THE PROBLEM(S) OF EVIL: answered

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
So much, then, for biblical inerrancy.

That is where we differ of course.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Such scientific evidence relies heavily on improvable presuppositions either way.

Thus we accept what the Bible says on this issue.

The sacred word says there is a time to be born and a time to die. That's what the Bible says. I invite you to accept The Word.

Originally posted by kirksey957
The sacred word says there is a time to be born and a time to die. That's what the Bible says. I invite you to accept The Word.

That was adressed at me?

Originally posted by dj2becker
That was adressed at me?

Yes, as I am under the impression that you believe the earth had no natural disasters prior to the fall.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Yes, as I am under the impression that you believe the earth had no natural disasters prior to the fall.

I see. So these words were spoken before the fall of man?

Originally posted by kirksey957
Yes, as I am under the impression that you believe the earth had no natural disasters prior to the fall.

Romans 8:20-22: “For the creation was subjected to vanity, not of its own will, but by reason of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now”

[i]The whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now, that is, from Adam's sin until now.[/I]

Does this mean the earth had no natural disasters prior to the fall?

Well, after reading these verses, can you say you're sure there were natural disasters prior to the fall?

Regards

Originally posted by xpoferens
Romans 8:20-22: “For the creation was subjected to vanity, not of its own will, but by reason of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now”

[i]The ...[text shortened]... ese verses, can you say you're sure there were natural disasters prior to the fall?

Regards

After reading these verses I can tell you unequivocally that the person who wrote them was not present then and certainly did not have knowledge about what was going on over the entire face of the planet which happened to be flat when he wrote it.

Originally posted by kirksey957
After reading these verses I can tell you unequivocally that the person who wrote them was not present then and certainly did not have knowledge about what was going on over the entire face of the planet which happened to be flat when he wrote it.

What do you mean with "the planet which happened to be flat when he wrote it."?

If the Bible is the inspired Word of God, it doesn't matter whether the writer was present or not.

Unless you don't believe in inspiration, of course.

Originally posted by xpoferens
Romans 8:20-22: “For the creation was subjected to vanity, not of its own will, but by reason of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now”

[i]The ...[text shortened]... ese verses, can you say you're sure there were natural disasters prior to the fall?

Regards

I should also say that I don't believe in a literal interpretation of the creation accounts. I interpret them metaphorically and universally. I see no theological significance to the idea that there were or were not natural disasters before the fall.

If you're in an earthquake and a rock hits you in the head, you want to know if there is a good Samaritan around who is going to help. That's theological. Not the innane argument that seeks to prove or disprove things that cannot be proven.

Originally posted by xpoferens
What do you mean with "the planet which happened to be flat when he wrote it."?

If the Bible is the inspired Word of God, it doesn't matter whether the writer was present or not.

Unless you don't believe in inspiration, of course.

Well, I was being facetious to make a point. It was believed that the world was flat at that time. Indeed I believe the "four corners " of the earth are mentioned somewhere. So does the world have four corners? Of course not. Now you will argue that it was being symbolic of the entire earth or something like that.

YOu say it doesn't matter if the writer was present or not if the Bible is the inspired word of God. I recently heard someone in my church say that he "did care if 2+2 was four. If Jesus said it was 5 then that settles it." Well Jesus didn't say that, but he did say the mustard seed was the smallest seed. We know of course that there are smaller seeds.

You come from the belief that the word of God must be infallible or inerrant to be inspired. I disagree.

Originally posted by kirksey957
I should also say that I don't believe in a literal interpretation of the creation accounts. I interpret them metaphorically and universally. I see no theological significance to the idea that there were or were not natural disasters before the fall.

If you're in an earthquake and a rock hits you in the head, you want to know if there is a good Sam ...[text shortened]... gical. Not the innane argument that seeks to prove or disprove things that cannot be proven.

Everyone has a free will to believe whatever.

But you are choosing which parts of the Bible to believe and which ones to ignore.

The Bible contains history (narrative), poetry, symbolism, etc. and I agree not everything is to be taken literally.

However, creation records are historical, and Jesus agreed with that idea.

Moreover, in the Genesis record, you can read about the fall of man, and therefore, about the need for a Redeemer. Metaphorically?

Originally posted by xpoferens
Everyone has a free will to believe whatever.

But you are choosing which parts of the Bible to believe and which ones to ignore.

The Bible contains history (narrative), poetry, symbolism, etc. and I agree not everything is to be taken literally.

However, creation records are historical, and Jesus agreed with that idea.

Moreover, in the Genesis ...[text shortened]... ou can read about the fall of man, and therefore, about the need for a Redeemer. Metaphorically?

Can you tell me where Jesus said the historical accounts of creation were approved and certified by him?

Originally posted by kirksey957
Can you tell me where Jesus said the historical accounts of creation were approved and certified by him?

Please allow me to quote from an article.

"When the Pharisees sought to quibble with Christ regarding God’s original law of divorce/remarriage, Jesus pointed out that under the Mosaic regime a laxness was tolerated due to the “hardness” of their hearts, but that this was not the sacred ideal—which would be restored under his regime (Mark 10:2-5; cf. Matthew 19:3ff). The Savior’s argument was grounded in the historical commencement of marriage as designed by Jehovah in the beginning. Here is his statement: “But from the beginning of the creation, male and female made he them.” If the human family did not extend back to “the beginning of the creation,” Jesus’ argument was based upon a false premise. Evolutionary chronology assaults the trustworthiness of the Son of God."

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/do_the_ages_of_the_earth_and_mankind_really_matter

Originally posted by xpoferens
Please allow me to quote from an article.

"When the Pharisees sought to quibble with Christ regarding God’s original law of divorce/remarriage, Jesus pointed out that under the Mosaic regime a laxness was tolerated due to the “hardness” of their hearts, but that this was not the sacred ideal—which would be restored under his regime (Mark 10:2-5; cf. Mat ...[text shortened]... tp://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/do_the_ages_of_the_earth_and_mankind_really_matter

OK, let me ask again. Where does Jesus certify the historical accounts of creation as accurate?

You have simply gone to an article that has an agenda about creationism vs. evolution. I want to hear where Jesus gives his seal of approval for every aspect of the creation account.

Originally posted by kirksey957
OK, let me ask again. Where does Jesus certify the historical accounts of creation as accurate?

You have simply gone to an article that has an agenda about creationism vs. evolution. I want to hear where Jesus gives his seal of approval for every aspect of the creation account.

Well, please tell me how you interpter Jesus words.

It seems that for some of you, a especific sentence is always required in order for you to accept something.

I wonder if you do the same in your daily life...

Do you ever use inferences?

Inference is the act or process of deriving a conclusion based solely on what one already knows.