Results 161 - 180 of 629
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Lionstrong Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
161 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Lionstrong | 33396 | ||
Hi Curt, You write, "As Christians, I believe we should be about the business of showing how they [the truth of Scripture and science of the universe] do match." What is an example of the truth of Scripture and science matching? Peace, Lionstrong |
||||||
162 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Lionstrong | 33411 | ||
No, you didn't, Curt. You raised more. You said, "science is the study of the physical world...." Then you go on to give an example of how the truth of Scripture and science match by saying, "Now, let me give an example of science and Scripture matching. First, a simple one: God said, "Let there be light, and there was light". When we look around, there is light! Science and Scripture are in harmony." Curt, is the presence of light science? You gave a definition of science, but this does not seem to fit it. Your more complex example raises more questions. I understand that we are not talking about conclusions drawn from the data but the observed data itself. So, what observed Flood data from Scripture and geology match? For example does a "significant flood" (which I take is the scientific data) match, "The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. All flesh that moved on the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died."? Gen 7:19-22 If your examples of science are examples of "the study of the physical world," then it is unclear what you mean by science, and therefore it is unclear how the truth of Scripture and science match. Peace, Lionstrong |
||||||
163 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Lionstrong | 33460 | ||
First, Curt, Welcome to the forum! It's good to see another reformed face in this crowd, even though you're from the outrageously liberal PCUSA:( (My prayers are for you, brother!) Francis Schaeffer wrote a little book "No Final Conflict." (I can no longer find my copy of it.) If I remember it correctly, he seemed to be making points similar to yours, but I no longer hold that position. I accept the definition of science you quoted, and I believe science and Christian scientists have a legitimate place. But that place is not that of revealing (natural revelation in the case of science) truth. In this position I disagree with another reformed member of this forum, Joe, who I highly regard, and many other fine believers here. Nonetheless, this is what I believe about science at this point. I was playing on your word "match," which you've happily improved it to "agree," "support" and "intersection." Should they agree? Not necessarily. One problem as you mentioned is world view. Because of an unbelieving scientist's world view, he may not even "see" the data properly. The other is, as I've said, since science does not discover truth it is not in the same ballpark as Scripture. It's only when Christians or unbelievers try to use it to "prove" or attack Christianity that it becomes an issue. Got to go. Pick up on this latter, if you're willing, Curt. Peace, Lionstrong |
||||||
164 | "Let Us make man in Our image." | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 7659 | ||
I like the grammatical analysis. Translating the preposition as "as" agrees with 1 Cor 11:7, "...since he /man/ IS the image and glory of God;" (My emphasis) However, I am not comfortable with the interpretation that seems to have God conforming to the customs of ancient Middle Eastern potentates. |
||||||
165 | Did God Create Man Mortal? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 9916 | ||
Part Two 2. Man’s mortality. No, God did not create man mortal. Man as created would have lived forever, body and soul. A. God threatened death for DISOBEDIENCE. He did NOT threaten death for obedience. Man was not going to die unless he disobeyed. When man sinned God pronounced the sentence of death, which brings us to my next point. B. The mention of physical death in the curse was not in passing. This was also given as a reason for concluding that man was created mortal. Gen. 3:17-19 “Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." As you see, God tells man his end (Till you return to the ground). He then gives a reason for that particular end (For you are dust), and then He repeats that end (And to dust you shall return). So it’s not “in passing.” The curse has two parts: misery (consisting of a cursed earth and hard labor), and death. Death was initiated on the day Adam sinned and culminated when he returned to the ground from which he was taken. “(T)he body is dead because of sin” (Rom. 8:10), not because of the absence of the Tree of Life. In the Curse, God was not simply stating facts about the future of man; He was pronouncing a sentence. “(B)ecause you listened… cursed…” So God wasn’t describing the “natural” course of events; this is a judgement, and this judgement included physical death. 3. Sin’s penalty. Finally, are the wages of sin spiritual death only? Or rather, was God’s threat of death for disobedience spiritual only instead of body and soul? To answer this one must realize that the truths in Scripture form a system of truth. No truth stands in isolation from the other truths of Scripture. They are tied together, and one statement has implications and effects on the rest of the system. So it is the case on this issue. If the curse was only spiritual death, this has implications in other areas; the most significant of which is the Gospel, and substitutionary work of Christ. Christ took our place before the bar of God’s justice. The penalty for sin, which should have rightly fallen on His people, fell on Him. So the substitutionary death of Christ proves the spiritual-only view of death wrong and the whole man (body and soul) right. For if sin’s penalty was spiritual death only, then Christ substitutionary death would have needed to be spiritual only. It would have been sufficient for him to be separated from the Father in our place to satisfy the curse. But his Father forsaking Him AND His death on the cross proves that the death God threatened was of the whole man body and soul, and not the spirit only. “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit.” 1 Pet. 3:18. You probably noticed that I didn’t answer the question as to why God made the Tree of Life. It really wasn’t my purpose to suggest why God made the Tree of Life. My purpose was to show that it WASN’T made because of some supposed mortality of man. I think the discussion on the Tree of Life is a legitimate one, but the answer for its purpose must be found in some other solution than the mortality of man. |
||||||
166 | Did God Create Man Mortal? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 10244 | ||
Hello JV, I would agree with this to mean death of the whole man, body and soul, but some members of the forum would still only see this as appliying only to spiritual death. ............ In addition, as I have stated before, I disagree with this notion that Adam knew the meaning of death only by experience. Adam was created with language, and therefore understood the command of God and His threatened consequece for disobedience --apart from experience -- (Gen. 2:16,17). Was there sufficent time between creation and the command for Adam to experience the death of plant or animal? |
||||||
167 | "Let Us make man in Our image." | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 38398 | ||
Hi Ray, Christ is the head of every man is what 1 Cor 11:3 says, but since the context is the church, I think it means that his is the head of every man in the church, just as Paul says in Ephesians that Christ is the head of the church. Why do you ask, Ray? Peace, Lionstrong |
||||||
168 | "Let Us make man in Our image." | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 38735 | ||
Hi Ray, Sorry about the typo. I did mean to type, “…he is the head of every man in the church….” You said, “Here is a comparison of Genesis 1:26 and 1 Corinthians 11:3. “ You go on to quote the two passages, but you don’t show how they compare, or at least I didn’t find where you made a comparison of the passages. And speaking of comparisons, you put your special markings for comparison, but, again, what are you comparing? I did see your contrast between the headship of God and the headship of man, however. Finally, concerning your interlinear literal reading, whose translation is that? And what difference does this interlinear translation have in its meaning from the NASB or the NKJV? Peace, Lionstrong |
||||||
169 | So...what is your theory? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 65794 | ||
Hi Zerotheory, Others have tried to give the teachings of the Bible a philosophical foundation, or have tried to understand it in a certain philosophical framework as you are doing. The problem was not philosophy, but that their philosophy was not "according to Christ," that is, it was not biblically based. Col 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. What results is the imposition of alien concepts on the Bible that further result in misinterpretation of the message of Scripture. You say, "Call it God if you wish, "0" is its mathematical proof." This quote is an example of an unbiblical theology resulting from an unbiblical philosophy. In terms of mathematics zero is the point on the number line which separates negative and positive integers. One cannot do math with out it. In terms of things in the created realm zero IS nothing. To have zero apples is to have none. And there is One Eternal God, living and true. I submit that your theory of opposites is not only unbiblical but also faulty in itself. But the Studybible Forum is a forum for Bible study not philosophy. Philosophy must be according to Christ not Anaximander. Peace, |
||||||
170 | So...what is your theory? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 65890 | ||
Hi Zerotheory, Again, the purpose of the forum is Bible study. It is not to propegate one's unbiblical philosophy. If you wish to continue to justify your unbiblical philosophy to me, my e-mail address is in my personal profile. Col 2:3, "in [Christ] are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." not Anaximander. Peace, |
||||||
171 | So...what is your theory? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 65957 | ||
Hello again Zerotheory, Our concern in a forum for Bible study is NOT that a subject is biblically RELATED, but whether it's biblically BASED. The ZERO theory is not a theory that can be biblically supported; it is not according to Christ (Col 2:8), that is, His Holy Scriptures. Is 8:20, "To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn." The ZERO theory is not according to the law and the testimony. It is foreign to them. Peace, |
||||||
172 | So...what is your theory? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 65979 | ||
Yes, indeed, Zerotheory! The basis of math is logic. The basis of logic is the logical/resonable mind of the Triune God of the Bible in whose image we are created. Atheism, for example, gives no adequate basis for math. Since man is the chance product of the impersonal-plus-time-plus-chance evolutionary processes, his logic is a product of chance. Man has evolved to think, and to think the way he thinks, and to think that he's really thinking! He could have evolved differently. He therefore has no reason to believe that the evolutionary processes would not have evolved a different logic where two plus two equals five. In contras to this, God reveals himself in Scripture as eternal and immutable. Therefore reason and logic are eternal and immutable in God in whose image we are created. Therefore math is not an evolutionary illusion. Peace, |
||||||
173 | So...what is your theory? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 66097 | ||
Hello Zerotheory, As I said before this is a forum for Bible study, not philosophy study. As I've said before, you've given no biblical support for your theory. Well... you can't, because there is none. If I'm wrong, show us the biblical basis of the zero theory. Peace, |
||||||
174 | So...what is your theory? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 66168 | ||
Goodbye Zerotheory, You have yet to give us the biblical basis of your theory. Come back when you are ready to do Bible study and to gives us your meditations on the Word of God. Peace, 2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 2 Tim 3:17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. |
||||||
175 | Did God Create Man Mortal? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 108259 | ||
Thanks for your observations, Rowdy. As this is not a Debate Bible Forum I will not debate the issue with you. But if you would like to discuss this further, my public e-mail address is in my profile. |
||||||
176 | Man, the image of God | Gen 1:27 | Lionstrong | 6862 | ||
In Western culture one truth that needs emphasis is that man is the image of God. Western culture is under the influence of non-Christian world-views that say that there is no absolute truth. A scientific perspective that teaches that all reality can be reduced to scientific formulas, including man also sways our culture. In this scientific view there is nothing outside the mechanical laws and formulas, including man. Man is reduced to a bundle of psychological, sociological, and chemical conditionings. In contrast to this, the Bible teaches the wonderful truth that man is indeed outside of the mechanical laws and formulas. Man is not an intelligent animal, or is he some kind of biological computer. Man is neither animal nor machine. He is the image of his personal Creator God, the God of the Bible. As the image of God, man is capable of rational communication with his Maker, purposeful action, and wholehearted love. The issue is the value of man. If man is just a machine or an animal, then it’s ok for him to be treated that way. Abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, racism and tyranny are justified. The value of man also has implications for the Gospel. If the value of man is that of an animal or machine, then it makes no sense that Jesus should sacrifice Himself for such. But as the image of God himself, the salvation he has in Christ makes perfect sense! |
||||||
177 | Christian Ecology | Gen 1:28 | Lionstrong | 63176 | ||
Gen. 1:28 And God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." My wife and I were talking this morning. Depressed with all the murder and mayhem she saw on the news yesterday, she asked, “What would we be doing if there had been no Fall?” My thoughts jumped to the verse above, and then as thoughts go, it jumped to other things. Subdue God says, subdue the earth, not destroy it. Christian ecology: Francis A. Schaeffer has an easy read on the subject, Pollution and the Death of Man: The Christian View of Ecology. I recommend it to you. Peace, |
||||||
178 | Is an Un-subdued Earth Good? | Gen 1:28 | Lionstrong | 99338 | ||
3533 kabash (461b); a prim. root; to subdue, bring into bondage:--assault(1), brought them into subjection(2), forced into bondage(1), forcing(1), subdue(1), subdued(5), subjugate(1), trample(1), tread our under foot(1), under foot(1). Hummingbird, Your comment on understanding word usage is on target. But it is interesting to note that in the fourteen times the word appears in the Hebrew text, the NASB never translates "kabash" as "cultivate" or "bring under cultivation," nor does its primary meaning include the idea of cultivation. But I'm not sure where you were going with your comments on being fruitful and multiplying. My questions were not about that part of the verse. My questions stem from the idea of "subduing" the earth only. Thanks for your thoughts! |
||||||
179 | Food before the Fall | Gen 1:29 | Lionstrong | 25427 | ||
Food before the Fall God tells man what food he had provided for Man and animals. Man: 1. every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth 2. every tree which has fruit yielding seed Animal: every green plant. Note: the edible plants Identified by their color. No mushrooms!? Peace, Lionstrong, a.k.a. LooseCannon |
||||||
180 | Food before the Fall | Gen 1:29 | Lionstrong | 25583 | ||
Thanks Nolan, It is unknown whether "many kinds of plants and animals were lost forever in the flood." I think we should more carefully say, however, that we have fossil evidence of plants and animals we no longer see today. Whether these actually became extinct in the Flood instead of sometime afterward is speculation. You are right, though. The pre-Fall diet for man and animal was not just pre-Fall. It did not change until after the flood. Also the pre-Flood vegetarian diet is different from today's vegetarian diet, isn't it? The pre-Flood diet did not include under water vegetation (seaweed), nor seedless land vegetation like mushrooms. Do potatoes have seeds? I think that in the age to come we will be neither omnivorous nor vegetarians. Our resurrection bodies will have no stomachs. 1 Cor 6:13 Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body. Peace, Lionstrong, a.k.a. LooseCannon |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ] Next > Last [32] >> |