse faith in a coming final validity of the bible, or Faith which your particuar denomination advocates as the only way to properly understand Genesis?

 

[Adam]

Your opinion doesn't particularly trouble me. You obviously do not believe is the inspiration of scripture. I do. Paul, who was speaking the words that Jesus told him to say, said:

"For there must be heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." (1 Corinthians 11:19)
​

You see, your heresies of denying inspiration has been expected. It was prophesied concerning you. This is not troubling, it is invigorating.

Circular logic isn't an argument.

 

[cupid dave]

I find it troubling when people conflate the words of Jesus with the words of Paul and can't see the distinction between them.

I know that most people shrub their shoulders and say something illogical like "same difference" or make some appeal to the Holy Spirit and claim therefore Paul's words might as well be Jesus'.


In my opinion, it is important to note the difference. Paul is not the Christ. As such, he is fallible and capable of being wrong. You don't have to be purposefully deceitful to be wrong, just as you were in error about what Jesus said without having intentionally lied.

How is this any different in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John except for the usually Red Inked verses that are supposed the exact words of Christ himself?????

 

[Adam]

How is this any different in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John except for the usually Red Inked verses that are supposed the exact words of Christ himself?????

It is quite different. In those books, Jesus is actually claimed to have said something.

It is quite different than people who speak their own thoughts and then say, without any verification, that it isn't their thoughts, but the thoughts of the HS.


As well, Paul never claims that they are the words of Jesus. That's a modern phenomenon to conflate the two and to put the words of Paul on par with the words of Jesus as if it were Jesus actually speaking.

 

[Tri Unity]

It is quite different. In those books, Jesus is actually claimed to have said something. It is quite different than people who speak their own thoughts and then say, without any verification, that it isn't their thoughts, but the thoughts of the HS. .

Jesus only spoke the things he was told to speak.

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." (John 12:49)
​

You have made a false distinction between what Jesus says through the Holy Spirit and what other bible writers have said through the Holy Spirit.

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." (2 Timothy 3:16)

​

As well, Paul never claims that they are the words of Jesus.

"And to the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband." (1 Cor 7:9)
​

That's a modern phenomenon to conflate the two and to put the words of Paul on par with the words of Jesus as if it were Jesus actually speaking.

Its only modern if you have only just discovered it.

 

[cupid dave]

Jesus only spoke the things he was told to speak.

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." (John 12:49)
​

You have made a false distinction between what Jesus says through the Holy Spirit and what other bible writers have said through the Holy Spirit.

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." (2 Timothy 3:16)

​

"And to the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband." (1 Cor 7:9)
​

Its only modern if you have only just discovered it.

Whereas you will NEVER convince Adam he is wrong on any issue, my point was merely that The Gospels have a very limited number of direct quotes from Jesus, usually typed out in Red letters just to emphasize that point.

The bulk of what is stated thereafter is commentary from a person or writer not much different than reading what Paul says.

Even the quotes are not statements made by Jesus to his biographers, (Matt, Mark, Luke, John), but the remarks these writers can remember to the best of their own testimony.

That each of these men so often supports those quotes independently, we can have more assurance that Jesus did say them.

In we were to inisit upon a heirarchy between the NT writings we could use the ancient RCC division of the 4 gospels, the seven Catholic Epistles, andthe Pauline Epistles but I do not see how this disqualifies the lower end of the scale in regard to the accepted divinity of them all.

If Jesus said something which Adam can find in the Gospels that contradicts Paul's espitles, then let him do so while he refrains from arbitrary and subjective remarks which try to discredit those writings out of hand.

 

[Adam]

1) Jesus only spoke the things he was told to speak.
You have made a false distinction between what Jesus says through the Holy Spirit and what other bible writers have said through the Holy Spirit.


2) "And to the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband." (1 Cor 7:9)

There seems to be some inconsistency here in your beliefs.

 

[Adam]

Whereas you will NEVER convince Adam he is wrong on any issue, my point was merely that The Gospels have a very limited number of direct quotes from Jesus, usually typed out in Red letters just to emphasize that point.



If Jesus said something which Adam can find in the Gospels that contradicts Paul's espitles, then let him do so while he refrains from arbitrary and subjective remarks which try to discredit those writings out of hand.

If you have evidence that I am wrong, please present it.

I am not trying to discredit the bible. I am merely pointing out that many Christians make false attributions to Jesus when they are usually the words of someone else.


To the comments that originally created this conversation " Jesus said that we all come from Adam".... Evidence please.

The burden of proof is not mine. I merely pointed out that the attribution was incorrect.


Hopefully uoi can provide evidence in the future for your claims instead of ad homming about how I will never change my mind. I used to be a die-hard YEC fundamentalist who thought homosexuality was a mental illness and that Catholcs were pagan idolaters.


I happen to love correction and reproof. It has given me the opportunity to reach self actualization and full potential. It makes me a better person.

So, if you have sound evidence (not circular arguments or other fallacies), my only requirement, please present it. If you have such a poor case for your position that the only thing you can do is attack assumptions about my motivations or abilities, rather than demonstrating your own position effectively, that is not a failure on my part.

 

[cupid dave]

Posted by cupid dave

If Jesus said something which Adam can find in the Gospels that contradicts Paul's espitles, then let him do so while he refrains from arbitrary and subjective remarks which try to discredit those writings out of hand.


////


If you have evidence that I am wrong, please present it.

"If Jesus said something which Adam can find in the Gospels that contradicts Paul's espitles, then let him do so while he refrains from arbitrary and subjective remarks which try to discredit those writings out of hand."

 

[Adam]

That isn't evidence.

That is you strawmanning me into something I did not claim.

I did not say there was something in the Gospels that contradicted Pual.


I said that many people falsely attribute the words of Paul to Jesus in the context that he spoke them himself during his earthly ministry.

 

[Atothetheist]

Awesome, this thread is just awesome... Big thumbs up to everybody

 

[Adam]

I don't really want to argue. I just want to make sure that claims made are justified by demonstrable evidence.

If he says Jesus said something, but it was really Paul who said it, then he should be made aware of that so that he can correct himself.

It's his choice afterward to actually do the correcting.

 

[Tri Unity]

I don't really want to argue. I just want to make sure that claims made are justified by demonstrable evidence. If he says Jesus said something, but it was really Paul who said it, then he should be made aware of that so that he can correct himself. It's his choice afterward to actually do the correcting.

Hi Adam,

Basically, I believe in the traditional idea of biblical inspiration. Not entirely, but very close in principal. Consequently I believe that Paul and others spoke under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. If they did not, then it wouldn't matter what Jesus said independently, for the truth of His testimony rests on witnesses who testified to the events of His incarnation. These ones were given both power and authority to speak in His name for the establishment of the Kingdom of God.

This is what I personally believe. You do not believe these things. I don't want to argue this either; either you have faith in this or you don't. Everyone has faith in something; your faith is in that the bible is not the Word of God. You are entitled to your faith.

 

[Adam]

Sir, you do not know what my faith is or my view of the bible.


Please don't pigeonhole me.


It's a simple matter of saying that the HS has effected every writer of the bible.

If so, why is the HS, eternal, not consistent?

If the HS spoke through the OT writers, for example, then why does Jesus then say, "you have heard X, but I tell you Y"?

Because the Son is not the HS.


If Jesus says a thing, then it is Jesus' own words. If someone else says a thing, even by the HS, then it is still not Jesus speaking.

If you had meant, "the HS, speaking through Paul's epistles, tells us X" then you should have said so. It gives an entirely different context than "Jesus said X."


Also, if you are not familiar enough with the content of the bible or you are too apathetic that you don't make such a disctinction, you probably aren't the right person to be teaching doctrine.


Now, wouldn't it have been easier for you to have simply said "Oops, I was under the wrong impression about who said what. Thank you for correction, brother," rather than strawmanning me about what I believe?