AChristian correctly explained this one. In addition to what he said, there is also the thought that the plants here are those that required cultivation, not wild plants or other vegatation that appeared on "day" three.
Posts by RWC
-
26Creation Story Contradiction
by JosephAlward inthe two different creation stories in genesis contradict each other in the matter of the order of the creation of man and vegetation.
in the first story, vegetation was created on the third day, and three days later man was created.
however, in the second creation story, there was no vegetation before man.
-
-
-
26
Holy Week Rocks
by RWC inas some of you may know this week is the most holy week in the christian faith.
it is the week that jesus, true god and yet true man, willingly gave up his life including all of the pain that went with his cruel death, to save us from our sins.
he opened the door for all to be saved and have eternal life.
-
-
RWC
Funkyderek, Jesus died on the cross for the sins of all including those in the future. Yours included. Sin is a wrong against God. It seperates us from him and without the reconcilation of Jesus, we would never bridge that gap. That is why Jesus is our Savior.
Sins come in all shape and sizes, some serious and some not so serious, but ever since the fall of man, we have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. So nobody but Jesus has ever been born without sin.
You can choose not to believe it and that is your free will. But it is a gift that has already been made available to you.
-
26
Holy Week Rocks
by RWC inas some of you may know this week is the most holy week in the christian faith.
it is the week that jesus, true god and yet true man, willingly gave up his life including all of the pain that went with his cruel death, to save us from our sins.
he opened the door for all to be saved and have eternal life.
-
-
RWC
As some of you may know this week is the most holy week in the Christian faith. It is the week that Jesus, true God and yet true man, willingly gave up his life including all of the pain that went with his cruel death, to save us from our sins. He opened the door for all to be saved and have eternal life. It is a truly remarkable story of reconciliation and redemption. To anyone who has had even the least amount of interest in the Christian faith it is this death and ressurection of our Savoir that sets this faith apart.
During this time of the Passion I extend to all of you, atheists included, the true spirit of this week and pray that all may find the joy that this time represents.
God Bless
-
43
Was Noah's Flood Local?
by JosephAlward inachristian believes those who think the bible teaches that the flood was global look foolish.
he wrote, .
i encourage all christians to investigate the possibility that the bible does not really teach that the whole earth was flooded at the time of noah.
-
-
RWC
Joseph, I stay out of these flood threads for the most part because I contend that the idea of a global verses a "local" flood are a matter of interpretation and we may never know which interpretation is correct and was intended. But I could not resist this one.
Whether a man such as Noah telling the story from his perspective believed that the flood was global would make a lot of sense. He did not have satellite images of the globe. The Bible does not tell us that God told him it was local, so you are assuming that he would have too know that. The more logical assumption is that he believed it was global.
-
140
Just As In the Days of Noah
by Farkel insince the bible makes it clear that jesus believed in the scriptural account of the flood and since the evidence that a worldwide flood as described in that same scriptural account would have been virtually impossible, why should anyone trust jesus to be man's redeemer and the only begotten son of god?.
farkel
-
-
RWC
Joseph, This is an interesting article. however if you read it close it fails to say two things. One, when the story of Babylon first originated and two, how it made its way to Canaan. The article states that the first part of the epic derives from the second millienium B.C. It doesn't say when it ws written down.If you have any additional information on this I would like to see it.
It is known that the Noah account was an oral tradition of the Hebrew nation long before it was written, so how do we know who copied from who?
-
5
Forty Days Motif
by JosephAlward inafter the flood which lasted forty days, it seems that there were an unusual number of bible events lasting exactly forty days.
there are eighteen separate events of duration greater than ten days, and 61% of the time the event lasted exactly forty days.
only seven of eighteen events did not last forty days [1], while the other eleven lasted forty days [2].
-
-
RWC
Joseph, You can go further by looking at the number forty. You will notice that the writers also used forty years alot. But there is a reason for this. Generations were commonly referred to as forty years.In these instances, the Bible is not attempting necessarily to make an exact chronology. The same may be true for the forty days that you mention. We may not know if those were a literal forty days or a symbolic passage of time.
But from there, I know you make the leap that the events never happened. So how do you get there?
-
72
Question for Atheists
by RWC inchristians who believe in the bible and the teachings of christ use that as a moral core and code of conduct.
for those who don't believe in god, where do you get your sense of moral right and wrong?
what is your moral foundation?
-
-
RWC
I realize I started this, but you guys have taken it far further than I anticipated. Thank you.
I do have a question. Are you considering humanism akin to a religion?
It seems to me that there will never be a transition from theism to humanism. The more things swing away from religion in a culture, inevitably they swing back. I do not think that the majority of man will ever look to his fellow humans for the needs that are filled by a belief in God. The idea that we are becoiming so enlightened that we will one day be able to rely upon ourselves is thinking that has come and gone again and again throughout history.
-
38
Response to RWC's Atheist Questions
by Liberty inhi rwc,.
i'm sure you're a very nice person and i don't want to get into an argument but rather a civil debate.
i just wanted to point out that as ex-jws many of us are a little obsessed with truth (not to be confused with "the truth" tm) and that after being burned by the watchtower society and hating ourselves for being so stupid to have fallen for its bs we have now become highly skeptical of the bible as well.
-
-
RWC
Liberty, first let me address your points. As for the origin of the universe, I would agree with you that the Bible tells us that God is eternal, that he has always been. Based upon a belief in the Bible therefore he had no beginning. I don't expect you to agree with that, but that is a Christian perspective. From a scientific perspective to stay within the realm of our understanding, the materials to create the Big Bang must have come from somewhere, because science tells us that something cannot come from nothing. We don't know the answer to that question scientifically yet, so to reject God based upon science, you are placing your belief in an unknown.
Your thoughts on the flood as being a reason to reject the entire bible are interesting. The creation and the flood account comprise the first nine chpaters of the first book of the Bible. Whether they are to be taken literally or not is really a matter of our understanding. Suppose God never meant the accounts to be taken literally and that as Abbaddon puts it, he made it simple so Bronze Age Goatherders could understand it. Does the fact that these stories should not be taken literally mean that the events never happened, or is that really a problem of our lack of understanding? And is this lack of understanding a reason to reject the entire Bible and all that it teaches?
As for the tower of Babel, the problem there was not really the heighth of the tower and I am not sure that the tower is ever described as to a particular height. Nor does the Bible say that God was scared of the tower or of man. It was really a question of man's pride and lack of trust in God that was the issue.
The chronolgy you mention can really only go back so far. The first "seven days" are unkown as to how long they really were. Again that is a question of literal or not literal interpretation.
As for your comments that God should call down from the heavens and tell everyone that he is here, that would destroy the need for faith. And even if he did, those who did not hear it would question whether it happened. I contend that God has made his presence known through out the ages and the message of salvation is known. You clearly know it, but have chosen not to beleive it. So it is not a matter of lack of knowledge.
-
140
Just As In the Days of Noah
by Farkel insince the bible makes it clear that jesus believed in the scriptural account of the flood and since the evidence that a worldwide flood as described in that same scriptural account would have been virtually impossible, why should anyone trust jesus to be man's redeemer and the only begotten son of god?.
farkel
-
-
RWC
This board has alot of discussions about the flood and whether it was global or not. Some say it should be taken literally others say it shouldn't. Skeptics say it scientifically couldn't have been global so if that is the proper interpretation, the Bible cannot be taken as being true.
My thoughts on this debate are :
1. The problem of whether the flood account was intended to be taken as a literal world flood or as an account of God's judgment on mankind through an allegory is really a question of interpretation, not of whether the event happened.
2. Those who use the account of the flood ( and creation )as a reason to throw out the entire Bible are using the first nine chapters of the first book of the Bible to discount the rest of it. Again this is really a question of interpretation and not on whether God created the universe or passed judgment on his people.
If the real question is only whether the accounts are taken literally or not, than the problem is our lack of understanding on the proper interpretation, not on whether God exists or dealt with his creation. The fact that the Bible has proven time and again to be a reliable source of history ( more so than any other spiritual text) more logically should be taken into account than dismissing it because of a problem of the proper interpretation of the first nine chapters of teh first book.
-
54
Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm
by JosephAlward ini've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.
i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.
in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.
-
-
RWC
One more thought, how do you explain that Paul taught that Jesus was the messiah using the old testament scriptures which I listed? The Bible clearly says he did