Biological evolution does not ‘represent’ cosmology. They do both reflect the reality of the Ancient of Days’ ancient creation however.
1 Like
Well out of the four verses I posted which ones do you think is literal and which ones are just poetic? Mainly the last verse.
Is it literal or poetic to say that in the new heaven and earth infants will be born? Is it literal or poetic that youth will live to an old age? Is it literal or poetic that death will happen?
There are different interpretations about Isaiah 65:17-20. The simplest explanation is that it describes life in the millennial kingdom, between the return of Jesus and the final judgement.
That interpretation demands that we believe in the visible return of Jesus and also that the verses telling about the millennial kingdom describe a kingdom on Earth after the return.
Again, poetic means both, so “just poetic” does not mean just figurative or metaphorical.
Well we can’t always know in poetry. Sometimes it’s obvious and sometimes it’s not. We can always compare it to what we already know or think we already know logically and from experience, and we can especially to compare it to other scripture. We can always give opinions and reasons why we think a particular phrase is meant to be taken literally or figuratively.
What other scriptures can you think of that would suggest which of those should be taken literally and which figuratively, mainly the last verse?
1 Like
Of course you were talking about biological evolution – you certainly were not talking only about cosmological evolution! Or if you did not intend to mean biological evolution, you certainly did not specify. The word evolution just means change with respect to time. Clouds evolve. Is that evil?
2 Likes
I’ve already addressed all of that. Maybe you should reread and understand what I actually said.
I don’t think so, but thanks for granting me the opportunity.
1 Like
I think all the end time verses highly suggest it’s all symbolic and you can’t develop a literal framework
What so ever from it. Revelation is the most symbolic book in the Bible it seems. It’s just as non literal as Genesis 1-11.
Tim Mackie did a good revelation series. The heaven and earth overlap series also.
Why cannot that be taken literally?
So in the new heaven and earth you believe that infants don’t live for just a few day but live to and old age before dying? Or do you believe they will be immortal living forever?
Well, if there aren’t any literal infants, there won’t be any literally living just a few days, will there. 
Dale: “I’ve already addressed all of that. Maybe you should reread and understand what I actually said.”
No you did not. You based your entire argument on literary false opposites: poetry vs. literal. You may wish to take a class in literary analysis.
Read again, maybe well for the first time. That was @SkovandOfMitaze. I said that poetry included both the literal and the figurative, the literal and the metaphorical. I did not set them up as opposites.
And you in reading.
I will not bicker with you any more because, …well never mind.
1 Like
“You wrote ‘evolution’ without articulating any further. That is not the fault of the reader”
You failed to read any further, and that is the fault of the reader’s understanding. Again, I am not going to quibble over your unsupported assumptions. So please do not reply again.
You asked me about my faith. I shared, and you simply began engaging in “he said, he said” interaction while quibbling over words without making further inquiry. Not a good approach. I have seen too much of such irrationality on secular websites and am not interested in them. They lead nowhere.
You had better learn how to cite users’ quotes if you are going continue to use the Discourse platform instead of making blanket accusations without any support. Reply as much as you like.
1 Like
What is an ‘evolutionist’ if you did not mean biological evolution? “Clouds evolve.” Is someone that says that an ‘evolutionist’? 
1 Like
I think that all Dale is pointing out to you, Alonzo, is that the conversation is easier to follow if you include in your own reply the actual quoted section you are responding to. You can do that by highlighting the bit of text of interest in their post, and then clicking the grey ‘quote’ pop-up button, which will put the labeled snippet straight into any new post you are creating (or open a new post for you if you haven’t yet.) Then everybody can see exactly what “they said”. I don’t think Dale was really threatening you - despite him making it sound a bit ominous there.
2 Likes
Absolutely not! Dire consequences await anybody who transgresses.
Wait a minute. Ummm …
… Except for moderators, of course!
1 Like
These rest on a false belief as to what constitutes the imago Dei.
Evolution is biology. Other uses are metaphors.
Only for those with limited imaginations and reasoning skills.
So you’ve invented the long-desired divine-o-meter that can test for divine action in events? Are you going to patent it?
You should read more of what he’s written.
Ah – you’re making the mistake that John Lennox regularly warns against, confusing instrument with actor. This is equivalent to criticizing an auto-maintenance manual for not stating that it is necessary to hold a wrench in one hand.
Huh? That’s what he said!
2 Likes