Honest opinions from Christians please

[tumbleweed41]

I don't have a problem with non-Christians reading the posts on the thread. It's just that when the OP requested opinions "from Christians," that's what it seems to me that the thread's author wanted -- opinions from Christians. Technically, anyone and everyone can respond since the thread is not in the Same Faith Debates (which the author of the OP may not have even realized existed). But I don't think he actually wanted "everyone's opinions" or he wouldn't have asked for "opinions from Christians." What am I missing here?

You are arguing on behalf of the author of this threads OP.
You assume the author was mistaken in posting on this particular forum.
You criticize the intelligence of non-Christians who post here.

Sorry, but you come off a arrogant.

 

[Draka]

I don't have a problem with non-Christians reading the posts on the thread. It's just that when the OP requested opinions "from Christians," that's what it seems to me that the thread's author wanted -- opinions from Christians. Technically, anyone and everyone can respond since the thread is not in the Same Faith Debates (which the author of the OP may not have even realized existed). But I don't think he actually wanted "everyone's opinions" or he wouldn't have asked for "opinions from Christians." What am I missing here?

But he DID post it in the Science vs Religion section of the forum. It IS in a debate section. See I take the OP as stating certain facts and then asking why Christians either do or don't accept those facts and then why they choose to believe in some parts of the bible even though they don't believe in others. It is a valid debate topic. The non-Christians are posing these types of questions to get the "honest opinions from Christians". When certain Christians skirt the questions or make up mumbo jumbo or want to rail against each and every point except the main one...it deserves scrutiny and why can't a non-Christian do the scrutinizing? It's not like many non-Christians weren't Christians at some point in their lives. So it's not like we are talking from a place of ignorance.

Simply hun, if the thread author truly only wanted Christians to participate in this thread it would have been placed in Same Faith Debates. He could have had it moved there if he realized later that he made a mistake. This wasn't done, so I feel I have as much a right to converse here as anyone else. I'm sorry you don't feel I belong here though.

 

[Autodidact]

All I was doing was asking why non-Christians would feel the need to weigh in on a thread that was clearly intended for Christians only. Regardless of which forum the thread is in, it doesn't take a vast amount of intelligence to stop and think, "Hmmm. I'm not a Christian. Maybe I should just sit this one out."

I don't think that was the intent, Katz. I think the intent of the OP was to get answers from Christians, to form a basis for discussion with Christians and non.

 

[RomCat]

Nowhere in any Bible I have read is there a
passage saying man is 4,000 to 6,000 years old.
Although I believe such a time frame would be at
the lower end of man's existence on Earth while
the maximum would be somewhere around 120,000
years old.

 

[Autodidact]

Nowhere in any Bible I have read is there a
passage saying man is 4,000 to 6,000 years old.
Although I believe such a time frame would be at
the lower end of man's existence on Earth while
the maximum would be somewhere around 120,000
years old.

On what do you base this opinion?

 

[MarvelousWorksofGod]

Hello, My Opinion. Here's my opinion: The Bible never intended to be a science textbook. Here are a few brief thoughts I once read that explain my perspective pretty well, I think.

"In response to much of the rhetoric we have seen lately concerning creation and evolution, I don't understand why it is so difficult for some people to believe that God is the greatest scientist in the universe but that he could not explain some of his high tech processes to people who thought a fig leaf was high tech. Even if he could show Adam the whole truth, how could Adam write that down in terms that the rest of the world would understand without a few thousand years of education?

How do you explain to your children how a gasoline engine works or where rain comes from? Is it possible that you answer this never-ending flow of curiosity with 'note quite accurate answers' which are in terms your children will understand?

When God told Adam that he was created from the dust in one day, is it not possible that this answer was his 'not quite accurate explanation' in terms that Adam could understand? How would you explain genetics and millenniums to a man who first and greatest creation was disposable underwear harversted from the same tree his food was harvested from?

God didn't just give us a body, he give us a brain and what that a fair share of curiosity. He knew that knowledge is an eternal progression so he gave us the tools needed to eternally ask and learn the answers to all of life's questions. line upon line and precept upon precept.

I think it is reasonable to assume that the creator of the laws of the universe must also by his nature live by the laws he has set for us. If not then he would not have commanded us to "become as I am.' If you doubt this then I challenge you to explain microscopic living organisms or genetic blueprints to your 5-year-old. No short cuts, though, just the science."

I agree.

THE BIBLE IS NOT AND NEVER MEANT TO BE A SCIENCE TEXT BOOK!

AS IT APPEARS, THE SUN DOES GO UP AND IT GOES DOWN! BUT SCIENTIFICALLY IT DOES NOT.
THE BIBLE WAS MEANT FOR EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND, NOT TO BE MISUNDERSTOOD. GOD DOESN'T HAVE TO TELL EVERYONE EVERYTHING HE KNOWS, BECUASE THATS NOT HE'S PURPOSE. Hello, THE BIBILE IS USED FOR SPIRITUAL PURPOSES

Hey, we are just people.

 

[JMorris]

HE DIED FOR US, WHY NOT LIVE FOR HIM!?​

:bible::bible::bible:
think about it!

well, when you put it that way, it becomes soooooooooo much clearer.:yes:
thats gotta be the most compelling argument for christianity ive ever seen!
i think ill just run right out and go to church.:ignore:

 

[MarvelousWorksofGod]

Maybe the world was only regional!
I mean, God was the one who flooded the earth, and the earth changes all of time so probably we don't have slight of bit of evidence to show if your right or wrong.
Scientist aren't God.
That was, what? Millions of years ago that the earth flooded?
Have scientist went all over the earth to see if it was only regional?

 

[gzusfrk]

Hewbrews 4:12 "For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two edge sword and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit of both joints and morrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart".Therefor when you read the Word it will reveal to you what it says according to your heart.so it is unlikely you will get two versions the same unless their hearts are simular.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

Hewbrews 4:12 "For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two edge sword and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit of both joints and morrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart".Therefor when you read the Word it will reveal to you what it says according to your heart.so it is unlikely you will get two versions the same unless their hearts are simular.

And what in "god's" name does THAT mean? That the bible means whatever the reader thinks it means? That its only value is a mirror in which the reader sees his own thoughts?

This is the revealed word of god? Whatever the reader "intuits" it means?

So Hitler's reading of it has the right meaning - for him. And Billy Graham also has the right meaning - for him?:areyoucra

 

[DadBurnett]

I do not seek answers, I have studied enough! I wanted to know how ordinary Christian people, in the true face of reality as it is today can keep on believing what you believe. That is what my post is all about.

In over six decades of being "Christian" and studying Bible, I have yet to discover what you refer to as an "ordinary Christian person." I've also found that there is no singular reality, we all live seperate realities, shaped by our own beliefs and disbeliefs. Certainly, my perspective anof reality and your perspective of reality are different.

As asked, you question is, I think, unanswerable ...

 

[slave2six]

Well for one science has no proof for or against the spiritual, its the wrong tool for the job,
for two, as stated the Bible is not a science manual its a guide to good living, the spiritual, a source of prophecy, much of which came and is coming true.

The captain is partly right. In part, the Bible is a guide to good living. Well, some of it. Most of it is not that at all.

Where the captain is wrong is that he perhaps has not really considered what happens to the Christian religion if you remove the first fifteen books of Genesis from the equation. In fact, if you remove the first three then the whole thing comes crashing to the ground.

The "fall of man" is the foundation of the faith and the reason behind the epoch tale of redemption. If the fall of man is not literal then the truth is that there never was a free-will "fall" from grace and that therefore sacrifice in any form (whether animal or human) is completely without meaning or power.

If the "fall of man" is supposed to be literal then your argument is simply the most obvious rebuttal and the first step to proving that it actually cannot be literal. Either way, the whole thing falls to the ground no matter how you look at it.

 

[gzusfrk]

And what in "god's" name does THAT mean? That the bible means whatever the reader thinks it means? That its only value is a mirror in which the reader sees his own thoughts?

This is the revealed word of god? Whatever the reader "intuits" it means?

So Hitler's reading of it has the right meaning - for him. And Billy Graham also has the right meaning - for him?:areyoucra

We have about a zillion denominations,sometimes even two christians have a hard time,they go back and fourth each trying to tell the other what the verse says,often there both right,I have talked to alot of christians who tell me this has happened to them in that they will read the word a few months later read the same verse but it says something different the second time .1 peter 1:23 also says the Word is living.Billy Graham says Jesus is the savior,thats what the word tells him,it tells me the samething,some people say its fiction,what does the Word say to you.The Word reveals your heart.

 

[TechTed]

Hello, My Opinion. Here's my opinion: The Bible never intended to be a science textbook. Here are a few brief thoughts I once read that explain my perspective pretty well, I think.

Even if he could show Adam the whole truth, how could Adam write that down in terms that the rest of the world would understand without a few thousand years of education?

Adam didn't write Genesis, did he? Now, I'm not a Bible scholar by any stretch, but wasn't the Bible written much later after the events described in Genesis occured?

And why would Adam need to explain it to the rest of the "world", what world population are you talking about? Adam was the first one, right? If God explains it to Adam, then Adam passes it along to his children, and so on and so forth...the entire world would know the whole truth.

Wasn't Adam created with same intellectual capacity that we possess today? Being the first man created, wasn't his "mind" a blank slate ready to be filled with knowledge? If God would have explained quantum physics to Adam on day one, why wouldn't he understand it?

 

[slave2six]

Adam didn't write Genesis, did he? Now, I'm not a Bible scholar by any stretch, but wasn't the Bible written much later after the events described in Genesis occured?

The first five books are attributed to Moses who lived 2 thousand years after Adam and four hundred years after Joseph (the last story in Genesis).

Therefore, the only way that any of Genesis can be true is if God (who would be the only person who was actually around at that time and could give a detailed account) told Moses all about it. This being the case, one has to ask why God got the order of creation wrong and why he would make up a story about Adam and Eve when later generations would discover that human beings evolved and that there never was a Garden. By all accounts, Moses was raised in an Egyptian palace which means that he was probably well educated. So, if God is describing things to an educated Moses, why do people fall for this "primitive man" idea that mankind simply couldn't comprehend, say, a heliocentric solar system? Ever study Egyptology? There were very complex religious and scientific ideas involved even back then.

 

[TechTed]

So, if God is describing things to an educated Moses, why do people fall for this "primitive man" idea that mankind simply couldn't comprehend, say, a heliocentric solar system? Ever study Egyptology? There were very complex religious and scientific ideas involved even back then.

The "primitive man" idea helps those who take the Bible as literal fact come to grips with how illogical "creationism" really is. I guess.

 

[kingcores]

"Noah's flood was global"

At a web site called Answers in Creation, not to be confused with Answers in Genesis, I saw an essay addressing this. The author said that the Hebrew word translated "earth" in the Genesis flood account, can also mean "land". So, it could be referring to a region there. The author also said it is possible that at that time, all the people on Earth lived in that region. I don't recall exactly which page at the site this was posted in. I can't post a link yet, anyway. You can certainly google Answers in Creation, and look for the page.

 

[Vile Atheist]

: You will find that we as a people are generally stubborn. Atheists are stubborn too.

True. But with good reason to be.

 

[spearman]

ask these questions as I am truly perplexed, not having a go at you.

How do you continue to believe and have faith in the bible when it is rife with misinformation, misleading and at times outright lies. My examples are:
Mankind is around 4000-6000 years old. Science has proven beyond any doubt that we are at least 60, 000 years old for homo-sapiens, then we have all of the other variations of man prior.

Noah's flood was global. It was regional! Sediment layers, ice cores and many many other facts provea global flood as incorrect.

The sun goes up and down. The earth orbit the sun and may give this appearance to assuming people- but if the bible was the word of god then this literary error would not have occurred.
If the bible really and truly is the word of god, how did these very fundamental facts get so wrong? There are literally hundreds more, but I use these 3 are they have been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

#1 no where in scripture have I seen it say man kind or the earth was 4,000-6,000 years old its all how you interpret or whos teachings you listen to.Just because a preacher gets up on a telecast and says so, does not mean all christians believe the same thing? I look at Genisus and the creation and the whole garden of eden thing in a mystical way, a mystery which scripture points to but does not fully explain. You cant put God in a test tube and cant measure his electrical charge, you cant put all of him in a book even one so large as the Bible and thats why you cant know him.

#2 hold on a moment, ice cores and such measurements have been wrong and very, very, wrong before. Again much of the bible is not meant to be taken in a way you
have framed it, science is a valuble tool, but how many times have scientists told me not to eat eggs only to turn around two years later tell me they are good for me? Ice cores and Sediment layers are all fine and good but its not very up lifting or inspiring, oh mystery of the sediment layers, and ice cores you give immortality, oh devine testtube how my heart flutters at your sight

#3 Wow you cant be serious, again spiritual things dont belong in a laboratory, its nice to know there are smart folk out there discovering wonderfull things about science, its a good thing. But I am sorry but it does not give me the joy that faith and hope does it does not give me hope for the future. Because at the same time science has done some great things it also gave us the means to destroy ourselves too. The greatest threat to our kind is still the weapons science graced us with at the end of the secound world war. There are still enough nucular weapons to destroy civilization many times over and more and more countries are getting them

 

[Subhood]

for all you people who believe in god, please explain the dinosaurs?