11 Jul 21
@eladar saidThe topic is "Foolishness of God 1 Cor 3:18-20".
I have answered that question. It is to point out that the Bible says that to know God's truth you must appear foolish to man.presented. You are being like the monkeys who see no evil.
There is nothing in the bible called the foolishness of God.
So you are wrong to start with.
11 Jul 21
@eladar saidYou did not quote this in the opening post. Im demonstrating that your ability to read and understand and communicate what you have to say is very poor.
1 Cor 1:25
For the foolishness of God is wiser than mankind, and the weakness of God is stronger than mankind.
That is my point.
So far you have misunderstood everything people are saying
@eladar saidYes., there is foolishness of God, in 1 Cor 1, so I was wrong about that. But you failed to communicate your point clearly, You are doing the same thing with the creation account, you are misunderstanding the creation account and misunderstanding what people are saying about it.
This is what you said.
Are you willing to admit you were wrong?
11 Jul 21
@rajk999 saidIf I accept what the creation account says, then I misinterpret.
Yes., there is foolishness of God, in 1 Cor 1, so I was wrong about that. But you failed to communicate your point clearly, You are doing the same thing with the creation account, you are misunderstanding the creation account and misunderstanding what people are saying about it.
Got it.
How do you know the literal account is wrong?
11 Jul 21
@eladar saidI dont know it is wrong but I also do not know if it is right and neither do you. I know that the written record of creation is just a brief summary and not meant to give every detail as it is unnecessary for man to know how it all went down. The use of the word day is also inconclusive as the bible says a day for God is not the same as a day for man. So the bible is the one that makes a literal interpretation look silly and childish. The bible is says many things and if they are all brought together then the only thing that a fair minded person can conclude about the creation is I do not know for sure
If I accept what the creation account says, then I misinterpret.
Got it.
How do you know the literal account is wrong?
When it comes to certain doctrines, the bible is its own worse enemy as it often contradicts itself. That is a fact. Hence things like creation is open for any interpretation you care to make about it. Your interpretation makes the least sense.
@eladar saidHold on. I never said it was incorrect or possibly incorrect. To be clear, the point is that those who interpret the word 'day' as a 24 period are incorrect. The bible never said that and it is not incorrect. Creationists of the YEC type ate incorrect.
@Rajk999
Not knowing if it is right or wrong is exactly my point. Nice to see that you agree with me that the creation account is possibly correct.
11 Jul 21
@rajk999 saidThose are your words.
I dont know it is wrong but I also do not know if it is right and neither do you. I know that the written record of creation is just a brief summary and not meant to give every detail as it is unnecessary for man to know how it all went down. The use of the word day is also inconclusive as the bible says a day for God is not the same as a day for man. So the bible is the o ...[text shortened]... y thing that a fair minded person can conclude about the creation is I do not know for sure
How do you know that the creation account could not possibly be true as stated in the Bible. Seems to me that you are speaking out both sides of your mouth.
11 Jul 21
@eladar saidLet me clarify. Although we cannot be sure of anything, it is my opinion that the literal interpretation of a 24 hr day is least likely correct scenario.
Those are your words.
How do you know that the creation account could not possibly be true as stated in the Bible. Seems to me that you are speaking out both sides of your mouth.
You said that the whole universe was created in 6 24 hr periods. That is the worst possible interpretation, because it means that nothing was going on prior to the creation period, and that is incorrect.
Your version of creation makes no sense.
11 Jul 21
@rajk999 saidSo you are saying the literal 6 day each day 24 hour story is possible, just not one that you personally believe.
Let me clarify. Although we cannot be sure of anything, it is my opinion that the literal interpretation of a 24 hr day is least likely correct scenario.
You said that the whole universe was created in 6 24 hr periods. That is the worst possible interpretation, because it means that nothing was going on prior to the creation period, and that is incorrect.
Your version of creation makes no sense.
@eladar saidNo. That is the worst possible interpretation, because it means that nothing was going on prior to the creation period, and that is incorrect.
So you are saying the literal 6 day each day 24 hour story is possible, just not one that you personally believe.
Do you believe that nothing happened, like there was no universe and no life before the first day of creation? If you do then that is impossible because there were events taking place before.
- Joined
- 06 May 15
- Moves
- 27445
A provisional observation:
The funny irony is that the tiny eventual "believer" sprouts of the One who Spake and still Speaks the Cosmos into being would rather get lost in the brambles of localized microverbiage and cat squabbles than to sit quietly abiding in the One Who Says All.