Old Earth vs Young Earth

[loveme1]

All they ever do is look at the blue prints of our Almighty Yahvah God.

Why?

Well they seek the information in to "become gods" the evil rebellion is at work, using deluded men to gain the information they need.

 

[chesser]

Using scripture, I have already refuted the idea that Genesis is allegorical. See post #92 and #111

and i replied to both of those by telling you the people were literal, but not things such as the talking snake, which is obviously allegoial

 

[loveme1]

and i replied to both of those by telling you the people were literal, but not things such as the talking snake, which is obviously allegoial

The serpent was not a snake.

 

[Laodicea]

and i replied to both of those by telling you the people were literal, but not things such as the talking snake, which is obviously allegoial

The talking snake was part of Satan's deception to get them to sin.

 

[chesser]

The serpent was not a snake.

what was it then, it seems to have the description of a snake

 

[loveme1]

what was it then, it seems to have the description of a snake

Like I said Genesis is a brief account of things that took place....

2And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

 

[shininglight]

The serpent is satan

2Co_11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Rev_12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Rev_12:14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
Rev_12:15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

Rev_20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

 

[chesser]

thus proving the point that everyone, even in biblical times knew the snake to be symbolism for the devil

 

[shininglight]

thus proving the point that everyone, even in biblical times knew the snake to be symbolism for the devil

The point is...Adam and Eve were literal people, in a literal garden, who were deceived by a literal being, and they literally partook of something literal, that we still suffer literal consequences from.

 

[loveme1]

thus proving the point that everyone, even in biblical times knew the snake to be symbolism for the devil

So, though it is true, it is brief and uses symbols to tell us the story.

 

[Laodicea]

thus proving the point that everyone, even in biblical times knew the snake to be symbolism for the devil

When God created the earth there was no symbolism, there was no need. The serpent became a symbol for Satan because he used a snake and made it appear as though it could talk as part of Satan's deception to get Adam & Eve to sin.

 

[loveme1]

noun /ˈsərpənt/ 
serpents, plural

A large snake

A biblical name for Satan (see Gen. 3, Rev. 20)

A dragon or other mythical snakelike reptile

A sly or treacherous person, esp. one who exploits a position of trust in order to betray it

A bass wind instrument made of leather-covered wood in three U-shaped turns, with a cup-shaped mouthpiece and few keys. It was played in military and church bands from the 17th to 19th centuries

a search for serpent uses returned these 5.

 

[chesser]

When God created the earth there was no symbolism, there was no need. The serpent became a symbol for Satan because he used a snake and made it appear as though it could talk as part of Satan's deception to get Adam & Eve to sin.

i think there was symbolism in the fact that there was evening and morning before the earth and that adam was able to name every single animal on earth in under a day.

 

[chesser]

The point is...Adam and Eve were literal people, in a literal garden, who were deceived by a literal being, and they literally partook of something literal, that we still suffer literal consequences from.

i might disagree with you on the literal garden part, but all other thing you mentioned were definatly literal

 

[shininglight]

i might disagree with you on the literal garden part, but all other thing you mentioned were definatly literal

Then what do you believe the garden to be?

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.
Gen 2:11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
Gen 2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
Gen 2:13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
Gen 2:14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.
Gen 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

 

[shininglight]

i think there was symbolism in the fact that there was evening and morning before the earth and that adam was able to name every single animal on earth in under a day.

Here is something I found through google.

The material below is taken from Henry Morris’ book Biblical Creationism, which I think answers your questions. I hope it helps.

Before God formed Eve, however, he “introduced” Adam to the animals he had formed earlier in the day. Adam was to exercise dominion over them, so God told him to name them, giving each a name appropriate to the individual characteristics of each. The animals brought to him by God included “all cattle . . . the fowl of the air, and . . . every beast of the field” (Gen. 2:20)—that is, those animals that would live near him and might be possible candidates for companionship or usefulness to man. Not included were the fish of the sea, the beasts of the earth, or the creeping things. Furthermore, only the created “kinds” of these animals were included, not the multitudes of genera, species, and varieties that later proliferated from them.
In view of the limited number of relevant kinds of cattle, field animals, and birds and, in view also of Adam’s giant intellect in comparison with our own, as well as divine guidance and instruction, this project would not have occupied more than about half a day. An additional purpose of the assignment was to show Adam that he needed a companion that would be like him, an “help meet for him.” So God proceeded to form Eve from Adam’s side and then to give her to him as his wife.
​

 

[Laodicea]

i think there was symbolism in the fact that there was evening and morning before the earth and that adam was able to name every single animal on earth in under a day.

What is more important is what the Bible says.

 

[Tethered]

I kinda felt obligated to answer the 'other questions', even though I just wanted to get rid of what concerns me as a "species transitioning into other species" misconception. Also If I can see babies grow into adults, i don't need to know the genetic mechanism (or even the origin of life), i just need to see the evidence of growth happening - corollary, we have a few mechanisms for evolution but the actual evidence of species divergence over time is what matters... but for sake of answering questions i'll shoot ^_^

To those espousing evolution I have one question - What is the mechanism for speciation? Deists will answer God, and I think they are going in the right direction, because there is simply no evidence for change from one species to another. But I think a real examination of science confirms the Bible, not the atheistic scientists.

In the case of species divergence, it is the isolation of two parts of species A, aided by different environment selection pressures, until the daughter generations between each group can no longer interbreed.
In the case of genetics, this includes, but is not limited to, duplication and coding errors (transition and transversion )in RNA/DNA synthesizing, exposure to mutagenic and ionizing agents.

I studied science at University (secular) before I became a Christian. It was very profound to walk into biology, and be told that the fossils are dated by the rocks. Then to go to Geology next class and be told that the rocks are dated by the fossils. Circular reasoning at its finest.

Had not the said fossils or rock referents been dated by other lines of evidence first. Providing Non circular evidence for age of fossil A then > evidence of age of rock strata B > evidence of age for fossil C found in strata B.
Popularly slandered as circular Fossil > Rock > Fossil reasoning

As far as one species turning into another - give me one example that the offspring is not sterile. Life created in a laboratory requires intelligence, power and design. Why should the real world of nature be any different?

Species diverge.
Homo-Erectus > Man
Merychippus > Pliohippus > Modern Horse
Fossilized instances of south american iguangas, seperation by tectonic plate movement, galapogus marine iguana's bred under seperated conditions from mainland iguana. They can no longer interbreed.
...and various fruitfly and bacterial experiments.

 

[TheGrungeDiva]

The Bible is to be read like any other book back to front, Old and New Testament.

Here's another one. By what authority do you say the Bible is to be read "like any other book, back to front"? Does the Bible itself tell you what order the books are supposed to be read? If not, who told you what order they should be in? And why do you trust that source?

In fact, many scholars will suggest starting with the Gospels, if you're totally new to the Bible, then reading certain parts of the Old Testament like the Psalms, and some of the Epistles. One way to read the Bible is "front to back," but there are a lot of other methods highly recommended. There's an NIV available that offers a daily reading of something from the Old and something from the New each day, that gets you through the whole Bible in 365 days, but it's not "in order." In liturgical churches, each Sunday there are four Scripture readings: one from the Old Testament, usually either the Law or Prophets, one from the Psalms, one from the Epistles, and one from the Gospels; it's a 3-year cycle based on the 3 synoptic Gospels. I haven't been to a lot of non-liturgical churches, I admit, but I've never seen as much Scripture read at them as I have at the Liturgical ones.

 

[TheGrungeDiva]

Using scripture, I have already refuted the idea that Genesis is allegorical. See post #92 and #111

And I already responded to those, pointing out that the Scripture you used did not "refute" anything. But you have not responded to my points. All you have done is quoted more Scripture at me, which continues not to refute my point at all.

I'm not really surprised. Since my points are fact, not opinion, it makes sense that you can't refute them. It would be like someone trying to refute that 2+2=5, and every new proof they are given that shows it is 4, they just respond, "No, it's 5." You can say it's 5 all you want. That doesn't make it so. Filling the screen with a whole bunch of 5's doesn't make it so. It just shows that you really have nothing.