Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What was infused? | Acts 1:3 | Sctt | 44209 | ||
Hi Nimrod2 Just one more thought for concideration. Look at Alaska they have six months of day and six months of night.So you could say that their day was six months long. Just a thought, God bless. P.S. thanks for the help on this thread I realy had no idea it was such a hot topic. One thing I think everyone will agree on is that God in His own time and after His own fashion will reveal the truth of this matter to us all. In Christ Scott | ||||||
2 | What was infused? | Acts 1:3 | nimrod2 | 44245 | ||
Another good example of how an individual's interpretation of "day" and "night" are skewed by what they have been exposed to and not what may or may not have actually occured in the pre-solar days of creation. It is a hot topic. One that threatens some literalists so badly they'll not only question your motives but your integrity too. Don't ever stop thinking, looking and exploring. See you around the message board. Blessings to you, Doug |
||||||
3 | What was infused? | Acts 1:3 | Makarios | 44253 | ||
Greetings Doug! Have we resorted to name calling? I find it interesting to note that those who believe in a billion year old earth philosophy have trouble explaining how the seven day week was established. It has been interesting dialoguing with you on this subject, even though I'm still waiting for Biblical evidence to substantiate your claim. And those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible are not "threatened" in any way, since we (at least I) will be ready for you. Makarios |
||||||
4 | Why carry on like a playground dispute? | Acts 1:3 | nimrod2 | 44324 | ||
What name calling? Literalist? You mean to tell me you're not a literalist? I certainly would hope you'd wear that title as a badge of honor. I have no trouble explaining how a seven day week was established. No more than I would explaining a seven year cycle of planting, harvest and rest. As far as any Biblical evidence to a billion year old earth- what evidence is there period for the age of the earth? I'll say it again. The Bible isn't intended as scientific text. Believing the earth is such and such an age is not a requirement to becoming a Christian or remaining one for that matter. If you wish to treat Genesis as literal, I applaud you. You have a much more difficult task than I do when it comes to witnessing to the scientifically literate seeker. |
||||||
5 | Why carry on like a playground dispute? | Acts 1:3 | Parable | 44349 | ||
For an excellent discussion of how the Genesis account is consistent with current scientific understanding of planetary geology, see The Genesis Question, by Dr. Hugh Ross. For a list of scientific accuracies in the Bibe, see The Complete Book of Bible Lists, by Harold L. Wilmington. I agree with you that we must work to remove this "conflict". It is a stumbling block for many who might otherwise come to faith. We can be confident that the truth of God's Creation cannot be contrary to His Word. The question for us is, have we done our science right and have we divided the Word rightly? |
||||||
6 | Why carry on like a playground dispute? | Acts 1:3 | Makarios | 44406 | ||
Greetings Parable! Instead of directing one to the works of Hugh Ross, I would point them in the direction of the authors who are presented at the following website: http://www.AnswersinGenesis.org. That way, we can be sure that we are reading material from people who do not put 'science' on a pedestal that is equal to or higher than of the view or authority in which they place Scripture. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
7 | Why carry on like a playground dispute? | Acts 1:3 | Parable | 44448 | ||
I appreciate your concern and suggestion for the website, which I'll visit. However, I'm happy to say that Dr. Ross is definitely a Christian and he holds that Scripture is the Word of God. He was a pastor for approx. 15 years and is founder of REASONS TO BELIEVE, visit www.reasons.org While he is an accomplished scientist, he does not place science equal to or above the authority of scripture. |
||||||