Adam, The Dinousaurs. The Creation..How do you BELIEVERS reconcile the EvolutionFolk? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-08-2002, 06:23 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:16 PM
Normal Adam, The Dinousaurs. The Creation..How do you BELIEVERS reconcile the EvolutionFolk?

See the argument is this-

Adam and Eve are 6000-7000 yrs old.
We have bones from PreHistoric Creatures way before that.(millions of years!)

We also have HUMAN bones from 10000 years ago as WELL!--- 4000 years before Adam and Eve.!!
The bible only goes back 6000 yrs as fars as a recorded history of Man on Earth-- Adam and Eve.
Theres a huge disconnect here. How do we believers explain this one.?

Anyway-


I have a theory
A theory predicated on The Scripture.
What is yours?

DB9
__________________

diamond is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 06:43 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:16 PM
There is just a different measurement of time I think. The old testament of the bible is simply a rough description not to be taken literally, at least that is what I think, and how I was raised as a Roman Catholic. I've never seen any real conflict at all to be honest.
__________________

STING2 is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 06:45 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:16 PM
Also, the old testament isn't neccessarily about when events took place, but that they did take place and were important events that would change society.
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 07:55 PM   #4
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:16 PM

Hmm.
Thanks Sting2.
Thats how Catholics explain then.:idea:

Diamond
:idea:
diamond is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 09:20 PM   #5
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 03:16 PM
I don't think there's any conflict. The Bible is meant to be (at least it's *meant to be*) a universal, timeless record of Scripture. I don't really use time as a frame of reference for the Bible, apart from a vague sense of "a long, long time ago."

I believe that God created everything that exists. I do not particularly care how S/he did it or how long it took. Creating everything is sufficiently awesome to inspire my love and respect for the Godhead.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 09:23 PM   #6
I serve MacPhisto
 
z edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the HORROR
Posts: 4,022
Local Time: 01:16 PM
I don't know really, as a believer i have always wondered. One thing for sure is that the truth will be revealed to us in due time.

Another thing about the bible is that time as they speak of it does not exist in the same measurements as we have today. For instance, if someone Moses lived to be 800 years old, then what would he consider a "generation". Keep this in mind when you hear that the generation that sees "certain things" come to pass (like Israel becoming a nation) will be the generation that is alive for the return of Christ.

One theory I have about scientists is that some of their logic could be flawed, though not necessarily by fault of their own. I mean consider how many scientists are not believers, and how much of their "evidence" refutes the scripture.

This may be by design folks, as in we are free to choose what to believe in. Therefore we have scientific evidence to believe or in many cases we have a very different version in the scripture. We are told in the bible that we will be tempted by the other side, and the other side will be more and more convincing in the end times.
z edge is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 09:30 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Lilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: back and to the left
Posts: 8,523
Local Time: 01:16 PM
i know what sting2 is talking about. how there aren't really times in the Bible, just eras. like the seven days in which He created the world could have been thousands of years, we just don't know that.


at any rate, carbon dating isn't the most accurate thing on earth either. it can be off with a range from 4,000-6,000 years. carbon dating only gives paleontologists a clue to the era. by gathering era clues we can understand the progression of the era.
Lilly is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 09:31 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:16 PM

Interesting reponses so far..

DB9
diamond is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 09:41 PM   #9
I serve MacPhisto
 
z edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the HORROR
Posts: 4,022
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
I do not particularly care how S/he did it or how long it took.
S/he?

I believe Jesus created in the image of the Father, in the flesh is not a S/he.

Plus, if God were a woman, we would never have gotten a second chance

(a little humor, don't flame)
z edge is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 10:05 PM   #10
Kid A
 
The Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Holy Roman Empire
Posts: 5,271
Local Time: 02:16 PM
did Dinosaur Jr. break-up?
The Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 10:10 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by The Wanderer
did Dinosaur Jr. break-up?
Brother Wanderer-
Pass me that FATTY, and lets at least try and stay on topic ok?
Thanks

DB9
diamond is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 10:54 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
oliveu2cm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Live from Boston
Posts: 8,334
Local Time: 03:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by z edge


S/he?

I believe Jesus created in the image of the Father, in the flesh is not a S/he.

and I believe we are ALL created in the image of God, thank you very much
oliveu2cm is offline  
Old 07-08-2002, 11:40 PM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Giant Lemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: out in the slipstream
Posts: 3,265
Local Time: 07:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by z edge
S/he?

I believe Jesus created in the image of the Father, in the flesh is not a S/he.
This doesn't answer the original question (sorry, Diamond!), but I felt compelled to say that I believe that both God and Jesus are portrayed as/were men because we live in a male dominated society and women are not traditionally seen as authority figures. Personally, I don't believe God has a gender, and I think the only reason Jesus was a man was because a woman wouldn't have been listened to. Just my $0.02.
Giant Lemon is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 01:30 AM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Stories for Boys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: chicago
Posts: 5,876
Local Time: 02:16 PM
i'm with z edge on this one (as well as lilly and others).....time is not the important thing.....god always has been and always will be.....we live for what? 80 years?.....of course our understanding of time is a bit jaded.....i mean, that's no excuse or easy cop out, but i truly believe that time in and of itself is not important....
Stories for Boys is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 06:57 AM   #15
The Fly
 
Truly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 218
Local Time: 07:16 PM
I think a lot of Genesis is metaphorical. I think it's stupid to try to work out exact dates and things based on it, because a lot of it isn't true - Adam and Eve for example. I was reading a thread yesterday where someone explained why the story of Adam and Eve was made up, (but I can't remember it exactly so I won't try to explain or I'll only get it wrong.)

I really don't see why people are so concerned about exactly how humans came to exist and things like that. In the end it doesn't matter to me how God created us, it matters that He did. If only people didn't feel the need to know absolutely everything, things would be a lot simpler.
Truly is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 07:49 AM   #16
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 02:16 PM
I've used the Obi-Wan approach to the early Old Testament for a while now: I believe Genesis, for example, is true, from a certain point of view.

Allow me to elaborate. If you stare at a single object, everything else in your field of view seems fuzzy; your peripheral vision is blurred. Those objects aren't actually fuzzy, but we can't ascertain any details of those objects while staring at the first object.

In the Bible, the Incarnation of Jesus Christ (God becoming a man who was born just over two thousand years ago) is THE central focus. We are to take as literal truth His birth, life, death, and resurrection.

If we look too far away from that central event, the Bible moves from literal truth to metaphorical truth. Going forward, we run into the Revelation, the prophetic (and almost clearly metaphorical) vision of the future. Going all the way backward, we find Genesis, and the assertion that the universe was created in six days. I believe that both should be taken as metaphor - truth, but not fact.

I could well be wrong - God could have made the world exactly as described in Genesis. If that's so, it doesn't affect my faith. My faith does not hinge a specific interpretation of Genesis.

But at the same time, I still believe the story of creation has some worthwhile truths about God and His creation: He DID create the universe, one way or another. We are a very special (possibly unique) creation of God's, created "in His image." And we were once His faithful creations, have since fallen into sin, and will be redeemed.

The biggest question that remains is this: at what point does metaphor become literal truth?

Well, it certainly seems the lives of King David and Jesus are to be taken literally, and it seems the first chapter of Genesis and most of Revelation is to be taken metaphorically. The line is somewhere in between.

I personally think the lines can be drawn from about Genesis 12 to Revelation 3: everything between those two chapters should be taken as literal truth. (The only possible exception is prophecy and parable, which should be interpreted as metaphor, but even that should be accepted as the literal words of the teacher.)

(Again, it's possible that earlier chapters in Genesis and later chapters in Revelation are to be taken literally, too; what I've given is the bare minimum of my personal belief.)

And one last thing of note on this issue:

Do NOT interpret a passage as metaphor on the basis that it contains the miraculous.

As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:12-19, if Christ WASN'T raised from the dead, then Christians are the most miserable and pitiable men on the planet.

The Resurrection MUST be taken literally. If THAT can be taken literally, so too can all of Christ's miracles - parlor tricks compared to the Resurrection.

And if Christ did walk on water and raise Lazarus, then it's equally possible that God literally parted the sea in Exodus.


And as a final note, in response to an issue raised in this thread, I believe that God is honestly neither a he nor a she - that He had no body and thus no gender/sex.

That said, the Bible uses words like "Father" and "Son" to describe the relationship between the First Person of the Trinity and the Second Person, and I believe those words are useful in communicating to us certain aspects about that relationship. It's useful to keep in mind those terms only go so far, but that doesn't mean we should stop using them.

It's kinda like when Christ said He is "the way, the truth, and the life." When He said He is "the way," He didn't literally mean a paved road, but the term is still useful.

(It's also easier for a human to have pray in personal terms to a "he" like God or a "she" like Mary. Praying to God as an "it" or "s/he" may make a personal relationship that much more difficult.)

And if God Himself is not really male, if the Second Person of the Trinity isn't really male, Jesus Christ (the Incarnation of the Second Person) IS LITERALLY MALE.

Jesus was literally the child of a specific human (Mary) and hailed from a certain part of the world (Nazareth). He was literally a "he."
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 07:50 AM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,604
Local Time: 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Truly
I think a lot of Genesis is metaphorical. I think it's stupid to try to work out exact dates and things based on it, because a lot of it isn't true - Adam and Eve for example. I was reading a thread yesterday where someone explained why the story of Adam and Eve was made up, (but I can't remember it exactly so I won't try to explain or I'll only get it wrong.)
There needn't have been an actual Garden of Eden or a forbidden fruit, but it's crucially important to Christian doctrine that the Fall actually happened in some form.

As you mentioned, the story of a paradise lost is a very popular "myth" ("myth" meaning "sacred story", not necessarily "nonsensical fabrication") in many cultures.
speedracer is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 08:13 AM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 12:16 PM

Some of you are getting closer..
I will elaborate later.
I think it will make sense.

DB9
:idea:
diamond is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 08:30 AM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 02:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Giant Lemon


This doesn't answer the original question (sorry, Diamond!), but I felt compelled to say that I believe that both God and Jesus are portrayed as/were men because we live in a male dominated society and women are not traditionally seen as authority figures. Personally, I don't believe God has a gender, and I think the only reason Jesus was a man was because a woman wouldn't have been listened to. Just my $0.02.
AMEN!

God is not a man.
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 07-09-2002, 09:52 AM   #20
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,760
Local Time: 08:16 PM
I agree that the labelling of god in chrisitanity as Father is more for the understanding of the audience than anythign else.

this article was posted in FYM a while back

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...p?story=106705


interesting to say the least
__________________

V Nura is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×