Creation of universe

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#81
I think Noah was probably also a real person, and he may have even survived some kind of a localized disaster with his family and some of the local wildlife, but the occurrence of a worldwide flood that no animals would have survived if they were not on board the ark goes beyond the limits of rational possibility.
Here is what the Bible says about you, Peter saw you coming:


2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Again: Your own "rational possibility". Just start your atheist youtube channel already and quit deceiving Christians itno believing in "science falsely so called". This is some of the worst possible behavior you can do in a Christian forum, sowing DOUBT in people about the Bible.

here is to hoping CS1 removes you from the board, LEST YOU OFFEND some new Christian and cause him/her to stumble, you know how the saying goes dont you? Millstone city!
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,612
9,127
113
#82
Correct.



Who gives the authority for ANY of the spiritual gifts?

The authority to understand and interpret the divine will and purpose is granted from the same source as the authority to interpret tongues.

I wouldn't call it picking and choosing what is true and untrue, though; I would call it consistently interpreting what the Bible is trying to teach us. It doesn't matter that the parable of the sower isn't "true," per se; it still teaches us important spiritual truths.



Because God determined at the creation of the universe that I would.

Jesus is fully God AND fully human. If there is no actual person Adam then there is no God in human form.
Jesus' Genealogy proves you are in error, and that there was in fact an INDIVIDUAL, whom God created, named ADAM:

Luke 3:23-38 English Standard Version (ESV)
The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai,26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,[a] the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of ADAM, the son of God.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,587
13,857
113
#83
It would be more accurate to ask "according to WHAT," rather than "according to whom."

Rational possibility is defined by the rules of logic in combination with what we know about the world. So if I say that it is not a rational possibility for you to flap your arms and fly to the moon, it is not by my own personal authority that you are unable to do so, it is by the limits of the physical world and logic that you are unable to do so.
Rational possibility, as you define it here, makes sense. However, this explanation is inadequate for rejecting the Genesis narrative.

I guess it depends on which texts you believe--some have Enoch living for 300 more years after his blessing at the age of 65, some have him living for 365 more years after his blessing at the age of 65--which only goes to substantiate my point that the details of "reality" get fuzzier the further into the past that you go.
I haven't come across such variants.

You don't know what Jesus thought, you only know what was recorded about what He said. (And I think that some of Genesis is roughly historical as well.)
While your point is valid, your implication isn't. There's no reason to think that Jesus didn't teach as He thought. In fact, it would be inconsistent with His character to teach something other than what He thought.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,733
8,603
113
#84
You are not understanding the question.

Some stars are so far away, the light from them takes billions of years to reach earth. We are now seeing that light billions of years later. So the question is, "How ancient are the heavens and the earth?"
You do err. The problem is the notion of uniformitarianism and the notion that our local vicinity is consistent everywhere else.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,733
8,603
113
#85
I think in general, the further back you go, the fuzzier the details become in terms of the reality of these persons and the legends around them. We can be pretty certain that Daniel, David, Moses, Joseph and Abraham all existed in some capacity, although I suspect the rumors of the extended lifespans of guys like Moses and Abraham were somewhat exaggerated. I think Noah was probably also a real person, and he may have even survived some kind of a localized disaster with his family and some of the local wildlife, but the occurrence of a worldwide flood that no animals would have survived if they were not on board the ark goes beyond the limits of rational possibility.

With Enoch and his 465 year lifespan before being taken alive into heaven, I think we are getting further into the realm of the legendary and/or mythical, and by the time we get to Adam, we have almost assuredly crossed over from historical account to instructional allegory.
Two comments:
-genealogies are not chronologies
-Genesis is VASTLY telescoped up to Abraham. Vastly. Time scales before then....forget it. Nobody knows.
-Usshers chronology is utterly useless
 

AxeElf

Active member
Mar 5, 2019
246
104
28
#86
Axel"Elf" is truly an ELF and an absolute heretic
Is that an insult? What do you have against elves? Are you prejudiced or something?

Claiming to be a prophet yet contradicting the Bible, claiming its not scientifically or historically accurate.
I am not contradicting any of the spiritual truths that the Bible was intended to teach us. I am contradicting the tendency of human beings to use the Bible in a way that it was NOT intended; i.e., as a history book or as a science book.

The only prophet you are is a prophet of science FALSELY so called.
Prophets of science--that is, people who help other people understand science--are called "scientists." I'm ok with that label.

Whats the wise thing to do? REPENT!
Repent of using the brain that God gave me?

I'll pass...

Here is what the Bible says about you, Peter saw you coming:

2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
I understand that you are probably not ready to digest this, but the context of this passage isn't about a literal reading of Genesis, it is about recognizing that God is still the reason for everything that happens. Peter directs this towards those who think that creation is running just fine by itself without any God that they can perceive, and Peter is reminding them that without God, there would be no creation in the first place. He talks about the flood, (because that's what they understood had happened at the time, even though we know better these days), only to illustrate that whatever happens in creation, happens because of God.

And to the extent that Noah may have been a real person who survived some kind of local disaster with his family and livestock, even people who have been through something like that today might say that their whole world was destroyed, when obviously, they don't mean THE whole world. To the extent that a localized flood was real, that would basically amount to their whole world being destroyed (as they had no knowledge of how big THE world really was at that time).

Again: Your own "rational possibility".
It's not "my own" personal impossibility, the occurrence of a worldwide flood is not rationally possible by what we understand to be true about the Earth--unless God is some kind of a liar Who is fooling us all into believing that things that did happen could not have happened--but that's not my idea of God.

For instance, for the entire surface of the Earth to be submerged to the tops of the mountains in the Himalayas would require something over 4 billion cubic kilometers of water. The Earth's entire ecosystem--oceans, lakes, ponds, rivers, clouds and atmosphere--contains only something like 1.5 billion cubic kilometers of water. There would have been no place for 3 times that amount of water to have come from--and no place for it to go afterwards.

Just start your atheist youtube channel already
Why would I do that? I'm not an atheist--I've made it abundantly clear that I am a Christian.

quit deceiving Christians itno believing in "science falsely so called".
I'm not deceiving anyone; this information doesn't come from me. I'm just telling you about it, and it can be discovered independently by anyone who is willing to follow the command of 1 Corinthians 2:15a (Amplified Bible): "But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things]..."

If Christians were supposed to ignore science, why would we be commanded to examine, investigate, inquire into, question and discern all things?

This is some of the worst possible behavior you can do in a Christian forum, sowing DOUBT in people about the Bible.
The doubt should not be in the spiritual truths that the Bible was intended to teach us--those truths are infallible in all matters. The doubt should be in the human practice of using the Bible in a way that it was NOT intended--as a history or a science book, for instance.

here is to hoping CS1 removes you from the board, LEST YOU OFFEND some new Christian and cause him/her to stumble, you know how the saying goes dont you? Millstone city!
Let's not forget that some rational people might be interested in checking out Christianity for themselves, but they think that they would have to check their brains at the door to become a Christian because, as St. Augustine said...

“Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.

"Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

"If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion."

Letting people know that you can still be rational and be a Christian at the same time could bring more of them into the fold.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,612
9,127
113
#87
The Bible is a book of spiritual truth. One should read it with the intention of learning what it is trying to tell us. That's where us prophets can come in handy, by helping others to understand and interpret the divine will and purpose.

Jesus told a parable about a sower who spread seed on various types of ground. Some of the seed did not sprout because it fell on rocky ground. Some of the seed sprouted, but was soon choked out by weeds. Some of the seed grew into strong plants, because the soil was fertile and receptive.

Do you believe that this sower was a real man, and that the story that Jesus told is an accurate depiction of actual events? Or do you believe that Jesus was teaching something important that was not contained in the literal facts of the story?

Ok, so if you understand that God and Jesus use parables to communicate spiritual truths through stories that are not necessarily historically or scientifically accurate, then why do you have a problem with trying to rightly divide the word into what is literal truth and what is spiritual truth?



When I do that, I am exercising my gift of prophecy.



It has nothing to do with whether or not I LIKE it, that's just what God's creation speaks to us when we examine it for evidence of how we got here as human beings. In fact, I LIKE the parable of the Garden of Eden a great deal. It helps me to understand some important spiritual truths, such as that selfishness (not hate) is the opposite of love, how man's nature of selfishness therefore separates him from God, whose nature is love, and why Jesus was necessary to reach out to across across that abyss created by our nature to allow us to pass over back into the presence of God for eternity.



Oh no; please, do not "work with" error or allow it to go unchallenged. If you can identify and demonstrate error, then by all means, call it out. I detest error with every fiber of my being (while still understanding that it can never be fully eradicated, only minimized).



Well, not just MY sin, but the sin of everyone who was created for salvation, yes.

(The matter of the "3rd day" may also be subject to a degree of question as well--there's a currently active thread on that very topic here in this forum--but it's not important.)
More error by you.
God's Creation tells us that there is IN FACT a Supreme Being that Created all. God's WORD tells us how He did it:

Hebrews 11:3 New King James Version (NKJV)
3 By faith we understand that the [a]worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.
Psalm 148:5 New King James Version (NKJV)
5 Let them praise the name of the Lord,
For He commanded and they were created.
Psalm 33:9 New King James Version (NKJV)
9 For He spoke, and it was done;
He commanded, and it stood fast.
Psalm 33:6 New King James Version (NKJV)
6 By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth.



Genesis 1:3 New King James Version (NKJV)
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
Genesis 1:6 New King James Version (NKJV)
6 Then God said, “Let there be a [a]firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.”
Genesis 1:9 New King James Version (NKJV)
9 Then God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so.
Genesis 1:11 New King James Version (NKJV)
11 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, andthe fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.
Genesis 1:14 New King James Version (NKJV)
14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;
Genesis 1:20 New King James Version (NKJV)
20 Then God said, “Let the waters abound with an abundance of living [a]creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the [b]firmament of the heavens.”
Genesis 1:24 New King James Version (NKJV)
24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so.
Genesis 1:26 New King James Version (NKJV)
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over [a]all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

You telling us that God told you the Universe came into being by evolution and other natural processes, directly against His Word, makes you a FALSE prophet!
Can't you see that?

I fear there is a lying spirit in your mouth. Please repent.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,733
8,603
113
#88
Is that an insult? What do you have against elves? Are you prejudiced or something?



I am not contradicting any of the spiritual truths that the Bible was intended to teach us. I am contradicting the tendency of human beings to use the Bible in a way that it was NOT intended; i.e., as a history book or as a science book.



Prophets of science--that is, people who help other people understand science--are called "scientists." I'm ok with that label.



Repent of using the brain that God gave me?

I'll pass...



I understand that you are probably not ready to digest this, but the context of this passage isn't about a literal reading of Genesis, it is about recognizing that God is still the reason for everything that happens. Peter directs this towards those who think that creation is running just fine by itself without any God that they can perceive, and Peter is reminding them that without God, there would be no creation in the first place. He talks about the flood, (because that's what they understood had happened at the time, even though we know better these days), only to illustrate that whatever happens in creation, happens because of God.

And to the extent that Noah may have been a real person who survived some kind of local disaster with his family and livestock, even people who have been through something like that today might say that their whole world was destroyed, when obviously, they don't mean THE whole world. To the extent that a localized flood was real, that would basically amount to their whole world being destroyed (as they had no knowledge of how big THE world really was at that time).



It's not "my own" personal impossibility, the occurrence of a worldwide flood is not rationally possible by what we understand to be true about the Earth--unless God is some kind of a liar Who is fooling us all into believing that things that did happen could not have happened--but that's not my idea of God.

For instance, for the entire surface of the Earth to be submerged to the tops of the mountains in the Himalayas would require something over 4 billion cubic kilometers of water. The Earth's entire ecosystem--oceans, lakes, ponds, rivers, clouds and atmosphere--contains only something like 1.5 billion cubic kilometers of water. There would have been no place for 3 times that amount of water to have come from--and no place for it to go afterwards.



Why would I do that? I'm not an atheist--I've made it abundantly clear that I am a Christian.



I'm not deceiving anyone; this information doesn't come from me. I'm just telling you about it, and it can be discovered independently by anyone who is willing to follow the command of 1 Corinthians 2:15a (Amplified Bible): "But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things]..."

If Christians were supposed to ignore science, why would we be commanded to examine, investigate, inquire into, question and discern all things?



The doubt should not be in the spiritual truths that the Bible was intended to teach us--those truths are infallible in all matters. The doubt should be in the human practice of using the Bible in a way that it was NOT intended--as a history or a science book, for instance.



Let's not forget that some rational people might be interested in checking out Christianity for themselves, but they think that they would have to check their brains at the door to become a Christian because, as St. Augustine said...

“Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.

"Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

"If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion."

Letting people know that you can still be rational and be a Christian at the same time could bring more of them into the fold.
You do err. At the time of the flood there were no Himalayan mountains. In fact it is very likely that the trauma of the flood created them. The entire earth was vastly terraformed beyond belief.....
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,612
9,127
113
#89
Guess what? There was no worldwide flood, either...
Again, you call God a liar. Have you no fear of the Lord?

Genesis 9:11 New King James Version (NKJV)
11 Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.”

If the flood was only a local event, in which only local people and animals were destroyed, how do you explain the many thousands of local, and regional floods throughout the following millennia, where people and animals were destroyed?

Can you see how you call God a liar by saying the Flood was only a local event?
 

Nebuchadnezzer

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2019
1,134
205
63
#91
What makes you so sure that the first day was not a literal 24 hour day when Genesis 1:5 says that it was? At that point God did not need the sun to determine that. He created light (cosmic light) on that day. So every day of creation was literally a 24 hour day.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

And the evening and the morning were the third day.

And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

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.

Now kindly go to the Ten Commandments for full confirmation.
What did God do on the seventh day?
 

AxeElf

Active member
Mar 5, 2019
246
104
28
#92
If there is no actual person Adam then there is no God in human form.
Non sequitur.

Jesus' Genealogy proves you are in error, and that there was in fact an INDIVIDUAL, whom God created, named ADAM
The two different genealogies of Jesus in Luke 3 and Matthew 1 only prove that the Bible should not be considered inerrant if you try to use it as a history book--since the two genealogies are inconsistent.

Luke 3:23-38 English Standard Version (ESV)
The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai,26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,[a] the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of ADAM, the son of God.
Matthew 1:2-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, 4 and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon,5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah,9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah,11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon. 12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

Jesus was the son of Joseph, check, and Joseph was the son of Heli (according to Luke)... or was it Jacob (according to Matthew)...?

Heck, we can't even get past Jesus' own grandfather before we have a problem! Surely one man (Joseph) cannot be the son of two fathers (Heli and Jacob)!

Now of course the genealogy doesn't really matter--the important point is that Jesus was born (and I think the Matthew account takes the more sensible approach of starting with Abraham, at a point when the historical veracity is more easily documented)--but it doesn't look good for you that the scripture you provide as the authority to prove that Adam was a real person is itself in error by conflicting with other scriptures.
 

AxeElf

Active member
Mar 5, 2019
246
104
28
#93
Rational possibility, as you define it here, makes sense. However, this explanation is inadequate for rejecting the Genesis narrative.
Not at all. The realm of rational possibility is adequate for rejecting any narrative that is not consistent with it. Once again, God would not try to trick us; His creation is consistent with His intent to reveal Himself to us. If some interpretation of scripture is not consistent with a rational interpretation of His creation--the world around us--then it is more likely that the interpretation of scripture is incorrect than it is that God's word is inconsistent with His own creation.

I haven't come across such variants.
Until now. You're welcome! :)

While your point is valid, your implication isn't. There's no reason to think that Jesus didn't teach as He thought. In fact, it would be inconsistent with His character to teach something other than what He thought.
As I mentioned before, whenever anyone says, "This is what the Bible says," what they are really saying is, "This is what I think the Bible says." No one knows the mind of God directly (and by extension, the mind of Jesus).

Jesus certainly referred to several people, places and events in the Old Testament when He was making points to His followers and to His persecutors (chiefly among them, the priests and Pharisees who were well-versed in the Old Testament scriptures)--but we have no way of knowing if Jesus REALLY thought that all of those people, places and events were real, or if He was just using them to put His message into a context that His audience would understand. So when Jesus said that "the righteous blood of Abel" would fall upon those who reject and kill God's prophets, we don't know whether or not He actually believed that Abel was a real person, or if He was just using a metaphor that the priests would understand.
 

AxeElf

Active member
Mar 5, 2019
246
104
28
#94
Two comments:
-genealogies are not chronologies
-Genesis is VASTLY telescoped up to Abraham. Vastly. Time scales before then....forget it. Nobody knows.
-Usshers chronology is utterly useless
Agreed, in general.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,612
9,127
113
#95
Non sequitur.



The two different genealogies of Jesus in Luke 3 and Matthew 1 only prove that the Bible should not be considered inerrant if you try to use it as a history book--since the two genealogies are inconsistent.



Matthew 1:2-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, 4 and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon,5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah,9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah,11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon. 12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

Jesus was the son of Joseph, check, and Joseph was the son of Heli (according to Luke)... or was it Jacob (according to Matthew)...?

Heck, we can't even get past Jesus' own grandfather before we have a problem! Surely one man (Joseph) cannot be the son of two fathers (Heli and Jacob)!

Now of course the genealogy doesn't really matter--the important point is that Jesus was born (and I think the Matthew account takes the more sensible approach of starting with Abraham, at a point when the historical veracity is more easily documented)--but it doesn't look good for you that the scripture you provide as the authority to prove that Adam was a real person is itself in error by conflicting with other scriptures.
Ya know, the ignorant don't know what they don't know.
Proverbs 26:12 New King James Version (NKJV)
12 Do you see a man wise in his own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for him.

It's impossible to give the Truth to those that already think they have it, so a fool at least, has a chance.

Believers know that where there is an APPARENT contradiction, or seemingly unnecessary passage in Scripture opens the exciting idea that there is something deeper to discover in the Word.
Non believers say "See the Bible cannot be trusted to be true because of contradictions in it".

I will let you have the joy of discovering all the awesome insights in Christ's genealogy for yourself. But they are incredible!

Here is an incredible example of what I am talking about. This is not long, and I'm certain you will be blessed by it:


 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#96
What did God do on the seventh day?
GENESIS 2
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#97
Ya know, the ignorant don't know what they don't know.
Proverbs 26:12 New King James Version (NKJV)
12 Do you see a man wise in his own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for him.

It's impossible to give the Truth to those that already think they have it, so a fool at least, has a chance.

Believers know that where there is an APPARENT contradiction, or seemingly unnecessary passage in Scripture opens the exciting idea that there is something deeper to discover in the Word.
Non believers say "See the Bible cannot be trusted to be true because of contradictions in it".

I will let you have the joy of discovering all the awesome insights in Christ's genealogy for yourself. But they are incredible!

Here is an incredible example of what I am talking about. This is not long, and I'm certain you will be blessed by it:


I like Chuck Missler! RIP!
 

AxeElf

Active member
Mar 5, 2019
246
104
28
#98
More error by you.
Or perhaps, more error in understanding me.

God's Creation tells us that there is IN FACT a Supreme Being that Created all. God's WORD tells us how He did it:

Hebrews 11:3 New King James Version (NKJV)
3 By faith we understand that the [a]worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.
Psalm 148:5 New King James Version (NKJV)
5 Let them praise the name of the Lord,
For He commanded and they were created.
Psalm 33:9 New King James Version (NKJV)
9 For He spoke, and it was done;
He commanded, and it stood fast.
Psalm 33:6 New King James Version (NKJV)
6 By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth.
Yeah... so?

We haven't been talking about this, and even if we had been, I would not have disagreed with anything you say or cite here.

Genesis 1:3 New King James Version (NKJV)
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
Genesis 1:6 New King James Version (NKJV)
6 Then God said, “Let there be a [a]firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.”
Genesis 1:9 New King James Version (NKJV)
9 Then God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so.
Genesis 1:11 New King James Version (NKJV)
11 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, andthe fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.
Genesis 1:14 New King James Version (NKJV)
14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;
Genesis 1:20 New King James Version (NKJV)
20 Then God said, “Let the waters abound with an abundance of living [a]creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the [b]firmament of the heavens.”
Genesis 1:24 New King James Version (NKJV)
24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so.
Genesis 1:26 New King James Version (NKJV)
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over [a]all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
You telling us that God told you the Universe came into being by evolution and other natural processes, directly against His Word, makes you a FALSE prophet!
Can't you see that?
If that were the case, you would be right. However, I have not claimed that God "told me" anything about the creation of the universe that He hasn't told everyone else in scripture. I have not claimed that the universe came into being by evolution and other natural processes directly against His word; I have only claimed that the universe came into being by evolution and other natural processes in accordance with His word.

If God created the universe, then He created nature. If He created Nature, He created natural processes, including evolution. The first chapter of Genesis describes the natural process of evolution remarkably accurately, for such a short summary--first there were swimmy things, then crawly and flying things, then animals, and then man--PRESTO!--Evolution!

So what does explaining to you how the universe came into being by evolution and other natural processes created by God, in accordance with His word, make me?

I fear there is a lying spirit in your mouth. Please repent.
Even if that were so, repenting of a lying spirit in my mouth wouldn't help much with my typing, now, would it? ;)
 

AxeElf

Active member
Mar 5, 2019
246
104
28
#99
You do err. At the time of the flood there were no Himalayan mountains. In fact it is very likely that the trauma of the flood created them. The entire earth was vastly terraformed beyond belief.....
LOL!!!

Dude, the Himalayan mountains are millions of years old.

Not to mention that a flood would tend to level surfaces. not push them up--and the surfaces would have to be under water in the first place for the water to have any effect on them.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,733
8,603
113
Non sequitur.



The two different genealogies of Jesus in Luke 3 and Matthew 1 only prove that the Bible should not be considered inerrant if you try to use it as a history book--since the two genealogies are inconsistent.



Matthew 1:2-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, 4 and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon,5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah,9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah,11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon. 12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

Jesus was the son of Joseph, check, and Joseph was the son of Heli (according to Luke)... or was it Jacob (according to Matthew)...?

Heck, we can't even get past Jesus' own grandfather before we have a problem! Surely one man (Joseph) cannot be the son of two fathers (Heli and Jacob)!

Now of course the genealogy doesn't really matter--the important point is that Jesus was born (and I think the Matthew account takes the more sensible approach of starting with Abraham, at a point when the historical veracity is more easily documented)--but it doesn't look good for you that the scripture you provide as the authority to prove that Adam was a real person is itself in error by conflicting with other scriptures.
Nope. Check my threads on genealogies. It is inerrant all right. But there are perfectly valid reasons for
LOL!!!

Dude, the Himalayan mountains are millions of years old.

Not to mention that a flood would tend to level surfaces. not push them up--and the surfaces would have to be under water in the first place for the water to have any effect on them.
Y'all need to get around a little my friend. I know better. As for you, I suggest a lot of independent research is required......