is this the same flood that noah experienced?
what's your thinking on the "numbered" geneologies?
like, "Arpachshad lived thirty-five years, and became the father of Shelah"
getting dates about a young earth
- Thread starter Dan_473
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
is this the same flood that noah experienced?
what's your thinking on the "numbered" geneologies?
like, "Arpachshad lived thirty-five years, and became the father of Shelah"
T
Tintin
Guest
Yes, Maths most certainly isn't my forte, but it's still a d@mn sight better than yours. Shem living 2000 years? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Show me where my Maths is wrong in my post. I won't be offended. Just remember it includes both BC years (the number of years Before Christ) and AM (the number of years from Creation).
The other half to this definition is explained by Dan Wallace in his book 'Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics'...in which 'this contrasts with the present and imperfect, which portray the action of an ongoing process. It may be helpful to think of the aorist as taking a snapshot of the action while the imperfect (like the present) takes a motion picture, portraying action as it unfolds.'
Thus....the reader is told in Heb 2.14 that Satan was already bound at The Cross.
He was rendered impotent.
It is completed action.....not action that is taking place, or that will take place in the future.
Its already a done deal.
Most people these days deny that Satan is bound, and give him full credit and praises for the evil in this world....an honor that he most assuredly does not deserve....all the while denying what Jesus did for us on The Cross!
Last edited:
You obviously get your 'Satan is unbound' doctrine at the same place you get your YEC doctrine......a lonely place called ignorance...
Clinic time...
1 Peter 5.8
νηψατε γρηγορησατε ο αντιδικος υμων διαβολος ως λεων ωρυομενος περιπατει ζητων καταπιειν
nēpsate grēgorēsate ho antidikos hymōn diabolos hōs leōn ōryomenos peripatei zētōn tina katapiein
Be sober-minded, watch, the adversary devil of you walks about as a roaring lion seeking whom to devour;
This passage does not refer to ‘The Devil’ himself, as ‘diabolos’ is anarthrous (i.e. it lacks a preceding Greek definite article).
Further, ‘ho antidikos’ (the adversary) is used in only one other NT passage, Mat 5.25, and is in the context of being thrown into prison.
1 Peter 5.8
νηψατε γρηγορησατε ο αντιδικος υμων διαβολος ως λεων ωρυομενος περιπατει ζητων καταπιειν
nēpsate grēgorēsate ho antidikos hymōn diabolos hōs leōn ōryomenos peripatei zētōn tina katapiein
Be sober-minded, watch, the adversary devil of you walks about as a roaring lion seeking whom to devour;
This passage does not refer to ‘The Devil’ himself, as ‘diabolos’ is anarthrous (i.e. it lacks a preceding Greek definite article).
Further, ‘ho antidikos’ (the adversary) is used in only one other NT passage, Mat 5.25, and is in the context of being thrown into prison.
We were talking about the formation of Eve.
Gen 2 informs the reader that Adam was formed out of the dust of the ground....this is as ground-up as you get....obviously NO deception of age here!
That's not exegesis, my friend.
You would have to post the scripture for us, and then explain the original words...
The problem with your assumption is that it ignores the text.
One event is clearly labeled as a miracle.
The other events (plural) are shown to be sequentially going from simple, to more and more complex in stages.
There would not be any need to have sequential stages of development if they had the appearance of age to begin with.
S
secondtimearound
Guest
Well, for one reason why what you say isn't true, is because in Isaiah 45:18 God said He did NOT... create the earth tohuw.
He said He created the earth to be inhabited. If you don't know what I'm talking about in His Word with that Hebrew word tohuw, then it shows you actually have not looked into this matter in His Word for yourself of how this earth is very ancient.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
as I remember it, we were talking about both adam and eve.
I understood you to be saying that when they were formed (adam from dust, eve from adam's bone), they were formed as newborns.
did I misunderstand that?
the passage is 1 sam 16. since samuel only anoints one person in place of saul, I assumed it wasn't necessary to indicate that.
https://www.wordnik.com/words/exegesis
"...the exposition or interpretation of Scripture."
I showed how I interpreted the passage, and how it fits as a possible analogy of how God created the universe.
if that doesn't look like exegesis to you, then I decline your request that I exegete the passage.
whatever they are they are not directly consecutive, unless you accept that Shem was alive when Abraham died. (there are other problems too).
I disagree that I ignored the text. I agree it's a miracle, in which something has the appearance of undergoing a process that in fact it didn't undergo... possibly the same as the universe.
I believe the creation/forming of the universe is a miracle as well.
given that God did create the world in stages, I don't know how a human could draw conclusions about why s/he did it that way, unless they know God's thoughts at the time.
is this the same flood that noah experienced?
I can accept the possibility that Shem was alive when Abraham died.
is there a difficulity in there somewhere?
true, genealogies are sometimes not consecutive... I think Matthew's is that way.
but in Matthew's case, there seems to be a reason... seems he wants there to be 14 generations in each section.
also we have other histories of the people Matthew talks about to compare genealogies with.
why do you believe they aren't consecutive?
what is the scripture communicating?
so you think the ice age was 180 years after the Flood? LOL My friend historical records are against you
and many creationists disagree with you
Last edited:
Adam and Eve were created and raised as children, as indicated by the text.
Again...a child from the ground-up....Adam from dust....and Eve from his side.
The reader is informed of a process involved with each one.
Adam was not created out of nothing, looking like an adult.
Eve was not created out of nothing, looking like an adult.
YEC's are unable to accept this because they are attempting to make scripture fit within a 24hr day...and, as I already stated...this makes for some pretty outrageous doctrines for the YEC.