Search results

Welcome to my ignore list.

That post was a lie. You're a liar! You knew that post was 100% B.S. when you wrote it. What the hell are you even doing here? What am I doing here?! Good bye!

Did I understand this argument correctly? You're saying that the refraction of light would have occurred before the flood and thus rainbows would have existed before the flood, therefore its reasonable to think that Neanderthals and Homo habilis lived on Earth before Genesis chapter one? Or is...

This doesn't really effect your point because what you said is generally true but, just for the sake of accuracy, epiphytes (e.g. Orchids) and broyophytes (e.g. mosses) do actually absorb water (and other nutrients) from the air.

Come on! Give me a break, will ya? There is no amount of relative motion that can create the differences in Z values within what is essentially same celestial object! There is a .0362 difference between two of the Z values in that image I posted. That's a difference of something like 500,000...

Something akin to the relationship between 'cube' and 'cubic', right? I've learned that 'aion' is where we get the English word 'eon' from. In fact, it seems to be the very same word that's just been transliterated. I've also learned that 'aionios' (or any of the words related to 'aion') does...

I agree. Aion is a word related to aionios (G166) but are you suggesting that they are synonyms? If not, and your translation is correct, why didn't Paul use 'aion' instead of 'aionios'?

Liar.

The red shift = distance theory is actually still just that, a theory. There are several anomalous red shifts that would seem to suggest that it isn't as iron clad an idea as you would like to think it is. What? No, I am not talking about the expansion of the universe. I'm talking about God...

Which word in the Greek means "age"?

No, what I'd like is for you to respond to the point I made and stop deflecting the discussion over to something else.

So, in so far as translating this phrase goes, I find myself in agreement with Idolater here. What good does it do to translate something into a language if it doesn't make sense to the people who use that language every day? I'm reminded of "word" being used as a translation for "logos" in John...

All interpretations based on your doctrine. That's backward. We don't conform the bible to our doctrine but our doctrine to the plain reading of scripture. The point being made, not only in Genesis but also in the Exodus passages, is that God created everything that exists in six days. John...

That doesn't sound all that "conservative" to me. You're basically suggesting that Paul was using sort of loose language and that the phrase is effectively a figure of speech. I don't mean to suggest that I reject the idea of figures of speech being used in the bible but the conservative in me...

Yes, yes, of course, not the original autographs but we do have the text of scripture in the original languages, which was my point.

Genesis isn't the only book of the bible and there isn't ANY reasonable argument that could begin to suggest that either of the verses below are allegorical, poetic or anything else other than explicit. Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that...

Okay, first of all the nearest star is about 4.22 light years away and the farthest thing visible with the naked eye is the Andromeda Galaxy (i.e. billions of very distant stars) which is something like 2.5 million light years away. And no, it isn't proof that the universe is old. The distances...

While holding the literal view is not a salvific issue, it is unchristian to hold that view, which is to say that the non-literal view is in contradiction to the Christian worldview. More accurately, it is in contradiction to the biblical worldview in that the early chapters of Genesis isn't the...

Well, of course, I agree with every syllable of your post so don't have much to contribute to the discussion except to say, in response to the above sentence, that I'm glad that I was never sucked into King James Onlyism or any other line of thought that didn't emphasize the importance of the...

I've often thought to myself, "I could make stronger arguments against my own doctrine than I've ever seen anyone make on Theology Online!" and, in fact, I'm sure I've even said so in a post here and there over the years, but I've always avoided doing so because I don't like the idea of handing...