Fundamentalist Thread
- Thread starter RoboOp
- Start date
-
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.
Hi there Red_Tory, all you need to read is my first post. I believe in a literal six-day creation. It logically follows from that that the earth is around 5,000 years old (not millions).
And for flyboy and whoever let me restate the reason for the original post here:
I think it's pretty clear -- I want to make clear what the administration of this site believe.
If anyone thinks that we don't allow more liberal views then they obviiously haven't read other threads (or even other posts in this thread!).
And that's the whole reason I made my post, to make clear what we believe, so that hopefully we and our site would not be so represented (in doctrine) by the more liberal posts. There is indeed a lot of freedom on this site and I'm exercising the same freedom to make clear what I/we believe.
I see nothing wrong with my simple post. Some actually appreciated it
Lastly, I think it most certainly does matter whether or not we believe the part of the Bible that says that Jonah was swallowed by a great fish. 'Coz if we don't, then that's an indication that we have a problem believing the Bible in general, and that in itself is indeed a problem (if we're calling ourselves believers). And again, I was reacting to some fundamentalist-bashing, by simply saying that I'm proud to believe all these fundamentalist extremist points of the Bible.
And for flyboy and whoever let me restate the reason for the original post here:
I think it's pretty clear -- I want to make clear what the administration of this site believe.
If anyone thinks that we don't allow more liberal views then they obviiously haven't read other threads (or even other posts in this thread!).
And that's the whole reason I made my post, to make clear what we believe, so that hopefully we and our site would not be so represented (in doctrine) by the more liberal posts. There is indeed a lot of freedom on this site and I'm exercising the same freedom to make clear what I/we believe.I see nothing wrong with my simple post. Some actually appreciated it
Lastly, I think it most certainly does matter whether or not we believe the part of the Bible that says that Jonah was swallowed by a great fish. 'Coz if we don't, then that's an indication that we have a problem believing the Bible in general, and that in itself is indeed a problem (if we're calling ourselves believers). And again, I was reacting to some fundamentalist-bashing, by simply saying that I'm proud to believe all these fundamentalist extremist points of the Bible.
Last edited:
Oh ya.. being a fundamentalist doesn't mean being crazy or out of your mind. Believing scripture to be God's Word.. accurate, inspired is backed up by truckloads of historical research and evidence.
Jesus being God
6 day creation and the world being 6-10,000 years old..
the virgin birth
etc
can be reasoned out using logic and historical research..
we won't get complete understanding for sure.. because the supernatural is involved.. but we can eliminate possibilities that aren't supernatural.. eg.. Jesus not dieing on the cross but merely swooning... Jesus not claiming divinity.. the story of the Ark being impossible...
these kind of conclusions are not actually backed up by sound, logical, reasoned research and thinking.
Jesus being God
6 day creation and the world being 6-10,000 years old..
the virgin birth
etc
can be reasoned out using logic and historical research..
we won't get complete understanding for sure.. because the supernatural is involved.. but we can eliminate possibilities that aren't supernatural.. eg.. Jesus not dieing on the cross but merely swooning... Jesus not claiming divinity.. the story of the Ark being impossible...
these kind of conclusions are not actually backed up by sound, logical, reasoned research and thinking.
I dont think its about not wanting the seeking in our threads. I think its written more in concern for those who post and show their spiritual status as Christian but deny some of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity. What better way to turn people away from Christ than to deceive & use professed Christians drawn into misunderstanding about issues like sanctification of the heart & those they speak to think that they know something because they quote a whole lot of scripture flood the forums with posts that sound like someone who sits right at the foot of Jesus. This thread was for folks like you to KNOW Zavok that there is ONE way to the father. Jesus Christ and anything posted in here contrary is a subtle but salvation stealing deception that many are being sucked into with the whole New Age movement. Its infiltrating our Churches too... cause its sounds real good and gushy that everyone who's basically more good than bad should go to heaven cause they have a good heart. I would love that cause I've got so many that I'm seriously concerned about but I know. I know the instant I received the Lord I found out it has NOTHING to do with me & nothing can compare to that and I can never in words adequately explain spiritual rebirth. So no this thread was not directed at unbelievers, except to advise them the way to the Father. It was more directed at the Christians who have come to a place where they think that maybe the the word of God is no longer relevant & in this they would be in err. I am however making a whole lot of assumptions based on my recent experiences in here, Robo can absolutely correct me if I'm wrong for it is not my place to put words in Robo's mouth, just trying to explain it to you zavok. You are welcome here for sure zavok.
PL: that was not one of my 12 points. What was one of my 12 points was a literal six-day creation. (Genesis 1)
But if you do believe in a literal six-day creation, with the first man being Adam (created on the sixth day), and follow the genealogies and add up all the ages (and maybe estimate where you need to estimate), you'll come up with something on the order of 5,000 (so I'm told). It could be double that; I don't know. But there's no way you can believe a literal six-day creation, with the genealogies in the Bible, and come up with millions of years from creation to now.
But if you do believe in a literal six-day creation, with the first man being Adam (created on the sixth day), and follow the genealogies and add up all the ages (and maybe estimate where you need to estimate), you'll come up with something on the order of 5,000 (so I'm told). It could be double that; I don't know. But there's no way you can believe a literal six-day creation, with the genealogies in the Bible, and come up with millions of years from creation to now.
Last edited:
Lordardan, I never said I didn't believe God is responsible for the creation of the Earth. I was simply asking Robo to explain his position.
I do acknowledge Yahweh as the divine force behind the creation of the universe, but I don't buy into the literal 6 day creation. I believe the word 'day' was simply used a a metaphor for 'era' or 'phase'.
I do acknowledge Yahweh as the divine force behind the creation of the universe, but I don't buy into the literal 6 day creation. I believe the word 'day' was simply used a a metaphor for 'era' or 'phase'.
Z
I thought a day to god is like a thousand years was in your bible, I think another passage states a day in heaven is like 10,000 years or something am I not correct in saying this?
this would actually make the 6 days to be of a not so literal stance there....
also, when Adam (as) and Eve(sa) had sons to whom did they marry? do you all believe that the sons of a prophet committed incest (nauthobillah)? or are you all beleieving in the possibility that the earth was already inhabited at the time of the fall and that there were daughters here that they married to, that were not from Adam (as) and Eve's (sa) loins..... makeing Adam (as) and Eve (sa) a basically different breed of human altogether....
what do Chrstians say about this?
this would actually make the 6 days to be of a not so literal stance there....
also, when Adam (as) and Eve(sa) had sons to whom did they marry? do you all believe that the sons of a prophet committed incest (nauthobillah)? or are you all beleieving in the possibility that the earth was already inhabited at the time of the fall and that there were daughters here that they married to, that were not from Adam (as) and Eve's (sa) loins..... makeing Adam (as) and Eve (sa) a basically different breed of human altogether....
what do Chrstians say about this?
It's not just the population growth... It's the establishment of civilisation on a truly global scale. Eight people survived a global catastrophe only to go on and found Chinese dynasties, Native tribes and great societies in North and South America, each of these things with a distinct culture, political structure etc. just a few hundred years later?
Doesn't the fact that there are different races around the world indicate some kind of adaptation over a longer period of time?
Doesn't the fact that there are different races around the world indicate some kind of adaptation over a longer period of time?