The Christian Taliban

#326
#326
bamawriter said:
Not quite.

Even if, like me, one accepts all of these as the miraculous work of God, science has proven that, miracle or not, Creation didn't happen 6,000 years ago.

Science hasn't ruled out the resurrection, nativity, or walking on water.

So, one is impossible, while the others are improbable.
Click to expand...

I wonder why someone would try to estimate the age of Earth using a biblical timetable. How could they possibly know the amount of time in Eden. The time between Adam and the flood. Isn't the written record of Gilgamesh 10,000 years old?
 
#327
#327
McDad said:
I wonder why someone would try to estimate the age of Earth using a biblical timetable. How could they possibly know the amount of time in Eden. The time between Adam and the flood. Isn't the written record of Gilgamesh 10,000 years old?
Click to expand...

Yep on Gilgamesh.
 
#328
#328
McDad said:
I wonder why someone would try to estimate the age of Earth using a biblical timetable. How could they possibly know the amount of time in Eden. The time between Adam and the flood. Isn't the written record of Gilgamesh 10,000 years old?
Click to expand...

There are multiple timelines of Biblical lineages throughout Scripture. The first one appears in Genesis 5 and traces the first several generations of mankind starting with Adam and ending with the sons of Noah. You put all of them together, and Adam showed up a little more than 4,000 years before Christ. A literal creationist viewpoint doesn't leave much in the way of wiggle room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#329
#329
bamawriter said:
There are multiple timelines of Biblical lineages throughout Scripture. The first one appears in Genesis 5 and traces the first several generations of mankind starting with Adam and ending with the sons of Noah. You put all of them together, and Adam showed up a little more than 4,000 years before Christ. A literal creationist viewpoint doesn't leave much in the way of wiggle room.
Click to expand...

I understand the mathematics. I question the methodology. I think the generation is thought to be 30 years. Abraham didn't produce offspring at 30. The 6,000 year figure is obviously incorrect.
Imo, just another example of Christians doing a disservice to God by trying to figure things God didn't say instead of focusing on the things He did say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#330
#330
bamawriter said:
There are multiple timelines of Biblical lineages throughout Scripture. The first one appears in Genesis 5 and traces the first several generations of mankind starting with Adam and ending with the sons of Noah. You put all of them together, and Adam showed up a little more than 4,000 years before Christ. A literal creationist viewpoint doesn't leave much in the way of wiggle room.
Click to expand...

And keep in mind, this is with the ages given of people living 600 to 900+ years. Which is another clue maybe it's not supposed to be taken literally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#331
#331
VolsSportsFan said:
And keep in mind, this is with the ages given of people living 600 to 900+ years. Which is another clue maybe it's not supposed to be taken literally.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I was gonna mention that but my post was already in tl;dr territory.
 
#332
#332
McDad said:
I understand the mathematics. I question the methodology. I think the generation is thought to be 30 years. Abraham didn't produce offspring at 30. The 6,000 year figure is obviously incorrect.
Imo, just another example of Christians doing a disservice to God by trying to figure things God didn't say instead of focusing on the things He did say.
Click to expand...

I agree.

I think literalists apply their own limited understanding to the works of God, and that simply will never bear much fruit. When someone asks if I think the world was created in six days, I always ask "how long is a "day" to God?" I don't know the answer to that, and I don't think I will until I get the chance to ask Him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#333
#333
bamawriter said:
I agree.

I think literalists apply their own limited understanding to the works of God, and that simply will never bear much fruit. When someone asks if I think the world was created in six days, I always ask "how long is a "day" to God?" I don't know the answer to that, and I don't think I will until I get the chance to ask Him.
Click to expand...

Well said. One thing is for sure, we all hope to have an eternity with Him to ask about all these mysteries.
 
#334
#334
McDad said:
Well said. One thing is for sure, we all hope to have an eternity with Him to ask about all these mysteries.
Click to expand...

I think that there will be no need or desire to ask. I look at as an awakening, finally using the other 90% of your brain. That is of course you get in the club.
 
#336
#336
hog88 said:
I think that there will be no need or desire to ask. I look at as an awakening, finally using the other 90% of your brain. That is of course you get in the club.
Click to expand...

Nobody is interested in what YOU think , hog!
 
#340
#340
Grand Vol said:
And back to being an ass
Click to expand...

That wasn't even an attempt at being an ass. I told you that I didn't know what you were trying to communicate to me. You answered that having faith is not as ridiculous as I make it out to be. In the context of our conversation, I can only assume you are implying that granting the premise of Jesus as a historical figure means that I'm in some way giving credence to biblical claims that i find wanting. Whether or not Jesus was a real human has nothing to do with how I examine the veracity of the rest of the Bible, especially concerning the claims that I find to be the most absurd. That's all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#341
#341
MercyPercy said:
That wasn't even an attempt at being an ass. I told you that I didn't know what you were trying to communicate to me. You answered that having faith is not as ridiculous as I make it out to be. In the context of our conversation, I can only assume you are implying that granting the premise of Jesus as a historical figure means that I'm in some way giving credence to biblical claims that i find wanting. Whether or not Jesus was a real human has nothing to do with how I examine the veracity of the rest of the Bible, especially concerning the claims that I find to be the most absurd. That's all.
Click to expand...

Its okay. I still like you
 
#345
#345
Grand Vol said:
I'm doing security at a sorority party tonight. About 200 drunk college women right now.

I'my in such a good mood I'd almost be willing to forgive Obama.

So yeah, Mercy is okay for the moment
Click to expand...
There's the difference between us. That sounds like a gdamned nightmare to me.
 
#346
#346
bamawriter said:
Not quite.

Even if, like me, one accepts all of these as the miraculous work of God, science has proven that, miracle or not, Creation didn't happen 6,000 years ago.

Science hasn't ruled out the resurrection, nativity, or walking on water.

So, one is impossible, while the others are improbable.
Click to expand...

Science hasn't ruled out walking on water, resurrection, or virgin birth? Really?

Muhammad ascending to heaven on a winged horse is equally as improbable?

Sorry, Improbable instead of impossible isn't any better in this case. Walking on water and water into wine as described in the bible are impossible, same as creation story.

Like I said, Ham is the honest one here.

Nothing wrong with just admitting all of it is in the same impossibility basket and you are picking and choosing what to believe based on what common sense based science is telling you. Common sense science says somebody can't walk on water as described in the Bible, you are just choosing not to believe it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#348
#348
Grand Vol said:
I'm doing security at a sorority party tonight. About 200 drunk college women right now.

I'my in such a good mood I'd almost be willing to forgive Obama.

So yeah, Mercy is okay for the moment
Click to expand...

Need help?
 
#350
#350
Grand Vol said:
Wait till you get my age junior.

It's all nice then.
Click to expand...

You forget how I've spent my twenties. I will always hate privileged sorority white girls. They're often belligerent, self-absorbed, ignorant *** dumpsters.

And that doesn't even cover the shrills.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top