|
Post by princess on Apr 21, 2019 16:31:14 GMT
Hi, you wrote
"I do think that Paul means death itself but I think the fact that God said it was good in the garden would also be meaning no imperfection and death of animals would of meant imperfection"
Then you need to apply the imperfection and death of a distopia to God's declaration that Adam was alone.
|
|
|
Post by BlueSky on Apr 21, 2019 21:00:54 GMT
Humm do you agree with me but wanting me to dig deeper or are you saying it doesn’t matter so it not important? LOL I do think that Paul means death itself but I think the fact that God said it was good in the garden would also be meaning no imperfection and death of animals would of meant imperfection Great insite again here events are important not dates. this I believe is also true about biblical events in the future too Spot on assessment.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 21, 2019 21:02:02 GMT
What I mean is to say if the phrase "not good" means death and imperfection then it would also apply to the aloneness of Adam being called not good. So we can scrub death from the equation.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 21, 2019 21:32:54 GMT
Yes, if we take things too far and go off on a tangent creating doctrines or stumbling blocks for others, this is bad, totally agree. But wondering who might have been Cain’s wife; this is an excellent question with some great answers that actually support the Biblical narrative as real history; not myths as liberals would try and sell us.
You just contradicted yourself in one sentence. Stumbling blocks are created by deviating from the message which in turn produce their own dogmas.
Ahhh, liberalism....now we can sink our teeth into the message
What does liberalism stand for?
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 22, 2019 1:48:26 GMT
Hi Mfox, you wrote "Good question I guess He could of explained it to them" Or maybe the question is based on a wrong assumption that keeps on moving in the wrong direction? Like talking about china while the bible is talking India? What do you think the answer is then?
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 22, 2019 1:55:59 GMT
What I mean is to say if the phrase "not good" means death and imperfection then it would also apply to the aloneness of Adam being called not good. So we can scrub death from the equation. Not good could mean many different things on different levels like it does in our world today
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 22, 2019 5:54:41 GMT
What I mean is to say if the phrase "not good" means death and imperfection then it would also apply to the aloneness of Adam being called not good. So we can scrub death from the equation. Not good could mean many different things on different levels like it does in our world today
For sure, however the phrase "is good" finds context within a cosmology. Cosmologies are given in order to communicate order within the whole of something. Thus "not good" would be communicating that adams aloneness is disordered. This disorder is resolved with the divine intervention of a helper for the man.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 22, 2019 6:43:07 GMT
Hi Mfox, you wrote "Good question I guess He could of explained it to them" Or maybe the question is based on a wrong assumption that keeps on moving in the wrong direction? Like talking about china while the bible is talking India? What do you think the answer is then? The answer is not old earth/young earth because these arguments are like having a sword fight with a fart. Any theory of creation that resides in the distant past cannot be possibly proven or unproven because its not observable or repeatable.
We are at the tail end of western civilization. Christendom ruled the world up until 80 years ago and in that time lost its empire, religion, culture, morality and in time will be ruled by someone else.
This is what Genesis 1-3 is communicating. Wink: Adam and Eve in the garden and then exile.
Genesis 1-2 is given as a cosmology.
Where do you see this cosmology in the rest of scripture? When the prophets declare the destruction of a civilization or kingdom by the disorder of the heavens and earth.
Science is not part of this
|
|
|
Post by BlueSky on Apr 22, 2019 17:01:46 GMT
What do you think the answer is then? The answer is not old earth/young earth because these arguments are like having a sword fight with a fart. Any theory of creation that resides in the distant past cannot be possibly proven or unproven because its not observable or repeatable.
We are at the tail end of western civilization. Christendom ruled the world up until 80 years ago and in that time lost its empire, religion, culture, morality and in time will be ruled by someone else.
This is what Genesis 1-3 is communicating. Wink: Adam and Eve in the garden and then exile.
Genesis 1-2 is given as a cosmology.
Where do you see this cosmology in the rest of scripture? When the prophets declare the destruction of a civilization or kingdom by the disorder of the heavens and earth.
Science is not part of this
Blue bold above Princess... ...I agree we cannot go back in time to observe or repeat the Creation; but what weight can/do we give Gods Word that describes this event in some detail? Hardly a fart in the wind... He has given us much to consider, and from what I have discovered, modern science and the Genesis narrative work very nicely together. Welcome your thoughts,
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 23, 2019 0:13:08 GMT
The answer is not old earth/young earth because these arguments are like having a sword fight with a fart. Any theory of creation that resides in the distant past cannot be possibly proven or unproven because its not observable or repeatable.
We are at the tail end of western civilization. Christendom ruled the world up until 80 years ago and in that time lost its empire, religion, culture, morality and in time will be ruled by someone else.
This is what Genesis 1-3 is communicating. Wink: Adam and Eve in the garden and then exile.
Genesis 1-2 is given as a cosmology.
Where do you see this cosmology in the rest of scripture? When the prophets declare the destruction of a civilization or kingdom by the disorder of the heavens and earth.
Science is not part of this
Blue bold above Princess... ...I agree we cannot go back in time to observe or repeat the Creation; but what weight can/do we give Gods Word that describes this event in some detail? Hardly a fart in the wind... He has given us much to consider, and from what I have discovered, modern science and the Genesis narrative work very nicely together. Welcome your thoughts, Yes it seamed to most people that science was disproving God but with more technology science is now proving Got to be true. To a Christian it didn’t matter because we had faith but science has convinced some people trying to disprove God that they can’t do it so if you can’t beat them join them
|
|
|
Post by BlueSky on Apr 23, 2019 0:35:12 GMT
Yes, if we take things too far and go off on a tangent creating doctrines or stumbling blocks for others, this is bad, totally agree. But wondering who might have been Cain’s wife; this is an excellent question with some great answers that actually support the Biblical narrative as real history; not myths as liberals would try and sell us. You just contradicted yourself in one sentence. Stumbling blocks are created by deviating from the message which in turn produce their own dogmas. Ahhh, liberalism....now we can sink our teeth into the message What does liberalism stand for? Hi there Princess, Not sure how you see that from what I said. Talking about, researching, hypothesizing about how the entire human race came from just two people ( with the required incest elements) is a question I get asked all the time from seekers and people who I am witnessing to. Seriously, it’s one of the most common questions. [ There are some great answers to btw ] looking st this question does not negate the overall message of the Bible, in fact, I would argue that it highlights the message. It’s not a bad question at all either I think. It needs an answer or a least the framework of an answer. Hypothesizing how this happened does not necessarily set up a stumbling-block-dogma for others ( it could I suppose to be fair ) ‘the devil is in the details’ tho.... You or others may perhaps feel this is a dead end or unfruitful vein of exploration, but I most certainly don’t feel it is. It’s a very interesting subject and is foundational to what we believe when you drill right down into it. ( who did Adams and Eves children mate with?) As for my use of the word “liberalism” that was just another word for unbelievers. That would have been a more appropriate word for the context. Side question for you if I could ask, was Adam a real man who lived in real history or just a allegory or something else? I only ask because I have encountered some who don’t think he was a real guy. .. Just curious. Hope this explains a little more. Blessings, Blue
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 23, 2019 0:38:27 GMT
What do you think the answer is then? The answer is not old earth/young earth because these arguments are like having a sword fight with a fart. Any theory of creation that resides in the distant past cannot be possibly proven or unproven because its not observable or repeatable.
We are at the tail end of western civilization. Christendom ruled the world up until 80 years ago and in that time lost its empire, religion, culture, morality and in time will be ruled by someone else.
This is what Genesis 1-3 is communicating. Wink: Adam and Eve in the garden and then exile.
Genesis 1-2 is given as a cosmology.
Where do you see this cosmology in the rest of scripture? When the prophets declare the destruction of a civilization or kingdom by the disorder of the heavens and earth.
Science is not part of this
I see what you are saying and nothing way in the past can not be proven to a fact but i started this post from a class I did on the flood from a home school convention. It was a good class and it was also about showing that the flood was sudden and killed off most dinosaurs not that dinosaurs were killed off millions of years before people from a meteor or ice age. There was actually a fossilization rock with a small dinosaur giving birth. Its good conversation for home schooling kids.
I really like what you say and agree with you about the death of Christendom we are the city God loves surrounded by satan's people in Revelation 20. Yes the history of the fall from the garden and the flood will keep on repeating its self until the end of our world thus Genesis shows us why God destroyed the world in the past and the reason why God will destroy the world again in the future
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 23, 2019 4:00:14 GMT
Bluesky wrote "Blue bold above Princess... ...I agree we cannot go back in time to observe or repeat the Creation; but what weight can/do we give Gods Word that describes this event in some detail? Hardly a fart in the wind... He has given us much to consider, and from what I have discovered, modern science and the Genesis narrative work very nicely together. Welcome your thoughts" Modern science and Genesis don't fit nicely together because the message is being communicated in their understanding of the world, not ours. This is how good communication works. The ancients at that time in the near east believed there was a dome over the sky that held the waters back. This is communicated by God stretching out the heavens like a tent. They also believed we thought with our internal organs like the heart and intestines. This is why the organs were preserved in jars while the brain was discarded. Makes sense because our heart rate increases and our internal organs react when we are scared or exited. A circumcised heart meant mind and when you ask Jesus into your heart it actually means mind. So while believers are arguing over the age of the earth or how dinosaurs rode in the ark we are circling the drain to our destruction.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 23, 2019 4:27:07 GMT
Mfox wrote,
Yes it seamed to most people that science was disproving God but with more technology science is now proving Got to be true.
To a Christian it didn’t matter because we had faith but science has convinced some people trying to disprove God that they can’t do it so if you can’t beat them join them
The biggest problem is deism. In this understanding God is a distant watchmaker who wound up creation and then lets everything run its course. So what is natural is non spiritual and everything that cannot be explained is related to God. God becomes smaller and smaller the more we understand and attribute to natural outcomes. So people have to chose between being an atheist or believing in God.
|
|
|
Post by ted on Apr 23, 2019 17:26:57 GMT
Mfox wrote, Yes it seamed to most people that science was disproving God but with more technology science is now proving Got to be true. To a Christian it didn’t matter because we had faith but science has convinced some people trying to disprove God that they can’t do it so if you can’t beat them join them The biggest problem is deism. In this understanding God is a distant watchmaker who wound up creation and then lets everything run its course. So what is natural is non spiritual and everything that cannot be explained is related to God. God becomes smaller and smaller the more we understand and attribute to natural outcomes. So people have to chose between being an atheist or believing in God. Philosophy has oft been used to distort the thinking of the common man. Science is the study of the created world (or un-created world, if that is your fancy). I would like to approach our ability to know God and the limits of science. God is the creator and not of this world. He is bigger than the domain of His creation out of necessity. I can never be less than anything that I mold from the materials of this world, that is impossible for I would have to put into it something more than I possess. I hope we can all agree with this position. The same holds for God. He is timeless, omnipresent and omniscient; God is far beyond our understand ans His mere creations. We can see evidence of His glory in the creation for His nature is reflected in it. Yet the creation itself is a mere reflection of God and can never be more than that. So how are we His created being supposed to come to know about our Creator from only having interaction with his creation. The truth is we can't except by the means that He created for that purpose. Namely no one can know the father except by the Son. We speak of God for the things we know He is not and also of the traits we know He has. But that list can never fully capture the fullness of God. Approaching this topic from the direction of a scientist I must come to the same conclusion. Let me give an example from our knowledge of relativity. Relativity is nice because it involves a lot of thought exercise (that and I'm a physicist so I have a decent grasp of the subject). If I am in a reference frame, say standing on a train car, unless there is a window I can not tell if my frame of reference is moving (if it is not changing speeds) relative to the reference frame of the ground. If that train car is a box car I am isolated and can only identify when the car accelerates or decelerates. Any test that i can do in the car will behave exactly as it would if i am in the reference frame of the ground. If I throw a ball into the air. I will witness the same motion according to my reference frame. Though If I am on the train car and another observer is on the ground and that train is moving at a steady speed , the other observer will see the ball take a completely different path than what I would observe from the train. They would see an arc while I would merely see the ball go straight up and down. Both observations are correct but occur from different reference frames. Anyway One can't make any statement about what that train car is doing unless you are in a separate reference frame. Moreover, there are a infinite number of alternative viewpoints external to the trains car frame so there is never a unique answer. There is only a unique answer in regards to our frame of reference. So it is also with God. He is in a reference frame outside our created world. there is nothing I can possibly do to test for the behavior of something outside my reference frame. My observations will be dependent upon my own frame of reference. It is never unique and never the same for any two people. Thus we may only come to know God though our own unique personal relationship with God. God has made that path possible through Christ. We may know Christ because He was a tangible man just as we are; yet he was fully God which we can't comprehend in it's entirety. So theology and science can not mix. they are entirely separate domains because theology look to know something that is outside the realm of creation and thus outside the domain of science. Man errs in his logic when he tries to apply the rules of one domain outside of that domain. This is the case when considering a scientific understanding of God. There is none to be had and never will be, period. We can only test or observe something less than God, his creation. However, I know God exists through my own personal relationship with him. Our fallen nature is a delusion that we are distinct (separate from God). Oh but are we fools. God is always there, it is only the lack of our own awareness that we fail to recognize His presence. God wants us to worship Him but of our own free will. Satan however tempts us to believe we may be our own God by not recognizing our Creator; this leads to terrible suffering. Fortunately God loves us and gave us all the tools to receive His love and reunite with God as we were intended in the garden of Eden. For without the fall from grace, we fail to truly appreciate the gift of God's grace for us all. Scripture is the revealed Word of God. God moves man by His Spirit. Many people may disagree with this position, but I posit that they are blind and deaf to God. We must want to have God reveal Himself to us. Our hearts must be open and then we must be humble and contrite as well. How do I know this. For God gave us the perfect example, Jesus Christ to emulate. We follow him as best we are able. and the more we do so the more our relationship with the Lord grows and increases our understanding. One can experience this in their life and once you do it becomes nigh impossible to deny our Lord. In the meantime, we who believe must pray for those who are still blind and deaf and mute. For God wants all to serve him by serving all our fellow men and women and being good stewards of God's gifts through His creation.
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 24, 2019 0:40:17 GMT
I agree that science is outside of the realm of God
You quoted me and I am wondering why you mentioned created or uncreated? The reason I am asking this question is I hear this distinction between creationists and evolutionists. The assumption is God had to create everything supernaturally kinda like a lightning bolt coming from his finger while evolution is natural and therefore outside of God. Therefore uncreated. I am not an evolutionist per say but I see no distinction between natural from supernatural or material from spiritual. The deistic seperation of God from creation translates into the gnostic separation of the soul from the body. Christianity is the most embodied religion on planet earth So much that we are not promised a disembodied eternity in heaven we are promised an embodied eternity in creation. A relationship with God is embodied in creation.
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 24, 2019 13:07:44 GMT
Bluesky wrote "Blue bold above Princess... ...I agree we cannot go back in time to observe or repeat the Creation; but what weight can/do we give Gods Word that describes this event in some detail? Hardly a fart in the wind... He has given us much to consider, and from what I have discovered, modern science and the Genesis narrative work very nicely together. Welcome your thoughts" Modern science and Genesis don't fit nicely together because the message is being communicated in their understanding of the world, not ours. This is how good communication works. The ancients at that time in the near east believed there was a dome over the sky that held the waters back. This is communicated by God stretching out the heavens like a tent. They also believed we thought with our internal organs like the heart and intestines. This is why the organs were preserved in jars while the brain was discarded. Makes sense because our heart rate increases and our internal organs react when we are scared or exited. A circumcised heart meant mind and when you ask Jesus into your heart it actually means mind. So while believers are arguing over the age of the earth or how dinosaurs rode in the ark we are circling the drain to our destruction. This was a great way of putting it and it makes sense Of course Christians shouldn’t argue about these things because we know God to be true but it is away to show non Christians that science can reveal God
|
|
|
Post by princess on Apr 24, 2019 16:09:10 GMT
Genesis is not about science. In fact, to make the message about science is symptomatic of the problem. Bear with me..... What differentiates the seed of Cain from the seed of Seth is autonomy. Autonomy, above all, desires self determination. Therefore what is predetermined needs to be self regulated and transcended in the name of freedom. The highest good ibecomes what can be self determined as opposed to what God has predetermined The seed of Cain is distinguished by their self determined achievements as opposed to what God has predetermined. Not bad in itself but not as the highest good Let’s apply genesis to a car. A car is created with form and that form has function. This is predetermined by the manufacturer not the driver I need to be taught how to operate the car in order to safely operate the car. If I want freedom and independence from the predetermined purpose that is inherent to my car then my focus will change from how the car functions to how it was created. The roads are full of mayhem and death because the people think they can transcend their cars braking system but the people still ignore the manufacturers instruction book and continue to argue over how their cars are manufactured.
|
|
|
Post by foxjj on Apr 24, 2019 16:15:12 GMT
Very well put.
|
|
|
Post by mfox on Apr 25, 2019 2:05:00 GMT
Genesis is not about science. In fact, to make the message about science is symptomatic of the problem. Bear with me..... What differentiates the seed of Cain from the seed of Seth is autonomy. Autonomy, above all, desires self determination. Therefore what is predetermined needs to be self regulated and transcended in the name of freedom. The highest good ibecomes what can be self determined as opposed to what God has predetermined The seed of Cain is distinguished by their self determined achievements as opposed to what God has predetermined. Not bad in itself but not as the highest good Let’s apply genesis to a car. A car is created with form and that form has function. This is predetermined by the manufacturer not the driver I need to be taught how to operate the car in order to safely operate the car. If I want freedom and independence from the predetermined purpose that is inherent to my car then my focus will change from how the car functions to how it was created. The roads are full of mayhem and death because the people think they can transcend their cars braking system but the people still ignore the manufacturers instruction book and continue to argue over how their cars are manufactured. Of course I agree with what you are saying as you have a great way of putting it and i am sure that you have taught us all something we didn’t see before as you have taken it much deeper. I know that the books of the bible have a message to it’s audience which are far more important than historical facts as the faithful would understand and take heed of the warnings and messages. What I am saying is that people who don’t believe in God wouldn’t see or even care about the message it would not interest them but scientific proof would. For example three things had to come into existence at once within our world paradine time, space and matter and for that to happen cannot be by chance but a creator would have to create them If a rock (matter) was created it would need to be placed somewhere (space) and when did it happen (time) and someone to make it happen (the creator) We find the answer to all four in the very first verse of the bible Genesis 1:1 1 In the beginning (time) God (the creator) created the heavens (space)and the earth (matter) Once a person understands and believes this then they will want to understand Gods message Thus both science and the message would complete each other would you agree with this?
|
|