Creation vs. Evolution Apologetics

[Tyrel]

(Denver;25966)
Right, but again that's based off of only what's been dug up. You cannot simply dig up an oral tradition that was much older.I go to what Christ said in the New Testament, specifically in Revelation:Revelation 3:16If the Bible borrowed from other religions, then that presents a real problem for a book that claims to be the Word of God. I would argue, for example, that Hebrew idioms preceeded the Greek ones. I would go a step further and say that using an idiom varies greatly from taking a story. Language is a language, a story is a story.I've actually had a chance to study a lot of the epics you mention, I'd add the Ugaritic texts and some of the other records of Ba'al and so on and so forth. I know the similarity, so I know where you are coming from.However, I go back to this. The argument that gods existed before God and only later became a single deity seems to defy logic.My point would be that these similarities were not borrowed from the other epics. My point is that these so called original epics were a corrupted form of the much older original verbal accounts. I can point the the story of giants which manifests itself in Europe, Asia, Africa, and North and South America. It survived a tremendously long time here with the North American tribes, and carried the same tenant that God punished a decidedly wicked and evil race with a flood. Everyone likes a unique national identity, but it's absolutely remarkable that so many traditions are so very similar.
I understand why you feel inclined to that conclusion. However, I think it's perhaps an unnecessary inclination.I do not think that the Biblical texts using stories from previous sources says anything as to it's credentials. It doesn't undermine the message. In fact, I believe that we can take away from where the scriptures deviate from the base source.For me, I think it highly unlikely, given my study of the Biblical texts, and the amateurish study into these other texts, that the Biblical tradition came first. In fact, I find that that would almost take away from the understanding and authority of the text. I believe that the texts were very often acting as correctives. Most especially within the book of Genesis, which is evidenced by the lengths to which the author goes to never once depict God as "in the sky" or "heavens", where elsewhere in the Torah this is allowed.However, I think the empirical evidence leads one to see that the Biblical tradition sprung from the previous. I also don't see anything wrong with that. I had a hard time at first, and so like I said, I understand where you are coming from, but I don't think we have to create such a dichotomy here.

 

[Tyrel]

(thesuperjag;25970)
Except for the fact that the Book of Jasher is completely messed up and flawed compared to the Word of God...Verse 1-5 skips many, I mean many verses of the Bible. It's sent by Satan.Jag
.........................

 

[Christina]

(Tyrel;25965)
And Ebla!! Oh my goodness, out of all the things to forget to mention off hand, the tablets at Ebla, with the account of a righteous man and his family, with a world wide flood, and his boat with all the animals. Along with the mentions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the wrath poured out on them, along with 3 other cities, not mentioned in the Torah, but Ebla was written way before hand, and thus, has the first ever mention of the fire from heaven on Sodom, and the first source to mention either of these cities.Sorry, I was going to edit a few new things into the past post, but decided against it. But this, I thought, deserved it's own post.Of course, my point is that these things have been known to Christian Scholars for ages now. They don't undermine the Biblical text at all. They help us better understand them if anything.
See this is where you and I always but heads you will believe anything before scripture no matter what if I point out scripture that says something different than the traditional believe you tell me Im wrong because that would mean God is right yet you will believe anything out side scripture even if it denys the Word I dont understand your logic.If there was a sixth day creation that lived say to be 900 years old and populated the world and it was these people Cain was afraid would kill him when he was kicked out of the Garden if it was these people that lived in the cities Cain built why couldn't they have left oral and stone remnants that were perverted here and there over time by the Egyptians and others? This is what Gen. really saysBut no you will deny that and rather go for the idea it was Gods word that stole the stories from the ancients.that it is Gods word that isnt trustworthy explain that to me

 

[Jordan]

(Kriss;25973)
(Biblical Tetragramaton;25965)
And Ebla!! Oh my goodness, out of all the things to forget to mention off hand, the tablets at Ebla, with the account of a righteous man and his family, with a world wide flood, and his boat with all the animals. Along with the mentions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the wrath poured out on them, along with 3 other cities, not mentioned in the Torah, but Ebla was written way before hand, and thus, has the first ever mention of the fire from heaven on Sodom, and the first source to mention either of these cities.Sorry, I was going to edit a few new things into the past post, but decided against it. But this, I thought, deserved it's own post.Of course, my point is that these things have been known to Christian Scholars for ages now. They don't undermine the Biblical text at all. They help us better understand them if anything.
See this is where you and I always but heads you will believe anything before scripture no matter what if I point out scripture that says something different than the traditional believe you tell me Im wrong because that would mean God is right yet you will believe anything out side scripture even if it denys the Word I dont understand your logic.If there was a sixth day creation that lived say to be 900 years old and populated the world and it was these people Cain was afraid would kill him when he was kicked out of the Garden if it was these people that lived in the cities Cain built why couldn't they have left oral and stone remnants that were perverted here and there over time by the Egyptians and others?This is what Gen. really saysBut no you will deny that and rather go for the idea it was Gods word that stole the stories from the ancients.that it is Gods word that isnt trustworthyexplain that to meOf course Tyrel is going to deny the Truth.Matthew 15:26 - But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.JagLovest thou in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.

 

[Tyrel]

(kriss;25973)
See this is where you and I always but heads you will believe anything before scripture no matter what if I point out scripture that says something different than the traditional believe you tell me Im wrong because that would mean God is right yet you will believe anything out side scripture even if it denys the Word I dont understand your logic.If there was a sixth day creation that lived say to be 900 years old and populated the world and it was these people Cain was afraid would kill him when he was kicked out of the Garden if it was these people that lived in the cities Cain built why couldn't they have left oral and stone remnants that were perverted here and there over time by the Egyptians and others? This is what Gen. really saysBut no you will deny that and rather go for the idea it was Gods word that stole the stories from the ancients.that it is Gods word that isnt trustworthy explain that to me
Oh my, I see I have been thoroughly misunderstood. I don't believe anything written on the tablets at Ebla.. at least not on the basis of their authority.It's not impossible for the oral Tradition to have found it's roots from back then. However, there is no reason to think they do go back that far. the Oral Torah is always understood as being presented no earlier than Moses. Now, I'm trying to be clear here; I'm not undermining God's word at all. God's word is Truth, and is true, whether or not people believed it. Did people have to believe the Truth from before it was revealed? Do you really think people believed in the Trinity as we do before Moses came?I'm simply saying that the Scriptures were speaking within their time and context, and was speaking to the audience. We have tried to interpret it ignorant of those things for far too long. It is clear that the authors were not hesitant to take from other sources. Truth is truth, regardless of where you find it. Balaam had truth, did he have the Torah, orally or written? no, he did not.The Truth transcends texts, and is presented to us clearly in the Torah. However, to fully understand the Torah, we need to be sensitive to the audience. The Torah worked off of other things to make it's points clear. It used both the language of the people literally and figuratively {hebrew, and their known traditions, such as the praise to Osiris, which latter was the basis for the psalm 78, as I make note of in the previous post.I'm simply saying that a proper understanding of the Torah, or at least an understanding in light of it's audience and context, being not ignorant of the images already commonly known to the people of Israel, leads one to find the true meaning of the text, which actually works together beautifully with the proved; Evolution.In this thread, up to now, I have presented good solid evidence for Evolution which I believe is beyond question, and certainly hasn't been properly contested at all to this point, and I have now begun to share how the scriptures are not opposed to this... at least... I have begun to show that. I don't consider the case made.

 

[Christina]

Gen 1:24 ¶ 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. Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good. Gen 1:26 ¶ 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 cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Gen 1:27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Gen 1:28 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. Gen 1:29 ¶ And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which [is] the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein [there is] life, [I have given] every green herb for meat: and it was so. Gen 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Where does it say anything about a garden or Adam ?And when we look at the hidden mystery 2 Peter shows us we know this sixth day was 1000 years long then God rested for 1000 years what were these people doing? what they were told being fruitful and multiplying this is when God created all the races. Not Adam

 

[Christina]

It was not until after he rested the 8th day that he created Adam differnt hebrew word here Ha-Adam(THE MAN) it was this man that was speacial that the would be the blood line of Christ so he was protected from the sixth day creation and put in a Garden and given a helpmate EveGen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen 2:8 ¶ And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Gen 2:10 ¶ And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.

 

[Christina]

Now assuming all this is true (which it is) but bear with me a minute this sixth day creation of the races had to have left tablets and stories behind as they populated the earth dont you think it possible that Egyptians and early civilizations copied these stories given the sixth day creation by God??????Instead of the other way around????????????????/

 

[Christina]

Now look at thisGen 4:13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment [is] greater than I can bear. Gen 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, [that] every one that findeth me shall slay me. Who was he afraid woulf find him if no one else existed besides his parents????? Gen 4:15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him. Who was God gving this warning to?????????? Gen 4:16 ¶ And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch Now he went to live in the land of Nod and suddenly has a wife and builds a cityHe was banned from Eden where did this wife come from who did he built a city for???the only logical answer is the 6th day creation that had been multiplying for a thousand years before Adam (the man) was ever created

 

[Tyrel]

(kriss;25980)
Now assuming all this is true (which it is) but bear with me a minute this sixth day creation of the races had to have left tablets and stories behind as they populated the earth dont you think it possible that Egyptians and early civilizations copied these stories given the sixth day creation by God??????Instead of the other way around????????????????/
Kriss... This is the problem.. you are understanding Genesis to be Literal history, when it's not even close. It's not in the same ballpark as history at all. The work itself is Ahistorical. It's not literal at all. It's a Creation Narrative.Oy Vey

 

[Jordan]

(Biblical Tetragramaton;25983)
(Kriss;25980)
Now assuming all this is true (which it is) but bear with me a minute this sixth day creation of the races had to have left tablets and stories behind as they populated the earth dont you think it possible that Egyptians and early civilizations copied these stories given the sixth day creation by God??????Instead of the other way around????????????????/
Kriss... This is the problem.. you are understanding Genesis to be Literal history, when it's not even close. It's not in the same ballpark as history at all. The work itself is Ahistorical. It's not literal at all. It's a Creation Narrative.Oy Vey

I think Tyrel needs a babysitter. As long he is still a babe, he can't get out of the house. Once he grows, he then can move on by himself.P.S. Spell your old username correctly...Jag

 

[Christina]

says who see you can not just say that wheres your proof your presenedence it doesnt fit you idea so this is your conclusion

 

[Tyrel]

(thesuperjag;25984)
I think Tyrel needs a babysitter. As long he is still a babe, he can't get out of the house. Once he grows, he then can move on by himself.P.S. Spell your old username correctly...Jag
Ad hominem... why am I not surprised.

P.S. ... er?

 

[Jordan]

(Biblical Tetragramaton;25986)
(thesuperjag;25984)
I think Tyrel needs a babysitter. As long he is still a babe, he can't get out of the house. Once he grows, he then can move on by himself.P.S. Spell your old username correctly...Jag
Ad hominem... why am I not surprised.

P.S. ... er?

It's Biblical TetragraMaton, not Biblical TetragraMMaton.Hebrews 5:13 - For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.Jag

 

[Christina]

You have done exactly what I accuse you of I have shown you in Gods word backed up by scripture and hebrew bares this out that there were three world ages no need for evolution if the earth is millions of years old and creatures existed before this age I have shown you how scripture supports a privious civilization that the tablets and stories could be from early Good fearing people yet you will deny it all instead choosing to make Gods word wrong a lie of men put together in some weird narriative all in an effort to believe men and your ungodly ideas and then try to make your ways fit God and call your self a Christian man you will comprimise any part of scripture to make your self right Im done with conversation you can go make a site decated to natratives and science and how clever you are for making it look Godly

 

[Tyrel]

(kriss;25985)
says who see you can not just say that wheres your proof your presenedence it doesnt fit you idea so this is your conclusion
Dear Kriss, I have already made this clear, but I'll repeat. I couldn't care less if we have a different view of scriptures. I believe we should all be open to consider all things. My theological position on the book is not the main point though. Sure, we can differ, and no, I can't offer you any more "proof" than you can. I can only try to show you how it works better and makes more sense than any other conclusion, which is the approach you have taken as well.However, consider first this."First, the truth of scripture must be held inviolable. Secondly, when there are different ways of explaining a scriptural text, no particular explanation should be held so rigidly that if convincing arguments show it to be false anyone dare to insist that it is still a definitive sense of the text. Otherwise unbelievers will scorn Sacred Scripture, and the way of faith will be closed to them" ~st. Thomas AquinasI agree with him. So, I am open to your interpretation of scripture. What I am not open to, is first, the way you are dealing with obvious truths, by choosing ignorance over insight. Evolution is the key here, but it's not limited to that. I want to break this false paradigm which ensnares so many honest Christians. It's exactly the thing which leads you to look away from the obvious truth of Evolution. It's exactly the thing which tends Denver and others towards a particular understanding of "superiority" or "supremacy" of scriptures.It presents us with a false Dichotomy. That on the one hand, there is faith, and on the other hand, there is honest intellectual inquiry, and critical empirical observance of the facts, with an open mind.It is clear beyond doubt that the interpretations of Genesis Vary.It is clear beyond doubt that there are various understandings of Genesis which do not find themselves in contrast with evolution.To act like this isn't the case, even in light of all the facts... that is what I am here to break. The attitude that facts don't matter, only our understanding of sacred text matters. To accept the interpretation of Genesis as literal to the exclusion of anything else, is not simply unfair and narrow, and does not simply, in my opinion, do great injustice to the text, but it also, in light of evolution's contrast to that understanding, presents many with the very false dichotomy I've been talking about all the while.

 

[Tyrel]

(thesuperjag;25988)
It's Biblical TetragraMaton, not Biblical TetragraMMaton.Hebrews 5:13 - For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.Jag
actually... I think you should look up how it's actually spelt. I made a mistake when I first joined. The correct spelling is Tetragrammaton.... but thanks for looking out for me..

 

[Jordan]

(Biblical Tetragramaton;25990)
(Kriss;25985)
says who see you can not just say that wheres your proof your presenedence it doesnt fit you idea so this is your conclusion
Dear Kriss,I have already made this clear, but I'll repeat. I couldn't care less if we have a different view of scriptures. I believe we should all be open to consider all things. My theological position on the book is not the main point though. Sure, we can differ, and no, I can't offer you any more "proof" than you can. I can only try to show you how it works better and makes more sense than any other conclusion, which is the approach you have taken as well.However, consider first this."First, the truth of scripture must be held inviolable. Secondly, when there are different ways of explaining a scriptural text, no particular explanation should be held so rigidly that if convincing arguments show it to be false anyone dare to insist that it is still a definitive sense of the text. Otherwise unbelievers will scorn Sacred Scripture, and the way of faith will be closed to them" ~st. Thomas AquinasI agree with him. So, I am open to your interpretation of scripture. What I am not open to, is first, the way you are dealing with obvious truths, by choosing ignorance over insight. Evolution is the key here, but it's not limited to that.I want to break this false paradigm which ensnares so many honest Christians. It's exactly the thing which leads you to look away from the obvious truth of Evolution. It's exactly the thing which tends Denver and others towards a particular understanding of "superiority" or "supremacy" of scriptures.It presents us with a false Dichotomy. That on the one hand, there is faith, and on the other hand, there is honest intellectual inquiry, and critical empirical observance of the facts, with an open mind.It is clear beyond doubt that the interpretations of Genesis Vary.It is clear beyond doubt that there are various understandings of Genesis which do not find themselves in contrast with evolution.To act like this isn't the case, even in light of all the facts... that is what I am here to break. The attitude that facts don't matter, only our understanding of sacred text matters. To accept the interpretation of Genesis as literal to the exclusion of anything else, is not simply unfair and narrow, and does not simply, in my opinion, do great injustice to the text, but it also, in light of evolution's contrast to that understanding, presents many with the very false dichotomy I've been talking about all the while.Matthew 7:13 - Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:Luke 4:4 - And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.Jag

 

[Christina]

you have shown nothing but opinions and mens words All knowledge comes from God not you You will never show a true Christian anything you lead people astray with luke warm watered down doctrines and you will be judged accordingly my opinions dont matter its Gods you had better worry about.

 

[Jordan]

(Biblical Tetragramaton;25991)
(thesuperjag;25988)
It's Biblical TetragraMaton, not Biblical TetragraMMaton.Hebrews 5:13 - For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.Jag
actually... I think you should look up how it's actually spelt. I made a mistake when I first joined. The correct spelling is Tetragrammaton.... but thanks for looking out for me..

I'll give you that, although you said you made a mistake. As long I am well aware of how your original username is spelt. I'm going to continue to spell that way.(kriss;25993)
you have shown nothing but opinions and mens words All knowledge comes from God not you You will never show a true Christian anything you lead people astray with luke warm watered down doctrines and you will be judged accordingly my opinions dont matter its Gods you had better worry about.
Kriss is right, Tyrel. You won't get any True Christian deceived by your opinion, due to the fact, you showed no scriptures. Are you well aware of, if you continue that path, God will spue you out?Jag