Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible Buffet (Run-off From Noah's Flood)
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


(1)
Message 46 of 66 (563149)
06-03-2010 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Iblis
06-01-2010 11:15 PM


Re: money, mouth
In the meantime though, I would appreciate it if you could give your views, feeling and actions, in relation to the actual New Testament commandments. I'm thinking of things like not just not killing, but not hating; not just not adultering, but not lusting; not just loving your neighbor, but also loving your enemy.
When someone shoots you in the left leg, do you roll over on it to make it easier for them to pop one into your right leg as well? When someone kidnaps your daughter, do you run after them and make sure they take your wife too? When someone chains you to a truck and drags you a mile, do you grab onto the bumper and make sure you go along with them that second mile?
I'm stretching, I know. But you know what I'm talking about. Do you "resist not evil" ??? Or is that just crap that you can safely ignore?
hello Iblis,
I'm not sure what your point is in this really. Do I believe that when Christ said, "You have heard that it was said, `YOU HALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; 28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. " that he meant this literally? Yes I do. Am I guilty of this sin, yes I am...lol. But that's not the point. We are born sinners from Adam, sin and death entered into the world. There isn't one sin itself that makes me a sinner, whether I murder someone or sleep with the woman next door. I was born a sinner, as was everyone, thus I need a replacement for that sin, thus, Christ's death and resurrection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Iblis, posted 06-01-2010 11:15 PM Iblis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Iblis, posted 06-03-2010 3:45 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 47 of 66 (563150)
06-03-2010 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Granny Magda
06-02-2010 10:11 AM


Re: Hi Flyer
hope that your kid's medical problems are all minor and will be dealt with as soon as possible. It's always very stressful when kids get ill. Best wishes to all the Flyer family.
Thanks Granny, nice post. He's doing fine now. Had a 2 week combination of two horrible ear infections coupled with some viral infections also, for those scientists out there that the know the difference....it's all gibberish to me. Anyway, he's home today...thanks again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Granny Magda, posted 06-02-2010 10:11 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 48 of 66 (563154)
06-03-2010 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Huntard
06-02-2010 2:20 PM


Look at my example in Message 30 That's an interpretation of a passage from the bible that won't be shared by many, but how can you (a fallible mere mortal human) tell me (the same), that my interpretation is any less valid than yours, except with "I don't believe that's what it says". Now pardon me, but I don't find that a very convincing argument, you see I believe i does. And then what, do we reach a stalemate, how do we go from there?
hello Huntard,
I'll try and address as much as I can in your post but I'd still like to bring it back to the whole reason why I posted and that's to debate the TE if we can.
Let's just take the Gen 9:14 example that you discussed, "And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud."
In light of what we read here in Genesis, the verse has to be interpreted within the context or with other Scripture. This is something that you are failing to do in all the examples you give. You are pulling verses out of the air, typing out a portion of it (not the other verses surrounding it) and saying it can mean whatever you want....and in the way you are doing it, yes, it can mean other things. However, the whole context says this:
"12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: 13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. 14 And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: 15 And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. 17 And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth."
So clearly your example can easily be understood in light of the end of Noah's flood and the covenant established with mankind that, if followed throughout the history of the OT and NT, ends in the death and resurrection of Christ.
Isn't that a bit arrogant of you, claiming to know the mind of god?
I'm not claiming to know the whole mind of God. God reveals himself in Scripture, he even says so...however, there are aspects of God we will never understand and yes it would be arrogant to claim that we can fully understand God...he clearly says in Scripture:"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. Isaiah 55:8. An example would be the Trinity or Triune God. The human mind cannot rationalize three persons in one.
Already you need to interpret stuff, I interpreted god from the bible in my Message 30, but that's not an interpretation you'll agree with. What makes my interpretation less valid than yours?
What makes yours less valid is that it was not in the context of the rest of Scripture. As a human being, fallible that I am, there will be times that I am wrong in my interpretation and there are resources to turn too to study these things, along with a discerning Spirit. Flip it around for a second and let's say I completely and maybe intentionally misinterpreted a science publication you posted here...even just one line of it. You would probably correct me where I was wrong and show me the context in which I should have interpreted the line.
Ok, I interpreted that he is. Now what? Who is right? How do we determine that objectively?
Except again, the bible says otherwise. If God were a relativist, there would have been no need for the cross and there would be listed in the bible, myriads of ways to heaven.
I hope that shed some light Huntard on your questions. I would like to steer this back to the flood however and what Scripture says about it, not what man says about it.
In light of Scripture, one can only come to the conclusion that it was a global flood, no? Take everything else out (for now) and have the TE convince me in Scripture that the flood was not a literal global catastrophic flood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Huntard, posted 06-02-2010 2:20 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Huntard, posted 06-03-2010 3:54 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3895 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 49 of 66 (563159)
06-03-2010 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Flyer75
06-03-2010 3:00 PM


Re: money, mouth
I'm not sure what your point is in this really.
I'm trying to get to the heart of this "pick and choose" question. When Huntard asked you about Old Testament commandments, you deflected his question with New Testament references. (Apparently it's ok for you to have a tattoo, because, Peter had a dream about some edible vermin?) When I ask you about New Testament commandments, you dodge over into theology about forgiveness.
Are you just a hypocrite? If so, fine. You are forgiven. But in such a case, you cannot speak with authority. People who tell us that their interpretation of the scripture is definitive, need to be able to show how that interpretation works out in their lives. All your sins are forgiven. Your beliefs are your opinions, about your faith. Your faith is invisible to us. So, what are your works? When is the last time, that you did one of those hard things the gospels tell us to do, and how did that work out?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Flyer75, posted 06-03-2010 3:00 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 50 of 66 (563162)
06-03-2010 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Flyer75
06-03-2010 3:22 PM


Hello Flyer, glad to hear all is well again.
Flyer75 writes:
I'll try and address as much as I can in your post but I'd still like to bring it back to the whole reason why I posted and that's to debate the TE if we can.
Ok, fine by me.
I will address some of the points you raised though.
However, the whole context says this:
*biblequote*
So clearly your example can easily be understood in light of the end of Noah's flood and the covenant established with mankind that, if followed throughout the history of the OT and NT, ends in the death and resurrection of Christ.
Sure, I could still interpret that to make it fit with what I said earlier. Now I never denied that this wasn't a reaction/promise of god after the noachian flood, but I simply interpreted it differently then you do. I could still make this all fit together if you really want me to, with no internal inconsistencies.
I'm not claiming to know the whole mind of God. God reveals himself in Scripture, he even says so...however, there are aspects of God we will never understand and yes it would be arrogant to claim that we can fully understand God...he clearly says in Scripture:"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. Isaiah 55:8. An example would be the Trinity or Triune God. The human mind cannot rationalize three persons in one.
Then how can you truly know that my interpretation isn't the right one? Perhaps I am the only one to make the right interpretation, perhaps somebody else is. Perhaps it's even that whacky Joseph Smith. But without knowing god's mind completely, we can never claim with any absolute certainty (even more so since we are fallible humans), what god acutally meant.
What makes yours less valid is that it was not in the context of the rest of Scripture.
That's what you say. I say it fits perfectly, god is in a bit of a temper tantrum for the rest of the OT, I guess this is because he is still pissed off at himself for fucking up adam and eve, and then fucking up even more, leading to him having to destroy the world in a flood, not leaving behind any evidence of his fuck ups. Then, right at the end, he goes right back to his promise to Noah (the one about destroying the earth again, not with water, but other things, as my interpretation clearly shows), and does just as he promised, he destroys the world with all kinds of nasty stuff, because he felt the covenant was broken once more, the fact many have tried to put a time on when this will occur, and that they've all been wrong, shows quite clearly it is for god to determine when this time will be, also as I've interpreted. Seems like I'm pretty close on the mark there.
Flip it around for a second and let's say I completely and maybe intentionally misinterpreted a science publication you posted here...even just one line of it. You would probably correct me where I was wrong and show me the context in which I should have interpreted the line.
There is a difference though. I can show you why you are wrong by pointing to objective evidence. The fact that there are so many different denominations of Christianity is a tell tale sign that in this case, there is no objective evidence to determine which of them is right. And since you can't even figure out which one of you is right (well, to you, it's the one you belong to, but I think you'll get my point), what is to say that I have not accidentally stumbled (or perhaps I was guided ) onto the right interpretation.
Take Peg for instance, she's a Christian, and even a creationist, like yourself. She will however not agree with you on the trinity, according to her, there is no such thing, and she claims the bible as support. There have been lengthy discussions between here and other Christians on this site, and so far I've never seen them resolved.
{ABE}: Or take Jaywill in the "some still living" thread. Look how he's twisting and turning to make Jesus' prophecy about when the end time will be fit! He's not taking just scripture into accoun there, he's taking in the real world also (For it has not happened yet. therefore, a way must be foudn to make it fit).
What do you make of that then?
Except again, the bible says otherwise.
I don't think it does.
If God were a relativist, there would have been no need for the cross and there would be listed in the bible, myriads of ways to heaven.
There are, you just interpreted it wrong. See what I did there?
I hope that shed some light Huntard on your questions. I would like to steer this back to the flood however and what Scripture says about it, not what man says about it.
In light of Scripture, one can only come to the conclusion that it was a global flood, no? Take everything else out (for now) and have the TE convince me in Scripture that the flood was not a literal global catastrophic flood.
If we look just at scripture, and ignore everything else, it's pretty clear it's a global flood. But why do that? Why limit yourself just to scripture when you've got the real world around you you actually live in?
But I will agree with you, just looking at scripture it was a global flood. Though perhaps I would be able to squeeze out a different interpretation, given enough time on my hands and the verses at hand (I can get the verses, but I'm not gonna waste my time interpreting Noah's flood, I don't think it will do any good anyway).
Edited by Huntard, : Added a bit

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Flyer75, posted 06-03-2010 3:22 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 51 of 66 (563529)
06-05-2010 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by marc9000
06-03-2010 8:18 AM


the word absolute has nothing to do with being damned.
I never said the two words held a direct correlation. I was citing an example.
I thought you were using the word absolute the way I’ve seen atheists use it against religion many times,
I was.
that religion is an unchangeable conclusion reached by faith.
Flip faith and religion and you'd be right. Faith is an unchangeable conclusion reached by religion. Faith and one's particular religion are directly proportionate. Had you been raised in Iran, you'd be spouting the same BS, only about Muhammed.
Evolution combined with some form of godless abiogenesis
As Huntard and ramoss have already told you, this couldn't be further from the truth. Evolution has fuck all to do with abiogenesis.
is an unchangeable conclusion reached by faith throughout most of the scientific community.
For the millionth time: science is NOT dogmatic. Nothing in science is concluded on faith. The whole premise of the scientific principle is to continue learning about the world around us. If science held any unchangeable principles, we would still think the earth was flat and the center of the universe.

"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by marc9000, posted 06-03-2010 8:18 AM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2010 1:45 AM hooah212002 has replied

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 3427 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 52 of 66 (564215)
06-09-2010 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by hooah212002
06-05-2010 4:46 PM


Tis curious, when scientists debate a concept, you say that is good. When a new concept is introduced, eg plate tectonics, many absolutely denied it (talk about dogmatic scientists.) Still, the game was started, and at the end, bout everybody believed in the new theory, This i the scientific process and it is good.
When Christians disagree about a topic, though, this is evidence that all Christians are wrong? It is the same process, but we use scripture instead of scientific facts. All the Christians knew that the earth was flat. We entered the debate and just as many Christians attacked the round earth idea as scientists attacked plate tectonics (or other major paradigm shifts such as the ice ages) Then, at the end, the new theory, round earth, won out among the Christians. Other such debates have occurred, such as the earth revolving around the sun. We are in the midst of yet another debate, does the Bible allow for evolution. When the dust settles, I am convinced that we will conclude that the Bible allows for evolution. This is not based on pick and choose, but a careful analysis of all the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by hooah212002, posted 06-05-2010 4:46 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Huntard, posted 06-09-2010 2:57 AM greentwiga has replied
 Message 54 by hooah212002, posted 06-09-2010 10:20 AM greentwiga has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 53 of 66 (564219)
06-09-2010 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by greentwiga
06-09-2010 1:45 AM


The problem is Greentwiga, that while scientists have objctive ways of telling who's wrong or right, Christians don't. They're all fallible and all don't know everything. So, none of them can claim that what they interpret from the bible is the one and only truth. For how do they know god meant that? Because they want it to mean that?
That is the problem here.
Example:
greentwiga writes:
When the dust settles, I am convinced that we will conclude that the Bible allows for evolution. This is not based on pick and choose, but a careful analysis of all the Bible.
Ask any creationist, and they will say the exact opposite, on the same grounds.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2010 1:45 AM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by greentwiga, posted 06-10-2010 1:23 AM Huntard has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 54 of 66 (564259)
06-09-2010 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by greentwiga
06-09-2010 1:45 AM


When Christians disagree about a topic, though, this is evidence that all Christians are wrong? It is the same process, but we use scripture instead of scientific facts.
You all have been reading the same damn book for 2,000 to 5,000 years. It changes periodically for a number of reasons, but that is due to user input (translations, copies, etc.). You guys have had the same documentation to work with for that long, yet you all still can't agree. It would be like us still disagreeing on how to domesticate animals or how to breed a milk producing bovine.
Now science, on the other hand, gets new input every day. Something new is learned every day.
Then, at the end, the new theory, round earth, won out among the Christians.
Thanks to what? What's that? Scripture? Did they learn that from scripture? Fuck no. Science told you morons that.

"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2010 1:45 AM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by greentwiga, posted 06-10-2010 1:30 AM hooah212002 has replied
 Message 59 by Buzsaw, posted 06-10-2010 11:26 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 3427 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 55 of 66 (564341)
06-10-2010 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Huntard
06-09-2010 2:57 AM


Huntard, Yep they would say the opposite. The are the defenders of the old theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Huntard, posted 06-09-2010 2:57 AM Huntard has not replied

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 3427 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 56 of 66 (564342)
06-10-2010 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by hooah212002
06-09-2010 10:20 AM


People have been experimenting with lead for over 5,000 years. Do we know everything about lead? No. Scientists are still trying to understand some facets.
Now I did not use derogatory words like "Morons" so I ask you to keep the discussion civil.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by hooah212002, posted 06-09-2010 10:20 AM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by hooah212002, posted 06-10-2010 1:35 AM greentwiga has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 57 of 66 (564343)
06-10-2010 1:35 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by greentwiga
06-10-2010 1:30 AM


People have been experimenting with lead for over 5,000 years. Do we know everything about lead? No. Scientists are still trying to understand some facets.
Name something unknown about lead. Otherwise, I will say: of course, because we constantly learn new methods to study the physical world. This does nothing for your argument. If you have a point, make it.
*abe* A second glance at this statement brings this thought to mind: your equation of lead to scripture would be as if we didn't understand yet that lead had a melting point of 600.65 K, or if there were some scientists debating that it was 300K and saying they were absolutely right and no one could sway their opinion. Try again sally.
Now I did not use derogatory words like "Morons" so I ask you to keep the discussion civil.
You want sugar and roses too? Man up, buttercup. I wan't even directing that "moron" at you. I could start though, if you like.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by greentwiga, posted 06-10-2010 1:30 AM greentwiga has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 66 (564547)
06-10-2010 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Huntard
06-01-2010 10:45 AM


Getting To Know God
Huntard writes:
You're just a fallible human, you're not all knowing. How can you possibly know what god meant, who has an intellect far greater than anything you could ever hope to fathom? How can you know that god is like you say he is? That he will only act the way you think he should act?
Huntard, there are things you are studied in. You spend a lot of time in your thing. When one is into the Bible daily for life, one gets to know how to corroborate the scriptures of the 40 or so authors, to become more astute in understanding them and get to know God.
Not only that, but when one becomes born of the Holy Spirit, enlightment come more easily as one's mind is illuminated by that spirit. That's not to say one will ever totally master it all.
The writers of many of the prophecies, like Ezekiel and Daniel, etc never knew how what they prophesied would work out. They were written so that the generations to come would read them and observe the fulfillment in their time. That's why Daniel was told that the book would be sealed until the last days and it wasn't for him to go further. Lo and behold the prophet John who wrote Revelation has a sealed book and Jesus opens it for him, i.e. the 7 seals, the 7th which becomes the 7 trumpets and the 7'th of it becomes the 7 bowls of wrath, etc. It's an amazingly wonderful book when you really get to know it. That's just one of the reasons nobody but nobody will ever dissuade me from trusting implicitly in the Biblical record. It satisfies all my needs, tells me where everything originated, why what we observe today is as it is and where the world is going in the future. It's been smack dad on the money as the centuries and milleniums pass and one can be assured about the future.
Edited by Buzsaw, : fix quotes

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Huntard, posted 06-01-2010 10:45 AM Huntard has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 66 (564551)
06-10-2010 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by hooah212002
06-09-2010 10:20 AM


Growing And Learning
hooah writes:
Now science, on the other hand, gets new input every day. Something new is learned every day
The scriptures are the same way. After being in it daily for 60 plus years, I'm still learning. Likely most of the apostates who have opted out of Christianity and the book studied little to grow and really understand it's values.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by hooah212002, posted 06-09-2010 10:20 AM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by hooah212002, posted 06-11-2010 12:05 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 60 of 66 (564562)
06-11-2010 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Buzsaw
06-10-2010 11:26 PM


Re: Growing And Learning
The scriptures are the same way.
Don't kid yourself, Buz.
Likely most of the apostates who have opted out of Christianity and the book studied little to grow and really understand it's values.
Perhaps they saw through the shenanigans. The more I read "the book", the further away from it I want to be. The more I learn about your sick and twisted religion, the further I want my children to be from it.

"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Buzsaw, posted 06-10-2010 11:26 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jaywill, posted 06-12-2010 7:14 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024