What is the question exactly?
read your post before it then you should already know…to help with the context i will update my quote so it reads more of your own previous post if you like.
Have I struck a nerve here, Adam?
1 Like
oh so now the thing that separates us in the evolutionary chain is that we have laws and animals that engage in rape do not? Do they not live by the universal law of nature and natural selection? Why do humans, with a highly intelligent capacity engage in rape and homosexuality? Neither of these two things supports the evolutionary timeline…but they most definately do support the bible narrative!
The bible speaks extensively of sexual immorality…I believe it is a general religious view that this was one of the reasons for the flood and destruction of all living things! The bible also prophecies that this kind of behaviour will continue and I am fairly certain that Christians universally hold to the view that towards the end of time it will only get worse not better…again, this would also seem to me to be in direct contrast to the TE model (unless you are now going to claim that human extinction is part of Gods plan?)
Human culture and complex societal organization, made possible by human language and complex symbolic thought, is indeed one of the main things that separates us from animals, yes. Let me guess, you think that is somehow controversial? By the way, I also believe humans are created to bear God’s image, but the differences between humans and animals aren’t just theological or spiritual.
Yes, because it speaks extensively about morality. Evolutionary biology doesn’t.
1 Like
[content removed by moderator]…no it did not strike any nerve with me as i know that it is not a universally held position. Christians do not play the blame game because they have a the following bible text that spells it out plain and simple:
Romans 5: 12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. 13 For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a pattern of the One to come.
Oh btw, in the concordance, have a guess what biblical passage Paul is referencing here? Wouldn’t you know, its Genesis 3:1-7 (The fall of man and from there the refernces start to filter throughout the entire bible narrative…this is why the death is BOTH spiritual and literal)
My assumption is that the new TE bible being worked on will take quite a few years to complete as you will have to not only rewrite the scriptures to fit your doctrine, but create an entire concordance for it as well. To illustrate the difficulty in all of this, JW’s now have over 8 million members and, in 200 years, they still not only don’t have their own bible translation errors sorted out, they dont even have a concordance which agrees with it!
Yeah, what is the question? I was obviously commenting about your comment about your grandfather’s refusal to believe the devil brought sin into the world,
For starters there are entire books on this subject lol. It’s not our fault you have never picked them up. Or bothered to read the various posts on it.
Let’s start with the tongues of fire at Pentecost. You know that had nothing to do with salvation right? That’s the power of the Holy Spirit, not the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The disciples were already saved then in that building.
They got the power of the Holy Spirit that was prophesied about.
Acts 1:8
New American Standard Bible
8 but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and Samaria, and as far as the remotest part of the earth.”
Jerusalem was for the Jews. Samaria was for the Samaritans and ends of the earth was for the gentiles. This happens in acts 2,8 and 10.
In acts 2:38 we read this is how you receive the Holy Spirit (which is the indwelling ).
Acts 2:38
New American Standard Bible
38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
They repented and are baptized ( fully immersed ) in water.
Now jump ahead to the Samaritans ( Samaria ) as promised. A interesting point of contention arises up because it’s Philip the evangelist, not the apostle that was scattered by Paul and went to Samaria.
Acts 8:9-19
New American Standard Bible
9 Now a man named Simon had previously been practicing magic in the city and astonishing the people of Samaria, claiming to be someone great; 10 and all the people, from small to great, were paying attention to him, saying, “This man is the Power of God that is called Great.” 11 And they were paying attention to him because for a long time he had astounded them with his magic arts. 12 But when they believed Philip as he was preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were being baptized. 13 Now even Simon himself believed; and after being baptized, he continued on with Philip, and as he observed signs and great miracles taking place, he was repeatedly amazed.
14 Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they would receive the Holy Spirit. 16 (For He had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized [a]in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17 Then they began laying their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit. 18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give this authority to me as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”
You’ll notice it says that Simon and the others heard the gospel, repented and believed it. They were even baptized into Christ. So they received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They were saved but they did not have the power of the Holy Spirit to preform miracles. In order for that to happen the Apostles had to come there and lay their hands on them. Simon himself seen this and said “ give me this power “ and was rebuked.
Now let’s check out the contention of the indwelling and power in acts 10 with the gentile Cornelius and his family at the ends of the “world”.
Acts 10:44-48
New American Standard Bible
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the [a]message. 45 All the [b]Jewish believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had also been poured out on the Gentiles. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter responded, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.
Leading up to this, just like in acts 2, Peter is proclaiming the gospel and before he is even finished the power that was promised at those three places to jumpstart the church fell on the gentiles who begin to speak in tongues. Peter realized they received the Holy Spirit ( power ) just like they did realized they are indeed meant to be in the kingdom of God and so he had them baptized so that again, just like in acts 2:38 they could be saved.
Lastly we also have this bit of conversation from Jesus highlighting how just because you have the power of the Holy Spirit does not mean you are saved.
Matthew 7:20-23
New American Standard Bible
20 So then, you will know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; leave Me, you who practice lawlessness.’
So how exactly were you trying to tie in the Holy Spirit to countering evolution with the three stages of the power?
You mentioned the verse about sin having entered through one man, Adam.
Im curious did Adam or Eve sin first? Did Eve sin before Adam sinned? If sin literally came into earth by Adam did that mean Eve did not sin? Was genesis wrong about Eve eating first?
Did the serpent also not sin by lying and being deceitful and telling Eve to undermine God?
It seems like Adam was the last to sin…. It’s almost as if they don’t care about the historical accuracy because it’s point is theological? Hmmmm crickets crickets crickets….
1 Like
you made the above statement and i then asked you to explain from your perspective the Day of Atonement Service.
If you had studied this service you would immediately recognise that the very end of the service requires the “acting High Priest” (for the service was not actually conducted by the high priest but his son who will replace him)…places his hands on the scapegoat Azazel and it is cast out into the wilderness bearing the burden for all the sins for which atonement had been made…these sins were the very ones that defiled the sanctuary which is in the midst of the camp of Israel…in the midst of all their evil.
This goat symoblized that the responsibility for sin does not lie with men at all. The responsibility of men is to ask forgiveness for their sin, that is done through faith in the very physical and literal bodily sacrifice of the Messiah Jesus.
The wicked at the end of time are not kiilled because they do not take responsibility for their sins, Jesus died for all sin…it is a free gift to everyone. The caveat is, he cannot force salvation on those who deny his sacrifice under the law (the wages of sin is death) can save them. You cannot be pulled up out of a pit if you do not take the hand of the person who reaches down to pull you up…its a physical and logical impossibility!
The goat wandering into the wilderness symoblizes that we cannot serve two masters…either God or Satan. Azazel is cast out into the hands of the devil who now bears the responsibility for him.
There is a significant theological issue with your statement above, and that is why i asked you explain the DOA from your TE perspective.
That’s the same fallacy as before. It took 15 my starting 50 mya. It may have only taken 5. So what? Rock cannot lie. Unlike the YEC-ID-TE Gods.
You also shared musings about physical vs spiritual death and Adam.
Let’s fact check the story.
Adam was created immortal right? Was he physically immortal or was he spiritually immortal? Was he even immortal?
I thought only God was immortal.
1 Timothy 6:15-16
New American Standard Bible
15 which He will bring about at the proper time—He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.
So if only God is immortal that means the angels, nor humans are immortal and that means they never were immortal and never will be immortal.
All life is sustained through Yahweh.
But we have some other proof that Adam was not immortal. There was a tree of life in the garden. Why would a immortal being need a tree that kept them physically alive? Makes no sense does it.
God also said to Adam , on the day you eat this you will die. But Adam ate and lived many more days. So did Adam die that day? If yes then it was not physically and if no then God lied. As a Christian, I go with God did not lie.
This is also interesting to note. Adam was going to die because he ate the fruit. Yet it then says “ he was kicked out of the garden away from the tree so he could not eat and sustain eternal life”. Adam was not kicked out because he sinned. He was kicked out to prevent him from eating the tree that granted physical life… the same tree he already needed.
So now Adam is spiritual dead. Obviously this spiritual death is metaphorical for a damaged relationship with God. After all Yahweh even looked away from Jesus on the cross.
The wages of sin is not physical death but spiritual death. Babies can’t sin. Babies don’t sin. Babies are not born guilty of the sin of Adam and on their way to hell. Yet babies still die. Animals still die. All these things still die that don’t break the laws Christ laid out before us.
Everyone dies. The righteous and the unrighteous. But only the unrighteous does the ultimate death. The destruction of their body and soul. They only get that in the second death. The lake of fire death. The death that again, destroys body and soul.
When Adam sinned that day he became spiritually dead in his sins. He now needed a savior. Physically he stayed alive. Physically he could have continued to live forever by eating the fruit of the tree of life, even though he was spiritually dead. The fruit did not forgive sins. He begin to physically die because he was cast out of the garden away from the tree of life.
Jesus died to conquer death. Not just spiritual death but also physical death. To redeem the body and soul so that we can have new body and souls.
So this also does not undermine evolutionary creationism.
I’m bouncing for a while too. Look forward to how you try to work through this.
I don’t have time to go through every chunk of coprolite you have dropped here, but… yes, scientists once thought that whales evolved from a mesonychid, a wolf-sized animal, not a wolf at all.
Yes, scientists analyzed DNA and discovered that hippos are the closest living relatives of whales. And so now it is thought that whales and hippos share a common ancestor. I don’t remember how to spell the proposed ancestor, though. This shows that scientists revise their theories as research yields new information.
Doing research and adding to knowledge is desirable. Sure beats passing gas.
2 Likes
This is irrelevant to what I said earlier: that people are responsible for evil in this world. In other words, people do evil things.
I appreciate this, however, what if as is claimed, the layers in which the fossils are found are inconsistent with the timeline?
When all of these errant issues start to popup, and they do regularly and repeatedly, at what point does one start to reassess their view of the apparent harmony between theism and evolution and decide that the differences are in fact irreconcilable?
I came from outside the Christian camp…i was not raised a Christian until my teenage years. As a child i thought i came from apes and yet still believe in mass, christmas and easter…not really understanding what it all meant actually. I think many people do just that…they go around just accepting without really studying to issues.
When i study the issues, and i reconcile them with my Christian world view, they are irreconcilable to the theology of the bible. I study the bible theology heavily and deeply…not a theologian thats for sure.
Only according to propaganda websites that fail to acknowledge how beautifully well the vast vast majority of evidence fits with the evolutionary model and who have yet to propose a counter-model with any explanatory power at all. Check out Joel Duff’s blog for analysis of their pathetic attempts with bariminology, the RATE project fail, hyper-speciation post flood. They contradict themselves all over the place because they can’t come up with a viable explanation that squeezes earth history into their predetermined time frame.
3 Likes
Well we have theologians, most of the most well respected ones as shown by popular vote in this modern day and obviously the overwhelming vast majority of sciences accept evolution. A small small amount disagrees.
Also I responded to a handful of your theological arguments. Many here, definitely not just us, really enjoy studying the Bible. I mean…. obviously it’s BioLogos.
1 Like
Bull coprolite! Over time their nostrils migrated to the top of their heads. It’s called a blow hole.
Is a few dozen “not very many”? There are 40 recognized species of pakicetid, ambulocetid, remingtonocetid, and protocetids, so there are a decent number of specimens.
This is a minor issue because 1. slight disagreement is normal 2. even if the ages are the closer ones given, then that just means that Pakicetus and Ambulocetus are not direct ancestors of modern whales, but derived members of their families. Transitional forms typically stick around, the same way that parents overlap with children.
Whales can move, can’t they? Also, there are two species of Basilosaurus: B. cetoides, from the US, and B. isis, from Egypt. Also keep in mind that the atlantic wasn’t as wide as it is now, and Africa wasn’t connected to Asia.
Basilosaurus has more similar teeth to modern toothed whales than anything else known. We have found more recent fossil whales with both baleen and teeth.
Pakicetus didn’t need it since it seems to have been amphibious, rather than fully aquatic.
Because none of the other features that are considered work that way.
Yes, and nobody thinks either of those are true. Whales evolved from a vaguely-kind-of-wolf-like ungulate, not wolves.
Because they are bones. bones change slower than soft body parts. Also teeth tend to stay consistent unless diet changes.
That is exactly what every anatomical argument against evolution does: cherry pick parts that are convergent, and ignore similarities that are considered.
The main part Pakicetus and modern whales share, which is what was noticed for why they are considered members of Cetacea is inner ear arrangement (which is only found in cetaceans).
NOBODY HAS EVER THOUGHT THEY WERE DESCENDED FROM WOLVES. MESONYCHIDS ARE NOT WOLVES.
They have ankle bones. Just because they aren’t used for walking doesn’t mean they don’t exist. The transitional fossils, like Basilosaurus help to show which bone that is.
3 Likes
Look, Adam, there are two things you need to do here.
First, go and get a university degree in science. Preferably geology or evolutionary biology, but any of the natural sciences will do.
Second, spend a couple of decades putting what you have learned into practice in a job where getting it wrong would get you fired, drive your employer out of business, or kill people.
Because if you do not have any experience of that kind of professional responsibility, you are not qualified to point fingers, weaponise the Bible, or make accusations of heresy, false teaching, or “rewriting scriptures to fit your doctrine” against Christians in science who do.
1 Like