re: Human evolution: astounding new story of the origin of our species

quote:

---

I can't believe you ppl. That's not how any of it works.

---

the fact that you're butthurt because other people aren't atheists is a big clue as to your motives

it's sad that you believe life popped into existence from nothing, but if you want to believe it, I'm not going to be butthurt over it - it's sad for you, not me!

Is Genesis History?

quote:

---

an alien Circus ship made an emergency crash landing on Earth.We escaped from that Circus ship.

---

That would explain a lot

quote:

---

if you take a non-literal view of what is clearly written as history, you open yourself up to a lot of theological problems.

---

in YOUR opinion

quote:

---

Those who downplay the significance of this particular issue either haven't thought through it or are aren't taking it as seriously as they should. It's not good enough to say it's not overtly an issue of salvation and then leave it at that.

---

in YOUR opinion

quote:

---

I'm saying that the Bible, when read in its entirety and without inserting our own biases based on secular, extra-biblical understanding of nature, will not lead anyone to believe what evolutionary theory proposes.

---

in YOUR opinion

quote:

---

The only way to agree with evolutionary theory and maintain a faith in the Bible is to alter the meaning of what the Bible says or claim it's written as a different literary genre than it was.

---

in YOUR opinion

quote:

---

Where have I said that no one can be saved if they believe in an old-earth view of creation? I haven't. I have warned against believing evolutionary theory is compatible with scripture because it can lead to potential issues with soteriology if one were to be consistent with their positions.

---

you can't tell that your 3rd sentence answers the 1st? you did the same thing in our first exchange back in july

quote:

---

To believe it's hyperbolic language, poetry, or a parable of some sort is to draw a conclusion without using the material, itself.

---

i could do the same with your position. "To believe it's NOT hyperbolic language, poetry, or a parable of some sort is to draw a conclusion without using the material, itself." the account itself does not necessary say or mean that yom is a 24 hour period. you are INFERRING that - eisegesis. and it most certainly does not "lead to a destruction of the Gospel" which is just laughable

quote:

---

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You are using extra-biblical material to interpret the Bible as you see fit

---

i absolutely and categorically am not and you don't know enough about me to make any such statement. if you don't know by now that i am conservative/evangelical then you should drop the conversation.

quote:

---

and then lecturing me about my concern for abandoning the scriptures.

---

i have not accused you of doing so. you are taking a particular interpretation, elaborating on it to the extent that is is creating a manufactured dilemma.

quote:

---

Kenotic theory is dangerous in that it can lead to the denial that Jesus was fully God. It's why the doctrine of the Hypostatic union is important.

---

this is the kind of thing that makes me think you know just enough to be dangerous. the hypostatic union is not a primary concern in kenotic theory. you know the word is in scripture right? the question is the degree to which Jesus "emptied" himself. and to illustrate the point i have been making, what is your perspective on this matter based on? your eisegesis because scripture does not say the extent to which Jesus set aside heavenly privilege while a person. Paul does not elaborate on what he means by "emptied." also, had you ever heard of that before i mentioned it to you? let me guess, you ran to carm or somesuch place.

quote:

---

Hyperbolic numbers in ANE civilizations also assumes that the Bible was written just like other documents in other cultures who did not have God's special revelation given to them.

---

oh my word. so what were they - aliens? this is special pleading because you're going to act like God's people were humans just like every other culture around them but somehow in this one respect they were superhuman. they assimilated other cultural practices ALL THROUGHOUT THE OT. your position is silly. i'm not saying they used hyperbole. i'm saying your position is based on what you are accusing me of. NOTHING in scripture suggests your position. eisegesis.

quote:

---

This view both removes the special nature of the Bible

---

it absolutely does not unless you think the earth is flat. you know they believed that right? do you know why? did you know that Jesus wasn't dead and buried for 3 days according to our reckoning? you know how you reconcile the problem right - EXTRA BIBLICAL KNOWLEDGE. knowledge of their custom. eisegesis

quote:

---

compared to other documents and it assumes too much confidence in archeological knowledge that we possess today to rule out the relative accuracy of the numbers provided in the biblical texts.

---

you just don't even know the can of worms you are opening up. exodus route. early timeline vs late timeline. you realize there isn't a shred of evidence that 1-2 million people left egypt and wandered around for multiple decades, right? i bet you love to cite archaeology when it confirms pontius pilate or the census or nebuchadnezzar but on this particular matter we shouldn't have confidence in it. it's clear you've only looked at these matters piecemeal and at a superficial level, which is what i would expect from someone who is working at a popular level, not an academic level. but that's not the problem. it's you acting like oec's are contradicting the gospel. it's you punching above your weight class

quote:

---

I could go on with the other examples

---

i bet you could. be honest, have you even heard of any of the "other examples?"

quote:

---

The text and context of the first few chapters of Genesis (or the book as a whole) do not lend an honest person to conclude that it was meant as anything other than historical narrative.

---

you realize that even if the hebrews used hyperbolic numbers, they could still have been recording historical narrative, right? it's not the genre of genesis that's in question. it's the interpretation of yom and why you think you know exclusively what the author meant. and that's not really the problem here. the problem is you thinking yom has anything to do with the gospel.

quote:

---

I'm saying that the normative view throughout all of Church history was aligned with more or less a literal view of Genesis in terms of creation

---

and the vast majority of christians over the last few centuries thought the kjv was the only inspired version of scripture. not good grounds for justification

quote:

---

even those early Church fathers who did not know exactly what was meant could not envision the concept of millions or billions of years as the OEC's attempt to contend with to reconcile their beliefs with that of evolutionary theory.

---

so now you can read minds. my word. you know that the patristics were aware of greek cosmology right?

quote:

---

The context of 1 Corinthians 15 that you brought up yourself is physical death

---

in YOUR opinion

you keep acting like you're providing some secret interpretation that scholars haven't heard of and if they only heard it, they would jettison that ridiculous old earth theory

quote:

---

So.. Christ, while teaching the Genesis account of creation as history, wasn't opposed to the modern view of evolutionary origins that is diametrically opposed to the view He taught as history? Am I understanding you correctly here?

---

ever heard of a strawman? did Jesus state explicitly that yom meant 24 hours? no. stop being coy

quote:

---

That's very true and I haven't yet said that those who hold to a OEC view cannot be saved. I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding on your part that I hope to have resolved.

---

"You might not see the christological controversy but it is there all the same"

quote:

---

you have to use context to understand meaning. "Evening", "morning", "first" (day), "second" (day), etc. all come together to provide context for what "day" means.

---

in YOUR opinion

quote:

---

the Bible or anything in it isn't even an historical document

---

oh my word. it's like you don't know anything about anything

quote:

---

Do you think God doesn’t work through the biological processes he creates?

---

I hate it when people say I dont believe in a creator just because I support the diversity of life through the mechanism of natural selection through the processes of evolution.

Evolutionists still can't explained how life began, Big Bang has been debunked numerous times and is a lazy theory, "Hey 13 billion years ago there was a bang and created the universe." Genius explanation, we just popped out of the sky, even though there is zero evidence of this.

The distance between the Earth and the sun is so perfect, that If the Sun were just a little bit further, or a little bit closer to Earth, life on this planet wouldn't exist. The odds of this happening by chance and not bye a creator is so astronomical it is ridiculous. The more you learn the more you believe in a creator.

The fact that they banned creationism from schools should tell you right there which one is the truth and which one is the lie.

quote:

---

ape turning into human

---

Humans are apes, your shite makes no sense

quote:

---

Humans are apes

---

Proof?

quote:

---

It's not a historical document

---

you are wrong. it contains the most well attested accounts from antiquity. if you think alexander is a real person, then you should believe the historical accounts in the Bible by about a thousand times more. in fact, the empty tomb is one of the most well attested facts from antiquity. check out gary habermas' minimal facts to get educated on what scholarship says on the matter