6days
New member
According to that parable... yes. If a person is thrown into burning sulphur, can they weep? Scripture says 'yes'. Is Heaven described as eternal in scripture? Yes. Is Hell described as eternal torment in scripture? Yes
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Rosenritter
New member
Six Days, according to parables in scripture, trees also talk among themselves and elect kings, and threaten to burn each other down. According to parables in scripture, men marry ten wives on the same night, and praise their unjust servants for their cleverness that embezzle their goods. Do you see the pattern here? The story settings of parables do not necessarily reflect reality or doctrinal truth.
Does scripture describe the reward of Christ as being eternal life? Yes, it does.
Does scripture describe the punishment of the wicked as being the opposite of eternal life? Yes, it does.
The opposite of life is death.
Does the scripture describe hell as eternal torment outside of parable? No, it does not. It does define it as death, darkness, gone down into silence, reduced to ashes, the fate of the wicked being as the brute beasts that perish.
For consistency's sake, do you believe that trees are sentient and can talk? Or elect rulers from among the other members of the Plant Kingdom?
Dear RR & patrick jane,
This is basically what I said in the first place, but no one sees the ledge I put myself on to make it known? The Lord told me of it. The wages of sin is DEATH, but there is also 'and the DEAD in Christ shall rise first {see I Th. 4:16KJV}' and/or "and I saw the DEAD, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works {see Rev. 20:12KJV}." Now, it is also written that those who died the 'second death' would not make it to Heaven. {See Rev. 20:14-15KJV}. There are two different deaths. One is the first death and one is the second death. That is where the answer lies. Those who die in the first death can still make it to heaven. It's the very HOPELESS who die in the second death. No, I will not answer any further questions about it, which would not be fair to those who do make it to Heaven in the first death. To really clarify, Hell can happen in the first death, but the "Lake of Fire" is the one that is the second death, or Thoroughly Eternal. This is my response to you about this issue. I will address Rosenritter's other issue in a separate post, so as not to confuse things.
May God Be With You Both As You Try To Understand,
Michael
Last edited:
Dear Rosen,
Yes, there is eternal life and eternal death (ECT}. God did not make the soul/ spirit capable of dying. He instead made it live forever. That's why this eternal soul/spirit receives one reward or the other, however great they be. Going to Heaven is a sweet reward and going to the 'lake of fire' is a bitter reward. So, God has installed a Heaven and also a place worse than Hell. Hell is only a 'halfway' house to the 'lake of fire,' which is a permanently and eternal 'Hell.' You can read that the Lord cast death and Hell into the 'Lake of Fire' {See Rev. 20:13KJV}. It has been hidden until these days of Revelation are now upon us. Hell is inside of the Earth, which is hot, to say the least, because of magma and lava. That is why hell is called the bottomless pit, because Earth has a top and a center. No bottom. Bottomless pit. Everyone on Earth thinks they are on top because of gravity. It is symbolism which was described like that for a less knowledgeable people who could not fathom more at the time.
The 'Lake of fire' was explained to me by the Lord that it is Our Sun, which is by far hotter than the center of our Earth, and it burns with sulfur. To make it even clearer, the lightning that God sends is five times hotter than the temp. of the Sun. Seems hard to believe, eh? I haven't told you all of these things because it is for a more advanced league. Jesus said to His disciples that there were things He would like to tell them, but they were unable to bear them {just yet}. I don't claim to know everything either and I make mistakes too, but not about this issue at all. If you think this is a prophecy that is not true, then see if it is proven with the passing of a short amount of time. How short, I cannot say, because I do not know that, as you have learned that soon can be also sooner.
And last, but not least, is what I was going to tell you before I wandered off in this direction. A tree has life within it and a soul, and it hurts when it gets chopped down or when a stem is cut. On their own level, they can communicate also, with God as Their Witness. What do you think happened when Jesus was hoping for a fig from a tree He had passed, hoping He might find some fruit thereon for Himself. He cursed that tree, and the tree withered up quickly enough. I can't say I know how soon it withered up, because I don't recall the scripture offhand, but it was quick enough that others made note of it. Jesus cursed the tree and it died quickly. Just as the serpent spoke to Eve. In the dimension I speak of, you don't use a mouth to speak with. You speak without a mouth, or to put it in man's terms, 'telepathically.' That is how the serpent spoke with Eve.
I even tell you that a rock has life living within it. You can saw a rock in two, and see it's splendid patterns/growth of life in it's crystals, etc. God can make a man from some rocks if He wishes to.
I can't keep going into such details for you because I am telling things here that some may find it quite taxing to learn. So, I will be much more careful of what I tell you in the future. You want answers, but don't want to agree. Therefore, I should not give answers, right?
Yes, Hell and the Lake of Fire are two different places. Lucifer is already cast into the Lake of Fire. Satan is another soul whom Lucifer deceived. Satan is going to get one more chance to prove himself to be above God. That is why it is written that he shall be locked away for a thousand years before he is let loose again to deceive the nations. Then after that will be the second death. See Rev. 19:20KJV and Rev. 20:2KJV. These things are too difficult for you, I sense. But, you are a close friend, so I will share them with you nevertheless. You might notice that "Two Witnesses" are allowed to come to be on God's side this time around, and two for Satan {the False Prophet and the Beast/ Antichrist}. Originally, there was one, namely Jesus against one, namely Satan. During that time, Jesus came doing miracles. Well, Satan said he could defeat God if He would let his two 'followers' do miracles too. So they got to do some miracles, too. They still did not win. If you need any more explanation, let me know. I can't just dump everything on you when it takes time to build up to knowing certain things.
May God Increase The Joy Of You And Your Loved Ones, RR!!
Michael
Last edited:
The study of the earth and the fossil record within is the study of Gods creation of life through the process of first, life implantation, and second, the "fostering" of evolution by the Life Carriers who brought life to our world. Faith and trust in the spirit of God is perfectly compatible with the study of his natural way of creation. The Hebrew holy men who created the YEC story didn't know any better and didn't claim divine inspiration.
6days
New member
Jesus: "If you really believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me"
You don't understand -
Wow. I think you were way out of line over in the politics forum, but on this issue I must give credit where credit is due and agree with you.
When atheists speak of Evolution they really mean Evolution Out Of Nothing, i.e there is no God and everything just evolved, out of what I have no idea. Obviously that version of Evolution is wrong.
BUT: Certain elements of evolution do not conflict with the Christian faith at all. It conflicts with the young earthers who read Genesis One literally, but reading Genesis One literally is a poor and erroneous way to read it.
Genesis One is meant to teach one thing and one thing only: That God created everything out of nothing, that he created man in his own image, that man separated himself from God through disobedience, and that God immediately set about the long - or at least it seems long to us - process of healing that rift, a process which culminated with the death and resurrection of Christ. That is ALL it teaches.
Everything in Genesis is meant to convey that truth, but it is done in the ancient Semitic style of writing, using allegories, fantastic imagery, and all based on traditions that were handed down for centuries. I do not believe there was a serpent, or a tree, or a garden, etc. These are all images & allegories, in a certain style of writing, meant to convey the fundamental truth I stated above.
But how long did that take? And what changes took place over that span of time? Authentic Evolution explains much of it.
And Moses also supposivly wrote: "So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab,according to the word of the Lord, 6 and he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day. Moses was 120 years old when he died."
But not really, the Bible was written and rewritten by the same kind of Jews who killed Jesus. The preachers needed to make the Bible written by God to use as their controlling authority. It's outdated and gets a lot of facts wrong.
Today the obveous errors in the Bible must be ignored in order to maintain Bibliolitry. The Jews who became believers in Jesus sort of misremembered things to justify transferring from Judaism to their new religion.
Check your spelling
Thanks. It's actually been the Catholic Church that was in the lead on accepting scientific inquiry. They realized some of the major claims of Genesis were simply untenable as written. YEC and Noah's flood. Simply put, everything changed for the Israelites after loosing their ancestral homeland and being taken off onto Babylon. It was during that devastating period that the Hebrew priest rewrote their history. They adopted preexisting lore from Mesipotamia and wove it into their own heavily biased story of origins.
I see you prefer the Pollyanna approach on the question of God writing just like you do on C-14 dating – ignore all the real-world complications and assume just the conditions you need that will lead to the answer you want. In my reading of the scriptures themselves, plus reading what Kenyon, Adams, and Metzger, and others have written about how the Bible actually came to us, I see a bit more realism and acknowledgement that in spite of your Biblical quotes, there is a bit of haziness in what God actually says in the scriptures.
Rosenritter
New member
Michael, when I am reading critically, I stop at the first place where incorrect statements are made and the assumptions preceded thereon. In this case, When you say "God did not make the soul capable of dying" ... God says otherwise. Jesus (God in the flesh) also says otherwise.
Ezekiel 18:20-21 KJV
(20) The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
(21) But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
Matthew 10:28 KJV
(28) And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Anything built upon the foundation of "God created the soul so it cannot die" will be fundamentally flawed. I pulled up just two passages there, one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament, just as examples.
Rosenritter
New member
Moses didn't personally write "So Moses died..." any more than Adam wrote "Adam died..." The successor would have picked up and filled in from that part and kept going. In this case, Joshua. Just because its called the "books of Moses" or "Moses" for short doesn't mean that Moses penned every word.
Rosenritter
New member
Test me then. If it doesn't hold consistent let us see by fair trial.
Already done. You have made it clear that you think God inspired most of what is in the Bible, including the early chapters of Genesis. The Creationist reading of those chapters indicates the earth was created about 6000 years ago.
C-14 dating of biological samples frequently yields dates predating 6000 years ago. You believe that there was essentially no C-14 in the atmosphere at creation, and so finding only small amounts of C-14 in a sample can mean it lived when there was little C-14 for it to metabolize.
But a month or two ago in this thread it was shown that international teams of scientists collaboratively calibrate C-14 dating against several other independent methods of dating. Those methods reach back to well before 6000 years ago. At that point you quit participating in that discussion.
Concurrently you made the claim that samples that science expects to be much older than C-14 can date give C-14 dates much too young. When some of the real-world factors were itemized that are known to increase C-14 counts in old samples you terminated participating in that discussion.
You were willing to jump on the C-14 issue until … well …until ???
As it stands now, in spite of your enthusiasm, I am not much impressed by your pretense to scientific competence.
6days
New member
Yes... There is approx. 4,000 years of genealogies from Adam to Christ.
What I have said before in this thread is unknown conditions in the past can't be calibrated for...
(Strength / weakness of solar rays, earths magnetic field, global fllods etc)
The global flood would have drastically effected the ratio....
-With all vegetation dead...much buried starting to form coal and oil...
The C14 would increase at this time relative to the C12.
Also effecting the ratio at this time would be volcanic activity around the earth emitting lots of CO2 without the normal C14
Creationist researchers figure that Preflood oganisms although only 4500 years old would C14 date somewhere near 40,000 years.
One of the easiest (and least productive) things to do is to toss out vague arguments without having gone to the work of seeing if they actually are pertinent.
-- For each of the potential problems you mention, do you know which of the alternative dating methods might be susceptible to that problem?
--How might a scientist detect that the alternative dating sample has been compromised by each of the influences you mention?
-- The potential problems you itemize cover a diverse range of physical processes: volcanic emission of C12, changes in solar intensities, variations in the earth’s magnetic field, etc. How likely is it that the various independent dating methods would each be affected to pretty much the same degree, even though they are not all sensitive to the same physical parameters?
-- and – how likely is it that a collaborative team whose members come from a variety of religious and cultural and national backgrounds, and who specifically cross-check the dates they bring to the study with dates supplied by others on the team, and who are on the teams specifically because of their expertise in specific dating methodologies - how likely is it that they are so incompetent that they would be unaware of the influence of the things you mention? You think they are just a bunch of PhD scientific keystone cops publishing the most detailed and researched C-14 calibration data in the world?
When you come back with specifics then let’s talk again. Your half-baked maybe, might, could have stuff is a waste of time.
6days
New member
I'm not so sure that cultural and religious backgrounds have much to do with science.
You must be referring to how they do backflips trying to come to an agreement that fits their belief system?
They would all AGREE with what I wrote. Unknown conditions in the past can't be calibrated for.
C14 dates of 28,000 - 45,000 years are consistent with what we would expect in the global flood model.
- Status