The Vatican says Evolution is right!?!?!

[dadof10]

That the "Vatican says evolution is right" is a 57 year old story (in fact, even older), and was not the point of the article you posted.

Perhaps 4th century AD older.... (well, maybe not the evolution bit, but the general idea)

Wow. I haven't read this before. Very nice.

I believe in the literal account myself but I also think it doesn't really matter what a Christian believes on that particular topic of how God might have created the earth. No one was there to see it. It wasn't written down "officially" until moses did it. It does have a poetic nature about it. I have friends who are devout Christian who believe evolution happened as well. I just don't think it matters one way or the other for a Christian. It shouldn't be a barrier. I have other friends that reject Christianity soley on that issue. After talking to them; however, they really are close to believing in Jesus and Him raising from the dead. ...and His desire for them to be saved.

I say focus on the core. Jesus is core. Focus on that. All the other stuff is peripheral to the faith

Amen. But you have to admit, this is fun. :P

 

[cyberjosh]

I'll ask the same question to you I asked to Misfit, If the Genesis account is to be taken only literally, why did a Pure Spirit have to rest on the 7th day?

God didn't have to rest, He simply did rest, because He decided to cease from His work of creation on the seventh day. He determined the exact timing and stages of the other six days, so why not the seventh?

Obviously there is an element of allegory in the account.

Not unless the theme of "entering into God's rest" in Hebrews is also an allegory. But no there is no good reason to take the Genesis creation story as containing any allegory apart from the literal.

~Josh

 

[MISFIT]

Believe what you want but history says other wise.

What historical document have you quoted? All that's here is typical anti-Catholic ranting.

Well where to begin hmm.... Holidays. Christmas, Jesus was more than likely born in October during the feast of trumpets NOT December during the pagan celebration of the winter solstice. So why do we celebrate the birth of Christ on a pagan holiday? Or how about the old Pagan festival of the dead? Later renamed all souls day or as you now call it all saints day.

So what? Because Christianity supplanted the pagan religions of Rome doesn't mean the Church accepted any pagan DOCTRINE. You have to PROVE IT, you can't just say it. A good place to start is with the Early Church Fathers before and immediately after Constantine. They were extremely careful about the purity of the Gospel. If pagan doctrine was being embraced by Christianity, certainly there would be some backlash. There would be at least a few "orthodox" Christians who complained, right? Where are their writings?

On a side note, All Souls Day is celebrated on Oct. 31 and All Saints Day on Nov. 1. They are two seperate holidays.

[quote:23dmz6qv]Of course we could always get on the subject of Mary shall I go there? No where in the Bible is she worshiped or prayed to or even held in high regard. Yes she was the earthly mother of GOD incarnate, but she was simply human. She had other children and like all of us was born with original sin. Also the Hebrew word for virgin means young woman. Do I believe in the virgin birth? Yea I do, but she was not a virgin all of her life, if she was then tell me where Jesus' half-siblings came from? Why does the Catholic church hold her in such high regard? Simple to satisfy the Goddess worshipers that otherwise would not have converted.

I never asked for your convoluted interpretation of Scripture, just HISTORICAL FACT that Christianity accepted pagan doctrines after She was legalized in the Roman Empire. Do you have any?[/quote:23dmz6qv]

1st of all I am NOT ANTI-CATHOLIC! 2nd, so I guess you CAN"T show me where in the Bible it says we should pray to and worship Mary.

 

[dadof10]

God didn't have to rest, He simply did rest, because He decided to cease from His work of creation on the seventh day. He determined the exact timing and stages of the other six days, so why not the seventh?

Good point. The word "rest" doesn't have to mean "a physical body wearing down and needing to repair itself", it could mean simply "ceasing work".

Not unless the theme of "entering into God's rest" in Hebrews is also an allegory. But no there is no good reason to take the Genesis creation story as containing any allegory apart from the literal.

Well, here I think it is allegorical, and the case could be made that it proves the 7th day rest in Genesis is also. "So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God; 10 for whoever enters God's rest also ceases from his labors as God did from his." (Hebrews (RSV) 4)

Obviously a Spiritual Being doesn't "labor". He has nothing to labor with and He's outside of time. He does everything simply by thinking it into being in the eternal Now.

This subject seems a lot like the flap over the earth/sun centered universe, Josh. Genesis was interpreted literally By all of Christianity up until Copernicus and Galilio proved it wasn't an earth centered universe. I don't know whether evolution will ever be proved, (or any other theory) and it really doesn't matter. What matters to both of us is that God created, and we both agree on that point. How He did it is not all that important to me, unless someone uses their own Biblical interpretation of Genesis (the literal one) to bash the Catholic Church. Then it matters (to me anyway ).

God Bless, Mark

 

[dadof10]

1st of all I am NOT ANTI-CATHOLIC!

Not anti-Catholic people, but what about anti-Catholic CHURCH?

2nd, so I guess you CAN"T show me where in the Bible it says we should pray to and worship Mary.

Just as soon as you show me the verses that say every doctrine must be contained in Scripture.

Well, you can't show any historical documentation for your ridiculous claims, so I guess you moved on to Biblical interpretation?

 

[MISFIT]

1st of all I am NOT ANTI-CATHOLIC!

Not anti-Catholic people, but what about anti-Catholic CHURCH?

2nd, so I guess you CAN"T show me where in the Bible it says we should pray to and worship Mary.

Just as soon as you show me the verses that say every doctrine must be contained in Scripture.

Well, you can't show any historical documentation for your ridiculous claims, so I guess you moved on to Biblical interpretation?

You know what, just go on thinking whatever you want I guess when we die we'll see if there is or is not a purgatory. (there is not) Until then I will answer your questions when you answer one of mine, and yes if it's not scripture it's not GOD that's just one reason why I'm not Catholic. Tell me did you watch the video I posted the link to? One more thing even IF I show you where you can find historical proof of what I say, will it matter? Will it change what you think at all? Or will you just tell me that it's an unreliable source,and that it's false. You are no different than the Mormons I deal with everyday, you say you want to see proof, but your mind is not open to anything other than whats been beaten into you. Open your mind answer at least one of my questions and then I may answer yours.

 

[MISFIT]

A good read:http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/monstr.htm

A video featuring the Popes hat, and where it comes from:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-WOZCPWkwc

 

[dadof10]

Until then I will answer your questions when you answer one of mine, and yes if it's not scripture it's not GOD that's just one reason why I'm not Catholic.

Where does Scripture teach this doctrine?

Tell me did you watch the video I posted the link to?

Yes. To be polite, I'm not too impressed.

One more thing even IF I show you where you can find historical proof of what I say, will it matter? Will it change what you think at all?

Yes, it will matter very much. Finding the historical Church mattered immensley in my re-conversion. The Early Church Fathers believed and taught the doctrines of Purgatory, prayers for the dead, communion of saints, hierarchical sacrificial preisthood, True Presence in the Eucharist, etc. In short, they were Catholic, and WAY before Constantine. The ECF's and the early documents were invaluable, so if you can find some that teach specifically Protestant doctrines I'll definitely listen.

Or will you just tell me that it's an unreliable source,and that it's false.

Depends on the source, as I'm sure it would with you.

You are no different than the Mormons I deal with everyday, you say you want to see proof, but your mind is not open to anything other than whats been beaten into you. Open your mind answer at least one of my questions and then I may answer yours.

You're still ranting...

 

[dadof10]

A good read:http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/monstr.htm

A video featuring the Popes hat, and where it comes from:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-WOZCPWkwc

: You may not have heard of Hunt or Boettner, but you know their work. It's still anti-Catholic silliness.

 

[cyberjosh]

Well, here I think it is allegorical, and the case could be made that it proves the 7th day rest in Genesis is also. "So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God; 10 for whoever enters God's rest also ceases from his labors as God did from his." (Hebrews (RSV) 4)

Obviously a Spiritual Being doesn't "labor". He has nothing to labor with and He's outside of time. He does everything simply by thinking it into being in the eternal Now.

I agree with you on the essentials of the truth of creation, but let me tell you why I personally believe Genesis 1&2 are not allegorical. This may blow your mind if you've never thought of it this way, but it depends on how you take it. First of all, most people forget that Genesis is not the only place where the story of creation is told (this is important - it's what this whole post focuses on). It was "repeated" by God himself on Mt. Sinai in condensed form (but infact it was the original declaration), and God can hardly misunderstand or misrepresent Himself or His own words, and it lacks the ambiguous context that people can weasel out of Genesis by trying to interpret days (yom) in an ambiguous fashion (for example). In two places in Exodus God unequivocally stated its truth:

"Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy." (Exodus 20:9-11).

And:

"It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed" (Exodus 31:17).

This wasn't God laying down literary allegory, or Moses detailing the story of creation in a literary fashion, but was recorded by direct dictation from the mouth of God.

Now here's the real gottcha and 'aha' to be had about this. The verse in Exodus 20 is of tantamount importance, as is the whole chapter - containing the Ten Commandments. But there is something else special about this chapter...

Trick Question: What were the first words of the Bible to be written? Answer: Exodus 20:2! This is where it all began, right at Mt. Sinai! God for the first time has openly revealed Himself to His people - in terrifying corporeal presence - and it is at Mt. Sinai that He authorized Scripture to be written by commanding Moses to write down what He speaks! The first words that came out of God's mouth at Sinai was the beginning of written Scripture! Where do you think Moses learned of the creation account from? God told him plainly at Sinai in the desert and Moses faithfully recorded it, and then later by inspiration of the Holy Spirit wrote the complete detailed account of what actually happened at Creation, but it was established long before Moses wrote Genesis: God spoke it with authority and truth, and so terrifying, convicting, and powerful were His words that the people said, "let not God speak with us, lest we die!".

This is why I believe the literal account of Genesis: it was confirmed by the mouth of God Himself, and was spoken with authority and clarity in the very Ten Commandments of God.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[Gabe]

Is it not possible that God Himself was speaking to them in poetic terms and had taken into consideration their current understanding and knowledge of the world around them, much like Christ and His parable of the mustard seed?

Based on the Genesis account, those same people thought the world to be flat and motionless, they thought the moon to be the actual source of evening light and they thought the sun would actually rise and fall every day, and God was in no hurry to correct them. If we can reconcile our faith with science on these issues then what is the difference with evolution?

 

[Vic C.]

... Based on the Genesis account, those same people thought the world to be flat and motionless, they thought the moon to be the actual source of evening light and they thought the sun would actually rise and fall every day, and God was in no hurry to correct them. If we can reconcile our faith with science on these issues then what is the difference with evolution?

God was not in any hurry to correct them because the nature and origin of the creation was not a what HE has in mind for us. HIS Word has one primary purpose for us; it is HIS revelation of HIMSELF to Man and HIS revealing of HIS redemptive plan for Mankind. Knowing how HIS creation took place and operates saves no one.

It may be possible to harmonize faith with science, but not in the order you specified. 8-) Bottom live for me; we are unique creatures among HIS creation and created separate from the rest of creation..

 

[MISFIT]

dadof10, look you and I are way off topic here so I'm happy to continue our pointless debate, but not here so if you want to either PM me or start a new topic.

To everyone else, thank you for staying on topic. I'm sorry I got so far off my own topic.

 

[cyberjosh]

Is it not possible that God Himself was speaking to them in poetic terms and had taken into consideration their current understanding and knowledge of the world around them, much like Christ and His parable of the mustard seed?

No I do not believe so, because that would simply be misleading, and remember that the Bible is supposed to be available and understandable to anyone who hears or reads it, not just the elite educated. This goes for many other things in the Bible as well. And small Israelite children were probably told these stories as they grew up (and infact the parents were commanded to teach their Children these things in the law - at the very least the Ten Commandments), and they no doubt were repeated the very words of God and took Him at His word. I couldn't imagine some parent giving a long disertation subclause explaining the real meaning of the creation account behind the story, any more than I could imagine someone trying to explain Animal Farm by George Orwell to little kids (whereas Animal Farm is clearly allegorical). Allegorical interpretations of otherwise simple accounts make for complex theological interpretations that even ancient Jewish factions were fond of arguing over (but never resolved), and often make for long-winded sophistries that completely take out of context the plain word of God.

And first of all, to address your specific question, we clearly have dozens of Jesus' parables, and we are clearly told that they are parables, and we are even given the interpretations of some of them. None of those same ear-marks were present with the reiterating of the Creation account by God. God sometimes will give us a veiled picture of something (such as in His law) but never a misleading one, and the context of the whole book of Genesis is as a historical book - nay, even the whole Pentatuech being the historical account of God's people as written by Moses. God's words were plain and they should be taken as plain. And even more in context, the recounting of the Creation account was tied to the commandment to keep the sabbath, saying 6 (literal) days you shall labor but on the 7th (literal) day you shall rest, "FOR..." and then God says that in six days (context and simplicity of statement demand it to be six literal days as well) He made the earth and on His seventh He rested. There is direct application and parallelism being applied here, and little ambiguity if any.

Interpreting "indeterminate periods of time" into God's words is eisegesis (reading a meaning into the text) and not taking Him at His word plainly. Of course God's work was far more spectacular than the people's simple memorializing observance of the Sabbath but it was in keeping with what God had done. But to say that God used an allegory to enforce a litteral observance is to say God intentionally used a spurious connection to "dumb down" the message. In all other places the Bible unapologetically blasts the truth into the open, whether the reader/hearer understands it or not (most of the law vieled deeper spiritual truths). But as I've already pointed out Exodus 20 was the first telling of the creation account to Moses and the Israelites, and in there was no ambuguity about what God said. There is just no good exegetical reason to interpret allegory into the statement that the world was created in six days and that God rested on the seventh.

Based on the Genesis account, those same people thought the world to be flat and motionless,

And yet God never dumbs down or panders to a lesser understanding of how things work by using language that implied a flat eart. On the contrarty infact the Bible clearly mentions a circular earth, "It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in" (Isaiah 40:22). I hope you are getting the point I am trying to make here.


God Bless,

~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

Gabriel, here is a link you may also want to look at: "Did Jesus say that he created in six days?"

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[Gabe]

Thanks Josh for the link and the refresher. Before I made the post, I thought to my self "I'm sure I read a passage in the OT that referred to the earth as round" but for the life of me, I could not remember where from and assumed I was probably wrong.

God bless

 

[cyberjosh]

Thanks Josh.

No problem. Oh, and just to be clear, please don't take all this as me arguing with you. Rather I would like it if you looked at it as me reasoning with a fellow believer to strive for a correct interpretation and understanding of God's Holy Word. I'm speaking from pure conviction here, not out of an argumentative spirit. And I do hope we can reach a consensus on this eventually.

God Bless You,

~Josh

 

[Gabe]

(In case you're wondering why the edit: you made a post as I was adding to my previous reply to you)

I'm here to learn and I really appreciate yours and everyone's answers to any questions I may ask. I do tend to take things a little too personal at times but that is my fault and not yours!

Thank you and God bless

 

[stranger]

An Baptist preacher once said (paraphrase) - I don't believe in evolution but I do believe in devolution - a man can become or degenerate into an animal. Not sure if he was kidding or serious.

 

[MISFIT]

Gabriel, here is a link you may also want to look at: "Did Jesus say that he created in six days?"

God Bless,

~Josh

Great link Josh I liked it.