Christianity... Destiny

So you think there is some significance that some biblical character's names sound vaguely like some words for particles and electronics in English?

I agree that you can get that reading from an inerrantist view of the Bible. I however don't believe that God does know the future in the way that we think of it as I believe that the future is unknowable. One of my Christian influences is John Polkinghorne who was a renowned physicist and changed his career path in his late 40's to theology. Here is a portion of an interview he gave a few years ago.

quote:

---

MS. TIPPETT: I think you also bring your theology and your science together interestingly in seeing that there's also something going on in the world, and including human beings' interaction with nature at any given time, that there are sort of competing freedoms. I think that's a very interesting, complex idea.

​

DR. POLKINGHORNE: Yeah. Well, I think we live in a world of true becoming. That's to say, I don't think that the future is fixed; I don't think God fixed it. I think God allows creatures to be themselves.

​

MS. TIPPETT: Does God know it?

​

DR. POLKINGHORNE: If we live in a world of true becoming so that we play our little parts in making the future and I believe God's providence also plays a part in making the future, and also the laws of nature that God has ordained play a part in constraining the form of the future if that's the sort of world in which we live, then I think actually even God doesn't know the future. And that's not an imperfection, because the future is not yet there to be known. Now, that's a very controversial view, and not everybody, by any matter of means

​

MS. TIPPETT: We'll let you have it here.

​

DR. POLKINGHORNE: has agreed with me about that, but that's how it seems to me. And I think that, you see, there's been a very important development in theological thinking in the 20th century, and it's reflected in all sorts of quite different theologians, but they have this thing in common: They see that the act of creation, the act of bringing into being a world in which creatures are allowed to be themselves, to make themselves, is an act of love and it is an act of divine self-limitation. The theologians like to call it kenosis from the Greek word, and so that God is not the puppet master of the universe, pulling every string. God has taken, if you like, a risk. Creation is more like an improvisation than the performance of a fixed score that God wrote in eternity. And that sort of world of becoming involves God's accepting limitations, and I believe, accepting limitations not knowing the future. That doesn't mean, of course, that God will be caught out by the future in the same way that you and I are. I mean, God can see how history is moving, so to speak, but God has to react to the way history moves. Now, that makes, to me, quite a lot of sense about the world.

---

Here is a link to the whole interview which I think addresses many of your questions. John Polkinhorne interviewHope this helps.

I have wrote the facts as I see them
If you look at the story of Adam and Eve more closely Eve was taken basically from the shell of Adam? It only goes to show there are more coincidences than you think. plus one of the points people have missed is the story of Noah and how the animals get put into the Ark two by two, there are two serpents in the story?
There is another point to make, that is there is a star formation called the serpent.

Why are creationists always this bonkers or thereabouts?Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Well I guess it sort of goes with the territory....

As a believer, I would add that I don't think anyone can fully understand God---though tangle cuts me off in another thread...where he states: If I were to accept this premise, it would basically mean game over for believers--atheists would have a slam dunk regarding the existance of the Christian God and of Jesus Christ--His character. I will continually argue against this. I agree. To be honest, I can't accept the way that creationists try and contort science to fit their preconceived religious beliefs---it is in my opinion dishonest on so many levels. To take the question further...I don't think anyone can fully understand why some people are so fully convinced of what is seen as unevidenced beliefs. For many of them, the beliefs at some point of their internal formation were most definitely evidential. I have my reasons why I don't simply toss my beliefs away...though some would argue that emotional insecurity lies at the core of my stubbornness.

That doesn't follow. You might as well argue that there were two Noahs, two arks, two Moseses, two Arks of two Covenants, two Jesuses....Hint: Throw numerology in the garbage.

Facts? What facts? Yeah, have you ever noticed the 9 looks like an upside down 6? Coincidence? I think not. Wow, I completely missed the significance of this.

If God didn't create the decision... then the person did?
If the person created the decision... then there is some point-in-time that God did not know about the decision (it wasn't create yet). If there if some point-in-time that God didn't know about the decision... then God doesn't have "ultimate" foreknowledge.That's not a problem in and of itself. I think God would prefer the idea of free will over "ultimate" foreknowledge.
But I suppose that's up to everyone's individual opinion on what their idea of God should be.

Oh I forgot to say I see the bible completely different, I see some of it as instructions and some in a different light to others.
can do without the petty remarks, just let me get on with it,in other words if you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all
the bible has five endings like a cross, it also has seven seals as you will see?
its difficult to write it all at once
if you can't see where this is going then I'm sorry

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard of the RPG game, Far Cry 5?

Oh ok. I see how you see it. God could not know certain things in time if the things were caused by human decisions within time. Got it. I always saw it as God knowing everything that would happen simply because He was at every moment in time when a decision was being made. But I see your point.
It would also explain why Jesus,being forced to live in time, could not and did not know everything that the Father knew.My point was that since the Father was at every point in time, He essentially would have access to ultimate foreknowledge, but perhaps this was not part of His judgment, which was based on either knowing or not knowing Jesus at a given point in the life of a human. We would maintain that such an option was available to everyone ever living, but I'm not sure how that would play out.As far as ringos insistence that only the message was important and that obedience to the message was evidence of belief through works, this would mean that even an atheist would essentially accept Jesus by doing the message. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

There is also one named Cancer.It reminded folks of a crab.So what?Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

funny you mention the crab
rev10 are the crabs the star formation is cancer the crab and this chapter holds the cure for cancer.

I think this is a new standard of bonkers.