| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Ananias917" |
| Date: |
28 Dec 2005 11:42:46 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
On 29 Dec 2005 01:28:26 GMT, "stone"
<antiaging@ineedhits-mail.com> spake thusly:
There are some people that think that the geneology of the human race given
in the bible is a partial geneology, and this could make the timing of
Noah's flood go back much further into history, if that is true. There are
good reasons to think that Noah's flood goes back much further into the
past.
No there isn't.
The archeological evidence for the history of man does go back farther
than the bible would say, if the geneology was all there.
No, there isn't. There is not one shred of
archaeological evidence for that position.
Now you make sure and tell me how wrong
I am about the Bible, when I say something.
After all, stating that the Bible isn't accurate,
is a good basis upon which to claim that
someone else is in error for not believing
that Jesus will physically/bodily ride a cloud.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
Matthew 16:27-28
27) For the Son of man shall come in the glory
of his Father with his angels; and then he shall
reward every man according to his works.
28) Verily I say unto you, There be some standing
here, which shall not taste of death, till they
see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Jesus said He would return within the lifetime
of the Apostles. we know this, because Jesus
said SOME (at least one, not not most) would
be alive when this happened.
This is not the Transfiguration. There was no
coming with the Father's angels and no judging
every man according to His works and they were
all still alive.
This is not Pentecost. There was no coming with
the Father's angels and no judging every man
according to His works and they were all but one,
still alive.
Now see a verse that no one argues is about
His Second Coming and see that this is what
Jesus was referring to, in Matthew 16:27-28.
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward
is with me, to give every man according as
his work shall be." - Revelation 22:12
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.
|
|
| User: "Willy" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
29 Dec 2005 10:02:35 AM |
|
|
"Ananias917" <_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1qt6r1hcnj4t39mh56875sm6q6q0vqv5c8@4ax.com...
On 29 Dec 2005 01:28:26 GMT, "stone"
<antiaging@ineedhits-mail.com> spake thusly:
There are some people that think that the geneology of the human race
given
in the bible is a partial geneology, and this could make the timing of
Noah's flood go back much further into history, if that is true. There are
good reasons to think that Noah's flood goes back much further into the
past.
No there isn't.
The archeological evidence for the history of man does go back farther
than the bible would say, if the geneology was all there.
No, there isn't. There is not one shred of
archaeological evidence for that position.
Now you make sure and tell me how wrong
I am about the Bible, when I say something.
After all, stating that the Bible isn't accurate,
is a good basis upon which to claim that
someone else is in error for not believing
that Jesus will physically/bodily ride a cloud.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
Matthew 16:27-28
27) For the Son of man shall come in the glory
of his Father with his angels; and then he shall
reward every man according to his works.
28) Verily I say unto you, There be some standing
here, which shall not taste of death, till they
see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Jesus said He would return within the lifetime
of the Apostles. we know this, because Jesus
said SOME (at least one, not not most) would
be alive when this happened.
This is not the Transfiguration. There was no
coming with the Father's angels and no judging
every man according to His works and they were
all still alive.
This is not Pentecost. There was no coming with
the Father's angels and no judging every man
according to His works and they were all but one,
still alive.
Now see a verse that no one argues is about
His Second Coming and see that this is what
Jesus was referring to, in Matthew 16:27-28.
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward
is with me, to give every man according as
his work shall be." - Revelation 22:12
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
There will come a time, and hopefully within our lifespan, when the
scriptural literalists will have NO choice but to reckon with the reality of
science and historical facts. I love the Holy Scripture, but I also know
that it must be taken from a literary point of view rather than a literal
one. Did the story of Noah happen? Yes, most likely it did. But the myths
and stories that surround it may or may not be totally true. And were there
other humans on the earth that didn't drown? Most likely since we can now
see that the whole earth didn't flood, rather the section of earth that they
occupied in all probability. So what they wrote was true based on the
knowledge that they had. To them, it definitely seemed that the WHOLE WORLD
was under water, and indeed, archeology does confirm there is evidence of a
tremendous flood in their region.
The good news is that the "theme" of the New Testament is GOOD NEWS.. for
everyone. Our sins have been dealt with ... and salvation is in place for
every person.
Willy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ananias917" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
29 Dec 2005 12:06:36 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:02:35 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
The good news is that the "theme" of the New Testament is GOOD NEWS.. for
everyone. Our sins have been dealt with ... and salvation is in place for
every person.
Sorry, but that's impossible, if the beginning is not
true. There is no "original sin" if we "evolved".
We're just animals as God created us to be and
therefore, He would be punishing us for being what
He created us to be.
Remove original sin and you have removed the Savior.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
Evolution =
Unknown chemicals in the primordial past...through...
Unknown processes which no longer exist...produced...
Unknown life forms which are not to be found, but
could through...
Unknown reproduction methods spawn new life...in an..
Unknown atmospheric composition...in an...
Unknown oceanic soup complex...at an...
Unknown time and place.
Dr. Henry Morris
.
|
|
|
| User: "Willy" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
30 Dec 2005 08:07:27 AM |
|
|
"Ananias917" <_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ka98r1dpfknt6grsfg68237m4886lotmlb@4ax.com...
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:02:35 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
The good news is that the "theme" of the New Testament is GOOD NEWS.. for
everyone. Our sins have been dealt with ... and salvation is in place for
every person.
Sorry, but that's impossible, if the beginning is not
true. There is no "original sin" if we "evolved".
We're just animals as God created us to be and
therefore, He would be punishing us for being what
He created us to be.
Remove original sin and you have removed the Savior.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
Evolution =
Unknown chemicals in the primordial past...through...
Unknown processes which no longer exist...produced...
Unknown life forms which are not to be found, but
could through...
Unknown reproduction methods spawn new life...in an..
Unknown atmospheric composition...in an...
Unknown oceanic soup complex...at an...
Unknown time and place.
Dr. Henry Morris
You have NEVER heard me say we evolved, nor have you seen me argue in favor
of evolution.
Do I believe creation happened exactly as written "literally" in scripture?
Of course not, and neither do you even though you say you do. You would
probably be the first to take a cautious position on issues like whether or
not it was REALLY just 7 days, or perhaps you would apply the "one day is as
a thousand years" routine - or whatever. You would have to do some serious
back peddling if you were to try and reconcile the two completely differernt
"noah stories" in Genesis. You would say you believe the scripture
literally, but in reality, just as myself, you do not.
I'm merely more open to considering that the intent of the story is true...
that we are made in the image of God, that sin entered into man, that Christ
paid the price, and that salvation is available to everyone, and whether or
not scripture should be taken literally or figuratively (philisophically)
does NOT matter. It's the MESSAGE that matters.
And I do love the scripture, I love my church, and I am a Christian.
Willy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ian Zech" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
30 Dec 2005 10:05:45 AM |
|
|
"Willy" <willyk@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:zabtf.511$801.393@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
"Ananias917" <_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ka98r1dpfknt6grsfg68237m4886lotmlb@4ax.com...
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:02:35 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
The good news is that the "theme" of the New Testament is GOOD NEWS..
for
everyone. Our sins have been dealt with ... and salvation is in place
for
every person.
Sorry, but that's impossible, if the beginning is not
true. There is no "original sin" if we "evolved".
We're just animals as God created us to be and
therefore, He would be punishing us for being what
He created us to be.
Remove original sin and you have removed the Savior.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
Evolution =
Unknown chemicals in the primordial past...through...
Unknown processes which no longer exist...produced...
Unknown life forms which are not to be found, but
could through...
Unknown reproduction methods spawn new life...in an..
Unknown atmospheric composition...in an...
Unknown oceanic soup complex...at an...
Unknown time and place.
Dr. Henry Morris
You have NEVER heard me say we evolved, nor have you seen me argue in
favor of evolution.
Do I believe creation happened exactly as written "literally" in
scripture? Of course not, and neither do you even though you say you do.
You would probably be the first to take a cautious position on issues like
whether or not it was REALLY just 7 days, or perhaps you would apply the
"one day is as a thousand years" routine - or whatever. You would have to
do some serious back peddling if you were to try and reconcile the two
completely differernt "noah stories" in Genesis. You would say you
believe the scripture literally, but in reality, just as myself, you do
not.
I'm merely more open to considering that the intent of the story is
true... that we are made in the image of God, that sin entered into man,
that Christ paid the price, and that salvation is available to everyone,
and whether or not scripture should be taken literally or figuratively
(philisophically) does NOT matter. It's the MESSAGE that matters.
And I do love the scripture, I love my church, and I am a Christian.
I don't see anything wrong with what you wrote here. I think Dave has a
problem with his original sin theory. The Catholic Church defined the
original sin dogma and here we have Dave, a Protestant, defending that dogma
or is he not instead condemning the theory of evolution using his Original
sin theology as an excuse. If he answers this post, he is sure to come up
with his Sola Scriptura slogan.
Mother Church tells you Dave that: :-)
''Whether God formed Adam directly from the dust of the earth or through
evolution does not have any bearing on doctrine already defined.''
"The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by
God - it is not 'produced' by the parents ..."
Dave is like an old stubborn mule. I'm also sure that his interpretation of
the first three chapters of Genesis is not a literal one. If I was wrong, I
would hate to have to call dave an old stubborn idiot. LOL.
Willy
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ananias917" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
30 Dec 2005 12:17:53 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 14:07:27 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
You have NEVER heard me say we evolved, nor have you seen me argue in favor
of evolution.
Do I believe creation happened exactly as written "literally" in scripture?
Of course not, and neither do you even though you say you do.
Don't tell me what I believe! You choose nor to
believe it and then try to convince yourself that
no one does, so you can feel better about calling
God a liar.
You would have to do some serious
back peddling if you were to try and reconcile the two completely differernt
"noah stories" in Genesis. You would say you believe the scripture
literally, but in reality, just as myself, you do not.
There aren't "two different Noah stories". You don't
even know what you're talking about and yet, you're not
only going to tell me what the Bible "really" says,
but what I believe? I don't think so.
You are probably referring to the so called,
"two creation accounts" problem.
There aren't two creation stories. There is no
contradiction, nor problem there and if you're
not bright enough to figure it out, then you
should ask for help, rather than tell everyone
else what they "really" believe.
I'm merely more open to considering that the intent of the story is true...
If Adam and Eve were not literal human beings,
then it's all lie.
God does not "just write the intent" veiled in a
false scenario and then leave us to figure it out.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
The Last Days were in the first century:
Revelation 1:1,3
1) The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God
gave unto him, to show unto his servants things
WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS; and he sent and
signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
2) Who bare record of the word of God, and of
the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things
that he saw.
3) Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear
the words of this prophecy, and keep those things
which are written therein: for THE TIME IS AT HAND.
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Willy" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
30 Dec 2005 03:21:39 PM |
|
|
"Ananias917" <_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:purar19koct3oh5h6lec5v7j084fd0nl09@4ax.com...
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 14:07:27 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
You have NEVER heard me say we evolved, nor have you seen me argue in
favor
of evolution.
Do I believe creation happened exactly as written "literally" in
scripture?
Of course not, and neither do you even though you say you do.
Don't tell me what I believe! You choose nor to
believe it and then try to convince yourself that
no one does, so you can feel better about calling
God a liar.
You would have to do some serious
back peddling if you were to try and reconcile the two completely
differernt
"noah stories" in Genesis. You would say you believe the scripture
literally, but in reality, just as myself, you do not.
There aren't "two different Noah stories". You don't
even know what you're talking about and yet, you're not
only going to tell me what the Bible "really" says,
but what I believe? I don't think so.
You are probably referring to the so called,
"two creation accounts" problem.
There aren't two creation stories. There is no
contradiction, nor problem there and if you're
not bright enough to figure it out, then you
should ask for help, rather than tell everyone
else what they "really" believe.
I'm merely more open to considering that the intent of the story is
true...
If Adam and Eve were not literal human beings,
then it's all lie.
God does not "just write the intent" veiled in a
false scenario and then leave us to figure it out.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
The Last Days were in the first century:
Revelation 1:1,3
1) The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God
gave unto him, to show unto his servants things
WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS; and he sent and
signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
2) Who bare record of the word of God, and of
the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things
that he saw.
3) Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear
the words of this prophecy, and keep those things
which are written therein: for THE TIME IS AT HAND.
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
You know, you actually made me laugh out loud. I can't believe you would
posture yourself in such a literal fashion.
Allow me to share a few facts with which there is no dispute among Biblical
scholars.
There are two stories of creation. The first three chapters of Genesis
contain two stories of creation, written about four hundred years apart.
The first one, Genesis 1.1-2.3 was probably written in the 500's BCE.
Commonly called the "priestly" or "p" story, it is part of a larger block of
material extending through the Pentateuch and reflecting priestly and ritual
concerns.
The second one was written earlier. It begins in Genesis 2.4 and continues
through the end of Chapter 3. Perhaps written in the 900's BCE, is is
commonly referred to amongst scholars as the "J" creation story, or
"Yahwist" because the author uses "yahweh" as the name of God. The Yahwist
story is also part of a larger narrative account of Israel's origins that
extended throughout much of the Pentateuch.
The two stories are quite different.
In the "p" story (and the bible as a whole) begins with the earth as "a
formless void". In the primeval darkness, the wind (or Spirit) of God moves
of the primordial waters.
The scriptures say "In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the
earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the
deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters".
AFter that, God creates the universe in six days. In a literary structure
repeated for each day of creation, the story begins with the creation of
light. In rapid succession the rest of the universe is created.
Day one: Light
Day two: Waters and the sky
Day three: dry land
Day four: sun, moon and stars
Day five: sea life and birds
Day six: land creatures
Then we are told on the seventh day God rests, thereby blessing and
hallowing that day as the sabbath.
In the "j" story which begins in Genesis 2:4, the writer focuses on the
creation of humankind and barely mentions the creation of the world. It
does NOT mention the creation of light, or firmament, or sun, moon and
stars, or sea creatures. Rather, it begins with the creation of humankind,
of "adham", a Hebrew word meaning "humankind" and often translated "man".
The creation of adham is the climax of the very long sentence with which the
story begins.
"In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant
of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung
up - for the Lord God had not yet caused it to rain upon the earth, and
there was no one to till the ground; but a stream would rise from the
earth, and water the whole face of the ground - then the Lord God formed
adham from the dust of the groudn, and breathed into his nostrils the breath
of life; and adham became a living being".
You see, the "p" story portrays humankind as the climax of creation by
having people created LAST, after everything else. The "J" story gives
humankind priority by having people created first, before vegetation and
animals. In the "P" story, humans as male and female are created
simultaneously. In the "J" story, the creation of woman comes later.
There is much more to be said, but my fingers are exhausted. I would
summarize by saying, without understanding WHY ancient Israel tells the
stories this way it would appear there is a clear conflict - for those that
take the scipture literally, which you imply you do.
So did Adam take the animals on board in pairs, or in sevens?
Willy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ananias917" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
30 Dec 2005 07:26:51 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 21:21:39 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
Allow me to share a few facts with which there is
no dispute among Biblical scholars.
This is how you know that what follows is a load
of crap.
There are two stories of creation.
And there's the lie that always follows a statement
like the one you made above.
So did Adam take the animals on board in pairs, or in sevens?
You know, you actually made me laugh out loud. I can't believe you would
posture yourself in such a literal fashion.
I see. So you are genuinely stupid. Okay, got it now.
You looked up a few items on some atheist, or liberal
web page and now think you're going to teach others.
And you can't even keep the people described in the
Bible straight. You're simply not very bright and it
comes through loud and clear, even in the WAY that
you write things.
You know, you actually made me laugh out loud.
I couldn't believe that you would screw it up so bad
twice, especially after being given a huge clue.
First you tell me about the "two Noah stories", when
it was Adam and Eve that God created at the beginning,
not Noah.
Now, you wish to know if Adam took two of each kind,
or seven, when Adam wasn't on the Ark. That was Noah.
To answer your almost question, Noah took seven of
every clean kind and two of each kind of the others.
As for "Genesis 2:4", there isn't a separate Creation
story starting there.
Not only that, but your late dates and "p" author
doesn't hold water either. They were inventions
of the genuinely stupid, who label themselves as
scholars and yet, after all those years of supposed
"research", couldn't figure out something so simple
as the fact that there is only one Creation account.
You should really try reading for comprehension,
as reading is fundamental. And knowing how to
read, means looking at ALL of the words.
Remember that man made the chapter divisions much,
much later. There were no chapter divisions in the
original text. No verse divisions either. While
unbelievers like to claim that chapter 2 was inserted
later, or the reverse, they forget that it was actually
one continuous text. As I said, there were no chapter
divisions, to be able to insert a new chapter between
two others.
Try this... Break the chapters of Genesis thusly...
Chapter 1 ends with 2:6. Now start chapter 2.
What you'll find, is that God made man. This is day 6.
He planted him in the Garden of Eden.
Then He made the things listed afterward, IN THE
GARDEN. The trees, etc. and the animals and brought
them to Adam, to see what he would name them.
He didn't make all of the animals, but rather, one more
of each, IN THE GARDEN.
This is confirmed, by reading vs 8-10, 15-16, etc.,
where it says, IN THE GARDEN. Chapter 2 is
discussing THE GARDEN, not the entire Earth.
For example (the verses mentioned above)...
8) And the Lord God planted A GARDEN eastward in
Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
9) And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow
every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for
food; the tree of life also IN THE MIDST OF THE GARDEN,
and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
10) And a river went out of Eden TO WATER THE GARDEN;
and from thence it was parted, and became into four
heads.
15) And the Lord God took the man, and put him INTO
THE GARDEN OF EDEN to dress it and to keep it.
16) And the Lord God commanded the man, saying,
Of every tree OF THE GARDEN thou mayest freely eat:
Therefore, we see that Genesis 1 is an overview of
the entire Creation.
Genesis 2 expands on the sixth day. It describes
the Creation in the Garden of Eden. Read the text
CAREFULLY.
It describes the creation of the garden and THEN
the creation of the things within the garden.
The animals, for example, were created in the garden.
Not the original creation of animals, but simply
another one, to be put in front of Adam, for him
to name.
Note: As I said, read Genesis 2:1-6 as a continuation
of Genesis 1 and you'll see it is a better
fit there.
Note: Genesis 2:7, goes into the sixth day, in which
man is created.
Note: Genesis 2:8 shows that God made the Garden
of Eden.
Note: As I said, Genesis 2:9 is discussing the creation
of plants, etc., IN THE GARDEN. How do we
know this? Read Genesis 2:10. It clearly
talks about the river going into the garden.
Thus, Genesis 2:9 is surrounded (v8 + v10)
by two statements about the garden.
Note: It continues to discuss the garden and then,
in v19, makes the statement about the
creation of animals, but only for the purpose
of seeing what Adam will name them and
THEY ARE STILL IN THE GARDEN, which
is where the context of the verses say that
this takes place. All of this was on the
sixth day, AFTER the rest of the world
and life was already created.
Opinion: This is why Eve was fooled and not Adam.
Adam saw God create. Eve didn't.
And now, you can go argue with yourself. Your claim
has been disproved, whether you admit to that or not.
Goodbye.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose
you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which
your fathers served that were on the other side of the
flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye
dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the
LORD. - Joshua 24:15
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
29 Dec 2005 12:52:30 PM |
|
|
"Ananias917" <_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ka98r1dpfknt6grsfg68237m4886lotmlb@4ax.com...
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:02:35 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
The good news is that the "theme" of the New Testament is GOOD NEWS.. for
everyone. Our sins have been dealt with ... and salvation is in place for
every person.
Sorry, but that's impossible, if the beginning is not
true. There is no "original sin" if we "evolved".
We're just animals as God created us to be and
therefore, He would be punishing us for being what
He created us to be.
Then, as logic would dictate, "the beginning" is nothing more than a fairy
tale!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ananias917" |
|
| Title: Re: Timing of Noah's Flood |
29 Dec 2005 12:05:02 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:02:35 GMT, "Willy"
<willyk@prodigy.net> spake thusly:
There will come a time, and hopefully within our lifespan, when the
scriptural literalists will have NO choice but to reckon with the reality of
science and historical facts.
We already have We're waiting for you.
I love the Holy Scripture,
No you don't.
--
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house;
and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the
Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest
receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."
- Acts 9:17
I know God won't give me anything I can't handle.
I just wish He didn't trust me so much.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Timing of Noah's Flood
There was no intent on God's part to save all mankind from the Flood of Noah... Gen. 6:5-7
Re: Evolution, Noah's Flood, Creation.....
Noah's Flood
Noah's Flood, We will replenish AGAIN the earth
MAJOR CLIMATE CHANGE OCCURRED 5,200 YEARS AGO(Noah's flood)
Sanhedrin Establishes Council to Teach Humanity 'Laws of Noah'
Noah's Food
| Re: God Signed with Noah on Ararat on 27.02.601 the Eternal Covenant to inherit Earth, His Kingdom, and enforce His Law of Love for Him and Neighbor by His Ministers, Colored Hamito-Semites as Criminals for denying, and to deny them, such State, but
Noah's Ark found
Proof #45 - Consider Noah's Ark
Noah Ark
Re: God Gave Law and Lands to Noah and his Sons on Ararat on 27.02.0601 Jews forged Abram and Moses to cover the Murder of Egyptian children
Noah another pre-modern JW durring the time of nephlims
Was "Re: So doesn't Noah's Ark disprove the "Creator" aspect of YHWH?"
|
|
|
