Moreover, please try to explain how the death of an animal sacrifice could attone for the Israelite's sin in the Old Testament? If animal death was meaningless and inconsequencial to God (for example, if he could declare everything Good in the presence of animal death), how could killing one attone for the sin of PEOPLE?
No... death entered the world by Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden. Death passed upon all that was within Adam's dominion and rule. Adam was the head of creation, as Christ is the head of the the church. Notice Romans 5 doesn't say that because of Eve's sin, death entered the world... but because of Adam's sin. The body cannot live without the head. Once the head is cut off, the body dies. Death passed upon all creation as a result of the 'master'. Adam was given dominion over all the earth. Why could Jesus come and die for us? Because he is the only one who could take dominion of the physical universe away from Satan, who had stolen it from us.
Why would the Bible call prey for a hungry lion a good gift from God's own hand?
Why would God call the death of Christ a good thing? Because it is a sacrifice so that men might live. The prey of the lion is no different. It is necessary that the prey die (because we live in a fallen world - note this is not the designed or intended way) so that the lion might live. It is to the Glory of God that the creation survives the death brought into this world by Adam. Otherwise, Satan would succeed in destroying what God had created.
Therefore, it is good, however only in a fallen world, that the lion eat to continue and survive and live out God's command to animals after the flood to be fruitful and multimply. In that the animals are simply obeying the word of God.
Note that the Bible says that the Lion shall one day lie down with the Lamb... that this is the intended way... the preferred way... God's way. Further evidence that it was not God's original design to have animals eating other animals... further evidence that death was not the original design. For when things are restored, the lion will once again be at peace with the lamb.
Oh, so you believe there are more than the nine kinds you listed? So much for a straight answer about what the word "kind" means! Are there nine kinds, or are there more than nine kinds?
Well, I simply believe there isn't time in 6000 years to deviate too drastically from the original creature created within a kind. We can say with certianty, for example, that a fish did not mutate into lizard... and a lizard did not mutate into a bird. Clearly, that would be crossing the bounds of the specific kinds that God lists in the Bible. However, I believe that the truth of "kinds" can be extended on down the line. Land animals will not turn into fish... land animals will not turn into birds... land animals will reproduce after their own kind. Dogs will create more dogs. There may be variation within this, but in a corrupt and dying world, we don't see the creation of new, we see the isolation of the specific from the diverse... we see the extinction of more species that we see new species. We loose information rather than gain. The gist of Bob's arguments on entropy is this - if you have a perpetual motion machine, you do not have entropy. With God sustaining everything eternally, that is just what you have. Perpetual everything - nothing dies... nothing withers... everything continues with the sustaining power of God. Remove God from the creation, and it begins to 'spin on it's own'. It will eventually run down. Biological things are the same. Without God sustaining them at the original design giving eternal life and health... things deteriorate and 'wind down'. We go from no entropy absolute order and function to high entropy, lower order, lower function... what Bob is trying to say is that we have gone from being physically eternal to being physically mortal. Because there is no known force natural force that can create somehting eternal from something mortal, we can see, therefore, the trend is for things to become increasingly inert. Decay rates of atomic particles for example. Without something to sustain us, we die.
Indeed, and there are many varieties of mammals, but they are all still mammals. There are many varieties of plants, but they are all still plants. What's your point?
The point is that ferns don't turn into frogs. Ferns turn into other ferns... frogs turn into other frogs.
A good analogy is an automobile. Like a car, our body is full of machines. While they may be biological and not mechanical, the same principles of physics that governs the operation of a car, governs the operation of our biological processes. Our cells still have to transmit heat and energy. If the muffler falls off your car, it will not hinder the operation of the vehicle, however it may effect performance. Our bodies are billions upon billions of times more complex than an automobile, however, to my knowledge not a single car has ever had the ability to evolve into something else.
"dude... I was driving down the road the other day and I felt this boost of power... I checked under the hood and my engine had evolved an extra cylinder!! This is soo cool!"
This is rediculous to us all because we all know that it is impossible for a car to 'grow' new parts. Moreover, even if a new cylinder did appear, who is to say there would be pistons for it... the header would also have to change... the exhaust and timeing would be all screwed up... an engine is a finely calibrated machine! Like I said... our biological systems are far more complex.
And what about entropy and sustaining power. Well, lets say you stopped chaning your oil (an analogy for God's eternal sustaining power being removed). Your engine would eventually burn up the oil... and eventually seize up. Why? Because we all know that it is not the nature of things to decrease in entropy over time... but it is natural to wear out and break down... go from better to worse. Without sustaining power... and sometimes by random pressures exerted on the engine... the engine eventually wears out.
Our genomes are the same. Without God to hold them up to their original design, they run down, not up. Evolution asserts that biological systems increase with efficency, function, use over time... this is not true. The best shape our genomes were ever in is at creation... since the fall, they have been running down... wearing out... loosing information, not gaining it.
YOu know exactly what I meant. The way you were quoting me is different that what was said.
I know that it is unfathomable to call yourself a christian and hold the view that portions of scripture are not quite right.... or that God didn't think it was important to tell us the truth. How can one be a christian and not believe the Bible? You can't pick the parts you think are real and the parts you think are fairy tale. Have you ever read the Geneologies in Genesis? Does that bit of reading sound poetic or historical to you? It is distinctly historical to me. The tone of Genesis never changes throughout. It is all historical matter of fact. Yet you relegate the first 11 chapters to some fiction fairy tale told to us because we couldn't understand the story of evolution even if God had told us.
I am sorry, UTE, but a 3 year old could understand evolution - the fishy turns into the lizard and then into the kitty and then into the monkey and then into you. But this is not what God told us... he told us he created the universe and the world ... and every living thing in the world... in 6 literal days. He told us He created land animals and human beings separately in one day... not that one turned into another. He gave five 24 hour (solar) days from the creation of our planet and time to the creation of man in Adam, the first man - NOT MILLIONS OF YEARS. He gave us detailed geneologies leading up to Jesus so we know it was ~4000 years after the creation of the world... ~4000 years after the creation of plants... ~4000 years after the creation of fish... ~4000 years after the creation of birds.... ~4000 years after the creation of man. History tell us it's been about 2000 years since then. We can't trust history as much as we can the Word of God, so we say that the earth is ~6000 years old.
These people, thousands of years ago, had a particular world view. You know this or you would accept somewhere along the way that they really did believe in a flat earth, surrounded by the deep, with a dome overhead.
While cleverly worded your statements mean exactly this:
"you know that the Bible is wrong about the world, and that Genesis is a fairy tale"
Perhpas if you spent less time trying to prove the scripture false, and more time believing it, your faith would not be shaken so hard by challenge. Isn't that the real reason you argue in favor of evolution? To appear wise in the eyes of man? You can't take the criticism because of your disbelief in the word, so you try to marry yourself to both beliefs to try to convince yourself that Genesis isn't real... that creation isn't real, and it's ok for you to think that and still call yourself a Christian.
Mat 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
You have demonstrated where your belief and loyalties lie. I would advise drastic change. You cannot serve God and Man.
Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
Choose to believe God over man. Just about the only thing that remains of evolution since Darwin is it's humanistic worldview that everything came to be by natural means without the direct influence of the Creator. Evolution true seeks to exhault itself against the knowlege of God.
2Cr 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
Evolution goes in DIRECT OPPOSITION & CONTRADICTION to the word of God! It is the same tool that Satan used against Eve when he said "hath God said? Surely God hath not said". God DID say... he was specific... he was direct... Creation happened, not evolution. The Bible is clear, and plain, and specific and True.
Your flat earth dome philosophies are desparate reaches in the dark. You seek desparately to overcome the condemnation you feel in your own spirit for dismissing the word of God. You keep trying to convince yourself that if you just prove evolution, you can justify your dismissal of scripture. It will never work.
You are the one making the assertion, not me. Ignore for a second that you disagree with my interpretation. Do you mean to say that if God really did use figurative language to give us the Creation account, that you think this means God lied?
Whether or not it's figurative makes no difference. This is what God told us is true. For us to believe anything different would be wrong. I believe that God never lied to us... I believe that he knows exactly what we are capale of understanding... he created us afterall. He is God afterall.
I find it amazing that you are willing to question God Himself.
In fact, it is not me who questions God, it is you. You have taken the path of stating "hath God Said... surely God did not say". You are the one who has decided not to believe what the scriptures say. Your statement is based on the assumption that God didn't mean what he said. You play little games saying "if God didn't say what he meant would you still believe as you do now?"
I believe WHAT GOD SAID AS HE SAID IT. If God had said that the earth was made of cheese no matter what science says, I would believe him. You on the other hand must be convinced by science... by what man tells you is true rather than by what God tells you is true.
This is EXACTLY the type of question that the verse was written:
Pro 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
I will not answer you according to your folly. You assume that the Word of God is incorrect, and you ask me to answer a question based on the confines of this belief. Nope... not going to happen. I have exposed your fallicous lie instead.
That is NO DIFFERENT from secular evolutionists asking creationists to prove creation without all this Bible stuff. They say 'we know you believe the Bible... but we want to know what PHYSICAL evidence you have... convince us without the BIble. No friend... the Bible IS THE ANSWER. God's word is the proof. God said it, I believe it. Now I can show you ... using the word... why and how your interpretations of the physical evidence is wrong - as I have done with Death and evolution, for example. But keep in mind that the Word is ultimate truth... not science. It must always be born in the Word FIRST. If it doesn't disagree with scripture, then it's open to human interpretation.
As I have said, I think God was more concerned with bigger things that the shape of the earth or whether species can evolve when deciding what to put in the Bible.
So you think God is willing to lie and give false witness as long as He got the 'bigger things' right? No so, my friend. In fact, Jesus said that it is Good that brings for good... and evil that brings for evil. You cannot build good with evil. You will never be able to build the truth using lies.
Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Good begets Good... evil begets more evil. Evil does not beget Good. You cannot build the truth upon a lie, for the truth will not stand. You cannot build your house upon the sand, or it will fall. The 'bigger things' must be based on the foundation of truth to stand. The little things are just as important as the big things.
I would submit that any christian who professes faith in evolution is like the man who built his house upon the sand.
Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Mat 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
Mat 7:25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
Mat 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
Mat 7:27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
Lets take a look at what's really being said here:
Is Genesis 1 & 2 True?
Not in a literal sense.
Is Genesis 1 true?
No.
Is Genesis 1:24-31 true?
No.
Is Genesis 1:9-13 true?
Let's see. No.
Is the bible true?
Absolutely.
Jam 1:7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
Jam 1:8 A double minded man [is] unstable in all his ways.
God really created everything and evolution was a part of that process.
Since God says he did it another way, I choose to believe Him rather than man. The Bible simply doesn't give the picture that evolution was ever part of creation.
Yes, and here you confirm my assertion. You will deal with the facts of the case only when I first say that I agree completely with your version. So you never will.
When you are willing to believe the Bible over your own eyes, let me know and we'll talk. Eve believed her own eyes and she was wrong. Here is a hint... God's word is true... believe it. But you would have to accept that God is smarter than you... you might not be willing.
Nope. I assert the God used non-literal language to reveal Truths to us. Just as was done wit the parables to give one example.
Actually, what you are really saying is "God hath not said". Verily I say to you... God HATH indeed said.
So then, how can you take an interpretation that doesn't even exist over the plainest clearest interpretation that the Jewish geographic worldview presents?
I take God's word over man's word any day. I would rather be considered a fool for believing God's word to be true, then wallow in the filth of my own self interest.
Oh yeah, you spin it with your modern thoughts.
Seems to me that Adam walked and talked with God. Even to Enoch who walked so closely with God that God took him. Seems like they could have simply asked and God would tell them the truth. So the 'modern idea' is a pathetic theory. They knew Genesis 1 & 2 because they were there and lived it. They passed that knowledge onto other generations. It wasn't until much later in history (probably after Babel) that 'other' religions, traditions, and worldviews took hold. For example, the 'flat earth' philosophies were not even around until people started venturing out into the oceans. These were myths and stories that were glorified by fear. The 'evidence' of the day (sailor's stories for example) seemed to promote the idea, and the church capitulated the Word to accept it - just as some here have done with Evolution today.
You do realize that there are many fine Christian that work in the sciences.
Yes, they are called 'creationists'.
), you can see what used to be disordered condensation turn into ordered snowflakes.