You are redirecting from the fact that you are a nincompoop. I don't fault you for grammar. As I said before, I too work in applied science, not grammar school. But since you had to be stupid...:dunce:
toldailytopic: The origin of life.
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
You are redirecting from the fact that you are a nincompoop. I don't fault you for grammar. As I said before, I too work in applied science, not grammar school. But since you had to be stupid...:dunce:
Sanitary engineer, right?
You know, childishly insulting my intellect with your own stupity doesn't make you any smarter.
Words
Words
I am a talker. I love words. Words are not adequate to describe those moments of " at-one-ness" during which I have experienced the presence of God and who I am becomes an integral and beautiful part of all that is. I used to try desperately to hang on to them, moments of glowing beauty. Now, I accept the gift, say thanks! and re-enter the stuff of my day. Thanks for sharing. blessings, bybee
Words
I am a talker. I love words. Words are not adequate to describe those moments of " at-one-ness" during which I have experienced the presence of God and who I am becomes an integral and beautiful part of all that is. I used to try desperately to hang on to them, moments of glowing beauty. Now, I accept the gift, say thanks! and re-enter the stuff of my day. Thanks for sharing. blessings, bybee
Last edited:
Another thought
Another thought
One such moment occurred when I was visiting the Chicago Art Museum. I walked down a hallway, rounded a corner and and stopped dead in my tracks. My friend ran right into me. At the end of that hallway was a "Chagall" window. It was blue incarnate! I couldn't bear to leave it. It is still with me! peace, bybee
Another thought
One such moment occurred when I was visiting the Chicago Art Museum. I walked down a hallway, rounded a corner and and stopped dead in my tracks. My friend ran right into me. At the end of that hallway was a "Chagall" window. It was blue incarnate! I couldn't bear to leave it. It is still with me! peace, bybee
The God I believe in says that in six days He created the earth and everything in it.
Which kinda makes irrelevant what you say:
are we going to play "tear down each others faith" again? Oh goodie . . . .
Where have I ever "torn down your faith"?
You readily admit that you do not believe the six days account. You leave it to chance whether or not God was involved in the creation of life on earth. The parts where your faith does not line up with the bible are of your own making and you support them vigorously. Quit crying because people are able to read what you believe and are able to recognise its divergence from what they believe.
I agree with your statement that determining the origin as God doesn't have to lead to the conclusion that evolution wasn't a process he used. The problem I see is that it conflicts with the biblical account, and in a big way. No literal Adam and Eve? No literal fall? No literal promise of a redeemer? While Scripture isn't intended to be a scientific record of creation, God, through Moses, at least provides a narrative of the big picture he wants to communicate - that he created everything. I don't see anything in the creation account that leads me to believe that God meant if figuratively.
Sozo again
New member
Without a literal Adam, the death of Jesus was in vain.
Some people think the narrative of Genesis contains a good bit of metaphor and that the story of Adam and Eve is a loose chronicle of man's initial state and the disobedience that caused him to lose it--a point of general reference from which a distinct and literal line is observed and diverges that will play a role in the whole of man's redemption. But regardless of where a man comes down on this the death of Christ and its message is the same. We are justly condemned and in need of grace. Man's imperfect nature holds the key to his doom absent that. It is in this imperfection that he will find disobedience and willful self destruction, though Christ's example and simple reason illustrate that at every point he need not.∅2L84U;2209209 said:
Last edited:
What I want to know is where the "metaphor" people switch over.
We have a genealogy going from Adam to Jesus. Is it only Adam that is a metaphor or is there a divide that exists somewhere down the line? Perhaps after Noah 'cos they love to deny that the world was destroyed in a flood as well...
We have a genealogy going from Adam to Jesus. Is it only Adam that is a metaphor or is there a divide that exists somewhere down the line? Perhaps after Noah 'cos they love to deny that the world was destroyed in a flood as well...
Sozo again
New member
Romans 5 would have to be a metaphor also, which would mean that Jesus never really died on a cross, because Adam is just a "story".
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come."
"So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous."
Being made righteous, is just a "metaphor"? :sigh:
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come."
"So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous."
Being made righteous, is just a "metaphor"? :sigh:
No. I think that camp's limitation of the narrative rests with Adam and Eve. The response on this point would be to argue the "act" is disobedience, willful and intentional disobedience as an extension of imperfect understanding and selfish desire. Christ, in the flesh and subject then to the same temptations and limits of that flesh obeyed at every point where man, both at the root and throughout his collective and singular history did not.∅2L84U;2209269 said:
I also think there is a third camp here to be had, one that reconciles both perspectives and I suppose I'd be closer to that one in my beliefs, but I fear this is spinning toward something that should probably find its own thread at some point.
Not true, and off the subject in the OP.
DocJohnson
New member
The subject is the origin of life. If bacteria exist, then life has already been created, by whatever means. And from there on it is evolution, which deals with the diversification of life, not its origin.
Don’t understand your question. Whatever form the first life had, whether it was bacteria, or something else, it was past the “origin of life” stage.
John Mortimer
New member
Why?
- Status