How can you be a True Christian™ if you don't take the Eden story literally?

[metis]

To treat the Bible as if it were perfect is a form of idolatry.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

We'll agree to disagree.

Go well.

You, too.
Have a good evening.

 

[InChrist]

To treat the Bible as if it were perfect is a form of idolatry.

I don’t agree. If God is infallible, then so will His Word be infallible. If the scriptures are inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16), then to consider them to be doctrinally error free cannot be idolatry in my view.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don’t agree. If God is infallible, then so will His Word be infallible. If the scriptures are inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16), then to consider them to be doctrinally error free cannot be idolatry in my view.

That verse does not even imply that the Bible is infallible. You are misinterpreting what it says. There is nothing in the Bible that indicates that it is all true.

 

[InChrist]

That verse does not even imply that the Bible is infallible. You are misinterpreting what it says. There is nothing in the Bible that indicates that it is all true.

The verse says “ all scripture is given by inspiration of God”. God is infallible, therefore scriptures inspired by God are infallible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The verse says “ all scripture is given by inspiration of God”. God is infallible, therefore scriptures inspired by God are infallible.

Yes it says "Inspired by God" that does not mean true. And no, if God is "infallible" then why was your mythical Adam "fallible" You are making an unjustified assumption. If God was infallible then there would have been no fall in Eden.

 

[InChrist]

Yes it says "Inspired by God" that does not mean true. And no, if God is "infallible" then why was your mythical Adam "fallible" You are making an unjustified assumption. If God was infallible then there would have been no fall in Eden.

It means true from my perspective.
The reality is that the Creator God is the only perfectly infallible Being, Adam was not. Any created being , though created good, would never be God, nor have the infallible attributes as God. There could have been no fall if A&E had trusted and obeyed God. But since they were not infallible the opportunity for the wrong choice was there and occurred.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It means true from my perspective.
The reality is that the Creator God is the only perfectly infallible Being, Adam was not. Any created being , though created good, would never be God, nor have the infallible attributes as God. There could have been no fall if A&E had trusted and obeyed God. But since they were not infallible the opportunity for the wrong choice was there and occurred.

Your perspective does not count. You are also refuting your own version of God whether you realize it or not. We can show over and over and over again that various stories in Genesis never happened as they were written down. That is why you are calling your God a liar if you claim that Genesis is true. Yes an omnipotent God could plant endless false evidence. But planting false evidence is a form of lying.

You need to read the whole passage. Then you might not misinterpret it so badly. Would you like to do that?

 

[InChrist]

Your perspective does not count. You are also refuting your own version of God whether you realize it or not. We can show over and over and over again that various stories in Genesis never happened as they were written down. That is why you are calling your God a liar if you claim that Genesis is true. Yes an omnipotent God could plant endless false evidence. But planting false evidence is a form of lying.

You need to read the whole passage. Then you might not misinterpret it so badly. Would you like to do that?

Do you think I haven’t read the whole passage? Who is “we”? Whatever “we” can show over and over again that would appear to show the Genesis accounts never happened, contrary to God’s Word…I don’t think counts.

 

[Ebionite]

Your perspective does not count. You are also refuting your own version of God whether you realize it or not. We can show over and over and over again that various stories in Genesis never happened as they were written down. That is why you are calling your God a liar if you claim that Genesis is true. Yes an omnipotent God could plant endless false evidence. But planting false evidence is a form of lying.

You need to read the whole passage. Then you might not misinterpret it so badly. Would you like to do that?

Yes of course, ***STAFF EDIT***

Did Jesus create mankind (Adam)?

Do you have reliable sources which provide an alternative explanation for the four-spoken wheel Ron Wyatt photographed in the Red Sea? https://wyattmuseum.com/chariot-wheels-in-the-red-sea/2011-669 Oh my FSM?? You are a hoot! Those are modern day ship's valve wheels That is the work...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Trailblazer]

The verse says “ all scripture is given by inspiration of God”. God is infallible, therefore scriptures inspired by God are infallible.

That would only be true if God wrote the scripture. Inspired by God is not the same as written by God.

 

[Ebionite]

The verse says “ all scripture is given by inspiration of God”. God is infallible, therefore scriptures inspired by God are infallible.

Circular Reasoning

A type of reasoning in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared. This fallacy is often quite humorous.

www.logicallyfallacious.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you think I haven’t read the whole passage? Who is “we”? Whatever “we” can show over and over again that would appear to show the Genesis accounts never happened, contrary to God’s Word…I don’t think counts.

First off you do not know that the Bible is "God's word" Did you forget how none of the verses that you quoted earlier ever referred to the Bible? They only mentioned a vague "word of God". You made the improper assumption that that was the Bible. So let's drop that bit of blasphemy right now.

Second as to the passage that you do not understand you only quote a small part of it. That indicates that you have never read or understood the whole thing. Here it is in more context:

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: [17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

Please note, this cannot even be talking about the whole Bible. It only talks about vague scripture. Did the writer have a time machine? This was written before the four Gospels, Acts, or Revelation. Obviously he could not have been referring to them. Second we once again have the problem of what is meant by "scripture". I know that you like to assume that it was the Bible but that is a 4th century invention. There were books that were left out and books that were clearly written after this that were included. This does not appear to cover the Bible.

But, even if it did it does not say or even imply that it is flawless. And even less so that it is factual. Please note the "and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correct, for instruction in righteousness". If the myths of Genesis and Exodus were morality tales they would still satisfy that clause. There is no need to go to the extremes that you do. There is no need for creationists to claim that God is a liar.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes of course, Mr credibility.

Did Jesus create mankind (Adam)?

Do you have reliable sources which provide an alternative explanation for the four-spoken wheel Ron Wyatt photographed in the Red Sea? https://wyattmuseum.com/chariot-wheels-in-the-red-sea/2011-669 Oh my FSM?? You are a hoot! Those are modern day ship's valve wheels That is the work...

www.religiousforums.com

Are you still but hurt because I told you before you even asked that you had to be polite And when you were rude I kept my word and ignored your rude demands?

You are not the first irrational person that I have debated against.

 

[Ebionite]

Are you still but hurt because I told you before you even asked that you had to be polite And when you were rude I kept my word and ignored your rude demands?

You are not the first irrational person that I have debated against.

Because laughing at you is rude but you making false claims against Ron Wyatt is perfectly acceptable, right?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because laughing at you is rude but you making false claims against Ron Wyatt is perfectly acceptable, right?

You were the only one that made false claims about Ron Wyatt. One has to be scientifically illiterate to believe him at all.

 

[Ebionite]

You were the only one that made false claims about Ron Wyatt. One has to be scientifically illiterate to believe him at all.

And what was the false claim that you think that I made, specifically?

 

[Subduction Zone]

And what was the false claim that you think that I made, specifically?

You claimed that I went back on my word. And then you proved that I did not. Have you forgotten how you shot yourself in the foot already?

 

[Ebionite]

You claimed that I went back on my word. And then you proved that I did not. Have you forgotten how you shot yourself in the foot already?

***STAFF EDIT*** Here's what I said:

Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

I told him in another thread that Moses was fictional. He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any. So he posted some pictures by Ron Wyatt, if you do not know who he is Google him, of modern brass ships valve wheels that he Wyatt...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

***STAFF EDIT*** Here's what I said:

Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

I told him in another thread that Moses was fictional. He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any. So he posted some pictures by Ron Wyatt, if you do not know who he is Google him, of modern brass ships valve wheels that he Wyatt...

www.religiousforums.com

That does not help you. Do I have to give the posts in order. You really are not worth the bother. You were told to be polite before you asked for sources.

Here is a link to the post where you quoted me warning you. Read your quote of me. It tells you that you have to be polite:

Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

I told him in another thread that Moses was fictional. He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any. So he posted some pictures by Ron Wyatt, if you do not know who he is Google him, of modern brass ships valve wheels that he Wyatt...

www.religiousforums.com