Reply to Shoreliner again/Evolution/Creation debate :)

[shawnts106]

I don't think that taking the book of Genesis literally gets a person into Heaven.
I never said it did.... did I?
Also you have the Genesis account all mixed up, here it is straight from the Bible itsself!
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth.
2: and the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the SPIRT OF GOD moved upon the face of the waters.
3: And God said, Let there be LIGHT and there was light.
-( now where this light was comming from I do not know, but all light is is Photons or individual quanta of light, and since God created the Universe, I dont think making light from nothing is too hard for him )-
4: And god saw the light, that it was god: and god divided the light from the darkness.
5: And God called the light day and the darkness he called night.And the evening and the morning were the FIRST DAY.
6: And god said let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters and let it divide the waters from the waters.
-( this is talking about the Oceans and the Canopy of water over our planet.)-
7: And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmamnet from the waters which where above the firmament and it was so.
-(the Firmament is the land)-
8: And God called the firmament Heaven and the Evening and the Morning were the second day.
-( the firmament in this verse is the Heavens, compaired to the firmament in the previous verse, which is the land)-
9: And God said, Let eh waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dr land appear and it was so.
-( aka, mountians were formed and valleys and since gravity is now in effect water rushed down into the valleys.)-
10:And God called the dry land EARTH, and the gathering together of the waters he called seas: and God saw that it was good.
11: And God said let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yeilding seed and the fruit tree yeilding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth and it was so.
12: And the earth brought forth grass and herb yeilding seed after his KIND, and the tree yeilding fruit, whose seed was in itself, AFTER HIS KIND: and God saw that it was good.
13: And the evening and the morning were the third day.
-(notice God has not made the sun yet, if each day stood for MILLIONS OF YEARS, plants would surly die off, but if a day stood for 24 hours then this would be no problem for the plants )-
14: And God said, let ehre be lights in the firmament (heaven) of the heaven to divide the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for DAYS and for YEARS:
15: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16: And God made 2 great lights; the greather light to rule the day (the sun), and the lesser light to rule the night (the moon) he made the stars also.
17: And God set them in the firmament of the HEAVEN to give light upon the earth.
18: And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19:And the Evening and the Morning where the 4th day.
Ok now we move onto the Animals and Man.

 

[shawnts106]

Genesis1:20
20: And God said let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and the fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
-( aka, fish and birds)-
21: And God created great WHALES, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God sw that it was good.
22: And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply the earth.
23: And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24: And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his KIND: and it was so.
25: And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and evry thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26: And God said, Let us make man in our Image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the catle, and over all the eath, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27: So God created MAN in his OWN IMAGE, in the IMAGE OF GOD creathed he him: male and female created he them.
28: And God blessed them and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and Multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29:And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing see, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the wich is the fruit of a tree yeilding see; to you it shall be for meat.
30: And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the erath wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31: And God saw everything that he made and BEHOLD it ws VERY GOOD, And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Does this answer you question?
He made animals before man, and gave man dominion over the animals.

 

[molamola]

It doesn't answer my question because nowhere have you mentioned Chapter 2.
Genesis Chapter 2...The SECOND Story of Creation
This is the story of the heavens and the earth after their creation...
2:7 The Lord God formed man out of the clay of the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and so man became a living being.
2:18-19 The Lord God said: "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a suitable partner for him." So the Lord God formed out of the ground various wild animals and various birds of the air, and he brought them to the man to see what he would call them; whatever the man called each of them would be its name.
I'm looking at about five different translations here and they all say the same thing. Here are a few things I read about Genesis in the introduction to one of my five translations...
"Eleven structural units, of unequal length and importance, present unity and purpose of the book in terms of God's universal sovereignty, his dealings with men, and his choice and formation of a special people to be the instrument of his plan for salvation."
So, the entire Catholic Church is in agreement that the whole point of the story of creation was to introduce the concept of God and his plan for mankind, mainly his chosen people.
"Despite its unity of plan and purpose, the book is a complex work, not to be attributed to a single original author. Several sources, or LITERARY traditions, that the final redactor used in his composition are discernable. These are the Yahwist, Elohist, and Priestly sources, which in turn reflect older ORAL TRADITIONS."
It is my understanding that an oral tradition is a type of folklore and this book was drawn together from several sources or oral histories. Oral histories by nature change from generation to generation, so by the time this book was composed, it ha probably changed a good bit from its original telling.
"The interpreter of Genesis will recognize at once the distinct object that sets chapters 1-11 apart: the recounting of the origin of the world and of man (primeval history). To make the truths contained in these chapters intelligible to the Israelite people destined to preserve them, they needed to be expressed through elements prevailing among that people at that time. For this reason, the TRUTHS themselves must therefore be clearly distinguished from their LITERARY GARB."
In closing, "Genesis contains many religious teachings of basic importance: the preexistence and transcendence of God, his wisdom and goodness, his power through which all things are made and on which they all depend; the special creation of man in God's image and likeness..."
So, all evidence on creation should be based on a transcribed oral history that originated from several sources? I'm not arguing that there isn't truth in Genesis, but the truth is in the existence and power of God, not in the order or amount of time it took him to throw the entire universe together. You can't argue creation just on the first chapter of Genesis. There are two versions of that story side by side. One version is significantly shorter and has a different order. The important thing to realize is that the underlying message stays the same throughout.

 

[lovethesea]

I think the most intelligent thing going on here is that Shoreliner isn't playing the game.

 

[lovethesea]

Originally Posted by Scotts
Never try to teach a pig to sing, you just waste your time and annoy the pig.
Scott

 

[rubberduck]

dont u ppl have a life

:hilarious

 

[nm reef]

I wanna toss a curve into this discussion....I consider myself a very spiritual person...but organised "religion" has little to no appeal to me.
That said what I wanna know from shawnts is this.....if you are such a devote "christian" how can you explain or justifiy the millions of deaths in recorded history in the name of religion...specifically in the name of christianity? If the god you defend is such a loving and all caring god how and why could his people murder in his name and at the same time defend his devine nature?Christians seem to me able to blind themselves to the truth surrounding them and attempt to focus only on the faith they claim to be the truth....and it is simply faith and not truth. There is a distinct difference in "truth" and "faith"....you can offer absolutely no proof of your "faith" yet you vainly attempt to prove false any proof not based on faith that comes your way....how can that be?
How does the bible you rely on differ from the Koran? How does the faith in your religion differ from the assorted faiths of the native Americans? Detail for me why your faith in your religion is better than the faith millions upon millions of others have in their faith...and if you can detail for me why all the other beliefs in this world are less acceptable than the single faith you hold to be truth?Truth is what can be held in front of you and can be felt/tasted/seen......there is absolute truth that for millions upon millions of years this planet has contained life...and there is absolute proof that during those millions of years life and its assorted species have changed over the passage of time.....some even became extinct....how does that absolute proof fit into your faith?
I am a very curious person and I live my life in terms of what I can see and feel and taste and experience first hand.....not on a faith........not in christianity or any other people created religion.........would you care to touch on these questions and concerns......I'd like to hear your thoughts........I'm interested.......I wonder why Christians follow the path they follow about the same as I wonder why some folks seems to feel they must make all they can and allow greed to overrun logical thought.......I'm not main stream....but seriously....I am very curious.

 

[darknes]

I didn't read much of this thread, seeing that it went off track.....
But, I want to recommend a VERY GOOD book I just read for anyone interested in this debate: "The Science of God" by Gerald L. Shroeder.
He does an excelent job showing how evolution and creation can go hand in hand, and how science and the bible (specifically the first 5 books) don't really disagree.
My favorite part is how he shows that from the beginning of the universe to man is six days in the Bible, and 16 billion years according to science, but are the exact same. Using the theory of relativity and time not being constant, he shows a very interesting relation.
I just wanted to recommend it and mention its very interesting. I think it ties together science and religion quite well.

 

[tizzo]

Originally Posted by NM reef
can you explain or justifiy the millions of deaths in recorded history in the name of religion...specifically in the name of christianity? If the god you defend is such a loving and all caring god how and why could his people murder in his name and at the same time defend his devine nature?

A lot of what you said NM is part of the great controversy...which religion or "faith" is the right one...I don't even wanna touch that topic, but the part that I quoted above, I would like very much to acknowledge...
As a christion, it is my belief...lemme set that straight..."my belief" that God (my God) is a loving God...BUT a human beings free will is one "gift" he has given us. If we choose to believe, with our own free will, it is that much more sincere. But humans tend to do a lot of stupid stuff with that free will. God "can" take away our free will to prevent all those wars and fights and killings, but that wouldn't be to loving either. He may as well had made a bunch of robots. And consequences... We usually bring them on ourselves, and God (again, the God I believe in) is not Santa Claus... He is kinda like a father (no pun intended)... When we get our selves into a predicament, he doesn't magically remove us from harm. If we need to have a consequence for something we did wrong or displeasing, we will get it, just like our own kids should. And yeah, I think they should.

 

[tizzo]

Know what I just noticed...
Shoreliner never did respond to this thread!!

:hilarious
This thread shouldn't even be happening!!

 

[shawnts106]

That said what I wanna know from shawnts is this.....if you are such a devote "christian" how can you explain or justifiy the millions of deaths in recorded history in the name of religion...specifically in the name of christianity? If the god you defend is such a loving and all caring god how and why could his people murder in his name and at the same time defend his devine nature?
I have no control over what people believed or thought they believed in the past, the people who murdered people in the Name of God probably were not truthfull in their sayings, They were probably and most likly enveloped in their own personal feelings are reacted on impulse and emotion rather than Gods will...
You see in the news about mothers saying that they killed their children becaue thats what God said to do. These people are probably mentally ill and do not know what or who God is but because they have heard such they repeat it, and also could have possibly been consumed and infected by a demon, or the devils angels, this has happend, and is still happening today.
There is a distinct difference in "truth" and "faith"....you can offer absolutely no proof of your "faith" yet you vainly attempt to prove false any proof not based on faith that comes your way....how can that be?
yes obveously, one is observable repeatable evidence and it is measurable Faith is not at all that, Faith is believing in something you do not know of, and can not see.... A person can not prove their faith, to someone without an open understanding mind, its something you feel not something that you outwardly announce daily as if you can measure it, "TODAY I HAVE 15.6600123 Mg of Faith... this just isnt possible.
I prove things FALSELY by facts, not by faith, where do you get off saying I prove false things by faith? this sentence in itself doesnt make any sence.
How does the bible you rely on differ from the Koran? How does the faith in your religion differ from the assorted faiths of the native Americans? Detail for me why your faith in your religion is better than the faith millions upon millions of others have in their faith...and if you can detail for me why all the other beliefs in this world are less acceptable than the single faith you hold to be truth?
Once again, faith is not measurable or anything of the sort... My personal belief is any "faith" as you say, or Religion as I say is a false religion because that is what my Bible says... Native Americans believe that rocks have souls, I do not, why because? Because there is no scientific evidence backing that up, rocks are physically compossed of atoms of certain elements all jumbled up in a ball... they have to organs therefore they are not alive, so I do not believe that rocks are alive.... you see? Other people having faith in their religions is no different than me having faith in mine, the only difference is what they are putting their faith in, I put my faith in God, a muslum (spelling?) puts their faith in Alah (spelling?), MY RELIGION believes that ALAH is a demon, and a false God, this is my faith...
the CHRISTIANS GOD is the only GOD of any religion who rose from the dead, and came back... all other gods are still in the grave just bones... ours is LIVING, therefore I choose to believe that my GOD is the real GOD.... this is my faith...
NM, here you say this :
Truth is what can be held in front of you and can be felt/tasted/seen......there is absolute truth that for millions upon millions of years this planet has contained life...and there is absolute proof that during those millions of years life and its assorted species have changed over the passage of time.....some even became extinct....how does that absolute proof fit into your faith?
ok, empty words once again with no backing up... where is your proof? what tests? you meen to tell me that scientists have taken NOTHING *(ABSOLUTLY NOTHING)* AND CREATED SOMETHING OUT OF ABSOOOOLUUUUTTLY NOTHING ? as the evolutionary theory states?...
BTW: where did all the mater in the universe come from if it wasnt created?... there would then be NOTHING> so nothing creates stuff...?
Proof of millions of years of life and species huh? wheres the proof to this?
please explain and give me scientific fact and not religion in your future statements about science NM
as for shoreliner never commenting back.... who cares?... I DO NOT, and shoreliner probably didnt comment back for good reason, now watch him reply! HEHEHE!~

 

[lovethesea]

Originally Posted by shawnts106
as for shoreliner never commenting back.... who cares?... I DO NOT, and shoreliner probably didnt comment back for good reason, now watch him reply! HEHEHE!~

 

[farmboy]

Hey Mola,
19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
NIV - operative word is "had". I believe this chapter is a recount of creation with a bit more detail.
Hope this helps.
(I think I know, without having read them, why other threads like this were locked.)

 

[scotts]

You ever have one of those sores in your mouth that you keep putting your tongue on, even though you know it is going to hurt, but you keep doing it again and again....

 

[spanky]

how can you explain or justifiy the millions of deaths in recorded history in the name of religion...specifically in the name of christianity?
Well, NM, I'll take a shot at your very good question.
This question captures one of my top twenty objections/concerns/barriers to Christianity. I'll share the best answer I've heard. (From Greg Boyd, author of "Letters From a Skeptic".)
I don't think God can be held responsible for what the Catholic church, or any church or religion, has done or shall do. The God whom the Bible talks about, and whom Christ incarnates, is a God of love, and this entails that He is a God of freedom, for you can not have love without freedom. We were created with the ability to choose love, and thus with the potential to choose it's opposite - evil. To assume that God is responsible for our evil - even the evil committed in His name - is, I suspect, to assume that humans are robots who simply act out a devine, preplanned program. But if that were the case we could never be loving beings. I want to argue that, ultimately, all evil in the world comes from free wills other than God. What God wills and does is always good. Whatever is not good has it's origins in somewhere or something other than God.
The fact that it was a Christian church (or several) which chose to do so many evils, and to do them "in God's name", only tends to show that not all that goes under the name of "Christian" is necessarily Christian. Christianity is aabout a relationship. Within the religion of Christianity there are, and have always been, genuine Christians - people who have a saving and transforming relationship with Jesus Christ. And this fact accounts for the tremendous good Christianity has brought to the world (in spite of the evils). But the "religion" of Christianity, the "institution" of the church, is not itself Christian. Only people, not institutions, can be Christian.
I want to sharply distinguish between the Christianity, which I defend, and the "Christian church": the two need not have anything more than a name in common. I wouldn't dream of defending all that's been done in the name of the Christian church. Like you, I am enraged by a great deal of it.

 

[lovethesea]

Originally Posted by Scotts
You ever have one of those sores in your mouth that you keep putting your tongue on, even though you know it is going to hurt, but you keep doing it again and again....

 

[lovethesea]

anybody????..............

 

[molamola]

Please don't think I'm trying to pick a fight here, just attempting to explain my take on it. I'm also not trying to preach. I was an English major and this is what I do for fun for whatever sick reason.
New American 2:18-19 "The Lord God said: 'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a suitable partner for him.' So the Lord God formed out of the ground various wild animals..."
New International Version 2:18-19 "The LORD God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.' Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air."
I understand that the New International Version says, "had," but verse 18 still states, "I will make a helper suitable for him." I see your point Farmboy and we're all human and we all manage to interpret things differently. I'm not disputing your interpretation, just trying to explain mine. The New Revised Standard, Revised English, and New Jerusalem Bible all say pretty much the same thing as the NAB. The NIV is the only one that says, "had." That difference is interesting though and now I want to know why it is Thanks for pointing it out...that will give me something to do at work tomorrow
Again, I'm not writing this to attack anybody and if it's taken that way, please forgive me. I'm not a scientist and the only way I can participate in these discussions is by arguing word selection. My intention is not to tell people they are wrong, just point out yet another view on things...from a purely non scientific perspective.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on this reproducing wedding cake I saw yesterday as well.

 

[farmboy]

Read a little further. . . .the helper is woman. . .
" 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam [h] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib [j] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. "
(Mola, I just want to be a blessing.)

 

[scubadoo]

As GOd created man he decided he best create some night time so the ugly folks would look somewhat better for a few hours.
To throw us men off...he created women. He over developed the nagging and moody parts of their brain.
In order to gbalance the situation , he gave us men the lazy feature along with that special ignore feature.
As a cruel joke on mankind, he added a Richard Simmons gene that would surface in the late 20th century. In order for Richard to survive, he planted in our brain that we like junk food and can only loose wait with a Deal A Meal and Sweatin to The Oldies.
When creating us, he used a Chia Head like mold to throw the dirt in.
How do I know this...it is all in the Bible. I can't prove any of it......but what other explanation could there be for Richard Simmons?
FYI...there was also an 11th commandement....though shalt not covet the remote control.