[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
It does fly. I see it flying in mine own religious life.[/quote]
So explain the origin and meaning of death in this world.
Do the same with sin.[/quote]
I say thee nay! I only tentatively decided to participate in this thread, when originally I was going to skip “yet another religious thread.” And, with what participation of mine can be found, I’ve tried very hard to remain non-sectarian. The questions you’ve asked would probably generate a long debate with Catholicism and Evangelicalism, and their respective theologies, battling it out. And most likely, with nothing to show for it in the end.
So, allow me to refrain from helping to steer this thread off the deep end. Instead, dropping any theological reasoning as to why the account of creation CAN NOT, absolutely not, be taken literally, I’d offer something much more succint.
Being a Christian who has no problem with evolution, I’ve always been amused by the atheist’s tunnel vision in this debate. It always seems to bog down at fossils, chimps, and carbon dating. Why? Why even bring dinos and man’s ancestors up? Why not stick with what most creation account literalists can’t deny? That is, can’t deny without entering into conspiracy territory.
Taking the Creation account literally, this illustration would be the world and universe. However, we know that there is no firmament (dome) seperating two bodies of water. With one body of water being above us somewhere. The two great lights in the dome are actually the Sun and moon. Which we know are off in space along with the stars.
Very few literalists accept the ancient Hebrew universe. Yet, the dome, the lights, the seperation of waters above the dome and below, earth as a basin, are all explicitly stated in the creation account. So, while creation account literalists (note how very specific I am) will argue the evidence of evolution, or an ancient earth, I’ve met none (though I’m sure they exist) who’d assert that our space missions have been unsuccesful. Our spacecraft haven’t been foiled with repeated crashes into the firmament of the sky, after all.
[/quote]
Slothy baby, I love you to death, but you are ignorant of the creation model. You have some study in store for you if you want to present your ideas here with credibility. I don’t blame you for wanting to stand on the fringes of this debate; you have no business being in the center of the ring.
I think you present yourself as an intelligent poster on many subjects on PWI but you are simply out of your league on this one.
And when it comes to theology you can’t even answer a basic question about the origin of sin and death. It’s not complicated like you made it out to be unless you have to figure out a way to mix and match the distinctly different world views of uniformitarianism/evolutionism and creationism. Good luck with your struggle, friend.[/quote]
The question of sin and death makes for another topic. But here, it’s simply a distraction. What other study do I need in my adoption of creation account literalism? Should I not stick to sola scripture? My very eyes can read the words as they’ve been put down in Genesis.
But, allow me to ask it directly. Do you believe there is a dome, a firmament, that is supporting waters directly above it?
[i]"Then God said, “Let there be a dome in the middle of the waters, to separate one body of water from the other.” And so it happened:
God made the dome, and it separated the water above the dome from the water below it. God called the dome ‘the sky.’ Evening came, and morning followed–the second day.
"[/i]
I’d then ask if you believe the sun, the moon, and the stars to be simply lights set into this dome?
[i]Then God said: “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky, to separate day from night. Let them mark the fixed times, the days and the years, and serve as luminaries in the dome of the sky, to shed light upon the earth.” And so it happened:
God made the two great lights, the greater one to govern the day, and the lesser one to govern the night; and he made the stars.
God set them in the dome of the sky, to shed light upon the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness."[/i]
To continue on, I’d ask if what we generally think of as good old dry earth is nothing more that earth raised up in the middle of a giant basin. A basin which is filled with water.
[i]Then God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered into a single basin, so that the dry land may appear.” And so it happened: the water under the sky was gathered into its basin, and the dry land appeared.
God called the dry land ‘the earth,’ and the basin of the water he called ‘the sea.’ God saw how good it was.[/i]
The illustration I shared must be accepted by CAL’s. The single basin is present, along with the land mass in the middle. The dome, the firmament, is also present. Including the waters that were seperated from the waters below, by the dome. The lights (celestial bodies) are set in the dome. That is literalist. That, is the account set down in scripture.
