Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 0/368 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Creationism
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 10 of 91 (66896)
11-16-2003 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Zealot
11-16-2003 3:47 PM


Adam and Eve became mortal and died. God's Word came true.
But they didn't die that day. Which is what God says will happen:
quote:
16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."
So God's word didn't come true.
After all if somebody said "Don't eat that orange, you'll die if you do", wouldn't you take that to mean that you'll die the minute - the day, at least -you ate the orange? And if I came by and said "whoever told you that you'll die is wrong. You can eat the orange." And if you did eat it, and didn't die, wouldn't you conclude I was right?
Why does the meaning of those utterances change when we're talking about different fruit?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Zealot, posted 11-16-2003 3:47 PM Zealot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 9:26 AM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 23 of 91 (67112)
11-17-2003 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Zealot
11-17-2003 9:26 AM


Considering Adam and Eve were immortals, the transition from immortal to mortal would imply that when they eat from it, they would start dying, from that very day.
Maybe, but that's not a literal interpretation, don't you think?
It literally says they'll die that day. Not that they'll start dying.
If I told you "you're going to die today", wouldn't you assume I meant that you would be dead by the end of the day? Why is it then that you assume God meant something else by the very same words?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 9:26 AM Zealot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by NosyNed, posted 11-17-2003 4:00 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 25 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 4:11 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 27 of 91 (67139)
11-17-2003 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Zealot
11-17-2003 4:11 PM


Yes, but what death was He talking about ? Death to the grave, or spiritual death ?
What death did you think I was talking about when I said it? If I was talking about a metaphorical, not literal, death, wouldn't I have said so when I said it?
But I didn't qualify "death", and neither does God. I think it's safe to assume, therefore, that we're both talking about the same kind of death.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 4:11 PM Zealot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 4:38 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 36 of 91 (67186)
11-17-2003 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Zealot
11-17-2003 4:38 PM


If God talked about a literal death (IE: Adam falling to the ground choking), he would have died that day.
Unless God was wrong, which is my point. God can only be made correct here if you're willing to twist language to match your preconceptions, and that's hardly a literal approach to the text, don't you think?
Your options are spiritual death, or removal of immortality.
Only if you're already committed to God never being wrong. If you're willing to entertain the notion that God could make a statement in error, or lie, then the text makes much more sense, and you don't have to twist the words. That's the third option that you don't list - God's statements are literally inaccurate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Zealot, posted 11-17-2003 4:38 PM Zealot has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 37 of 91 (67187)
11-17-2003 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Itachi Uchiha
11-17-2003 5:41 PM


ominpotente(spanish for all powerful).
That's "omnipotent", and it's from the Latin, yo.
And believe me pal nothing comes from nothing. My little sister can prove that
And yet, science proves you wrong. Stuff is always coming out of empty space, at every point, at every moment. Something from nothing happens all the time at the quantum level.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 11-17-2003 5:41 PM Itachi Uchiha has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 11-17-2003 6:04 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 41 of 91 (67199)
11-17-2003 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Itachi Uchiha
11-17-2003 6:04 PM


i dont know. Who gives a crap anyways?
Gosh, people who care about knowing stuff and not looking stupid, I guess.
The energy in the universe is constant and it conserves itself.
It may be largely constant, but over a very small scale, it fluctuates. This is a necessary outcome of the uncertainty principle.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 11-17-2003 6:04 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024