Narly





even if unbelievers do not care, they should still recognize if you are being truthful or not. of course then, once they understand you are being truthful, and it is about the miraculous touch of God, this is when they come at you with little dribble of comments here and there.

so obviously, if you ask them for clarification, you suddenly are badgering them for them choosing to bring up your viewpoint.

and this is why that i am not afraid to classify them according to their belief system, SCIENCE.

and Science claims, actions like that are the "Result" of an unstable (insane) mind.

very much like a double minded man is unstable in ALL of his ways!!




so yes, you point out a very excellent point.

you don't have to agree with a post, but if it is a truthful and heartfelt honest post, you should at least RECOGNIZE it even without admitting it!!

and thank you for believing!!

my mother is 67 years old so she is not about stupid games. she would not be discussing this with me if it was a lie and never happened. as a Believer, she would condemn me if i was lying.

but nonetheless, i am not trying to get the unbelievers to accept this, i am just trying to get them to give me their explanation of what took place in 1977.

but it's obviously clear, they know what i am saying is a fact, but anyone who DENIES GOD, does so due to them being defiant to all authority figures, not just the idea of God. But more so God, because they really don't want to bow to that or listen or do anything constructive.

it's the truest form of REBELLION, which is equivalent to WITCHCRAFT!!

and trust me,

the fact they claim i am repeating myself and should STOP participating in this thread is the SIGN i've been seeking!!

this is exactly where i am to be posting this :)

and the funniest and most revealing part of this entire process in this thread, is recognizing what specifically bothers their insane disorders.

i am told i repeat myself = in every topic i find a way to bring GOD into it = they are TIRED of listening/reading about God!!

i am told i should stop posting in this thread = well, that is obvious code that someone's toes are feeling stepped on over the topic of God HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

and before these 2 suggestions, there have been numerous others trying to get me to STOP!!



nah, this is specifically where i am to be and continue doing as God leads me to do because like I know, God obviously knew, this would pizz em off Royally :)

and REMEMBER, they believe they are an actual ANIMAL due to Evolution, SO, that means they are nothing but ANKLE BITING PESTS that you swiftly kick once in awhile for being RETARDED!!

Makes sense to me perfectly. Some people feel like they are responsible for how the world works, feel guilty when things don’t go their way, then try to throw their self into the trash can by rejecting God. We need more of a crowd of believers. It is senseless why some people insist this world is all there is, and say that the evil this world is proof that that there is nothing more. Like some sort of slippery slope or something.

I am not used to authority that accepts Jesus, and I am improving by becoming less rebellious. That is where I am, but more importantly, that is the direction I must go in and I am so feel so fortunate to have what I do have.

We need to engage more people who are genuinely interested in becoming stronger in our Lord Jesus Christ. A topic titled “the reign stomping ground of Christ” would keep the riff raft out.

Einstein's theory of relativity was for the sole purpose of claiming from the outermost edges of the Universe to the tiniest microorganism existing unseen on Planet Earth, we are all "connected."

he called it harmonious in his view of God and beyond.

today's science by virtue of DNA connects us to these very same microorganisms in bacteria existing in all living Species.

so indeed we are connected to it all.


the difference being however, are the views of being Connected by Reason and Thought (God), or by Accident?

and then in some Reasoning, the very idea of Accident equates to Highly Intelligent.

what, are they that foolish to believe such garbage?

that is the typical mind switch by imposition and based solely upon absolute ignorance..

that last sentence was me putting the term "that was a real mind skewing they're attempting to do by reversing common sense with their personal logic.

and they feel they have actually outsmarted the masses.

it's quite entertaining just how invisible they believe they are while making the sole difference hahahahahaha

God’s forming the world as we know it over a six day work week is the word of God and it is without error in any part. If a scholar of today needed to write a complete description of how the world came to be recognizable as we know it today, it would be hard to write a better description in the same length of text.

Onwhat basis do you say that 'six days' is without error? All the biblical scholars I have ever come across state that the word 'day' is this context is a parable and does not have the same meaning as the 24 hour period of time that we now call a day.

The actual meaning of that word 'day' in this context is of course open to interpretation, as we have seen in this thread and is seen in many other places too.

Wikipedia has this to say:

The Genesis creation narrative is the creation myth of both Judaism and Christianity. The narrative is made up of two stories, roughly equivalent to the first two chapters of the Book of Genesis. In the first, Elohim (the Hebrew generic word for God) creates the heavens and the Earth in six days, then rests on, blesses and sanctifies the seventh. In the second story, God, now referred to by the personal name Yahweh, creates Adam, the first man, from dust and places him in the Garden of Eden, where he is given dominion over the animals. Eve, the first woman, is created from Adam and as his companion.

Borrowing themes from Mesopotamian mythology, but adapting them to the Israelite people's belief in one God, the first major comprehensive draft of the Pentateuch (the series of five books which begins with Genesis and ends with Deuteronomy) was composed in the late 7th or the 6th century BCE (the Jahwist source) and was later expanded by other authors (the Priestly source) into a work very like the one we have today. The two sources can be identified in the creation narrative: Priestly and Jahwistic. The combined narrative is a critique of the Mesopotamian theology of creation: Genesis affirms monotheism and denies polytheism. Robert Alter described the combined narrative as "compelling in its archetypal character, its adaptation of myth to monotheistic ends".

Misunderstanding the genre of the Genesis creation narrative, meaning the intention of the author(s) and the culture within which they wrote, can result in a misreading; misreading the story as history rather than theology leads to Creationism and the denial of evolution. As scholar of Jewish studies, Jon D. Levenson, puts it:

How much history lies behind the story of Genesis? Because the action of the primeval story is not represented as taking place on the plane of ordinary human history and has so many affinities with ancient mythology, it is very far-fetched to speak of its narratives as historical at all."

I am just saying that the scripture was conveyed directly according to the truth revealed to the author.

The text describes the chronology as how things were recognized by name when it says let there be this and that; if components of the world were even formed in the order that they were recognized by name is not nailed down, and the text of course refers to other truth in between the lines. I believe evolution is also just as true; it is only a different way of experiencing the world.

And thanks, MK, for your contribution to the forums. I enjoy reading it always and it is very smooth and thought provoking.

MK,


indeed, excellent point on what constitutes what the word and meaning of Day should be?

there are 2 references (one in Psalms and the other in the Epistle of Peter) that to God, our one 24 hour Day can mean 1,000 years.

and David, in the Book of Kings and Chronicles, mentions a Book of the Hebrew Bible they had in his day called "Jasher" (Joshua mentions it in the Book of Joshua. but there is a reference in "Jasher" to where during a Battle that was nearing darkness that God stopped the time so that Battle could continue since it was against offspring of the Fallen Angels.

but those examples show us that we should not immediately take the 6 Day Creation literally because it was on God's time as He was Creating. and if God literally took one thousand years between 24 hour periods during the 6 Day Creation, then we cannot actually clarify 6,000 years as 6 literal days.


but you said it correctly, what constitutes the meaning of a Day in these references?

why this question..... does he required..

The original poster has long gone, but he was asking about the possible existence of a deity, usually called 'God'.

Tom has given all the possible asnwers:



but despite that, this topic has contained the need for believers and unbelievers alike to attempt to 'prove' the impossible. It has even extended to a discussion about the age of the universe, the age of the earth and other points which are certainly 'off-topic'!

MK








to some, when you discuss the Universe, it's age, the age of the Earth, the impossible, you are discussing God!!

the only reason to others, that it seems like a different subject, is that Science has tried to make them different subjects!!

since none of us really actually know, and the glimpses here and there we see and try to understand by piecing it together, is just simply the best guess we have to choose from.

and those two options are:

the universe, earth, us are here by one of 2 options:

1. by way of God through Thought and Reason as Espinoza explained and Einstein touched upon on

2. by way of Accident



and honestly, the way we choose depicts our ignorances.

1. if we choose God we are disgraced by our humanity for being delusional.

2. if we choose Accident, it makes no absolute sense, we just have to accept the stupidity of the dead ends accounted for in Evolution by way of Mathematics, and by way of discovery via Biology, and just assume IT HAS TO BE TRUE BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE EXISTENCE OF GOD!!


so either choice is a series of peeling off the outer layers, because of the marred conditions we have put both idealisms in, and have proven and still have yet to prove.



but let's examine this position of Delusion:


1. God, you have NEVER SEEN, but SOME may have seen His Angels, or even if the Greeks are correct WAS SEEN IN PERSON 2,000 years ago. it still is a matter of Faith to believe (for most) the very UNKNOWN!!


2. Accident, this is like the trainwreck clause and answer to a situation that no one has the first grasp about. FIRST OF ALL, up till a 100 years ago, no one thought about Big Bang. < the idea of the Big Bang is so NEW, t is not even a recognized concrete Theory yet, and very well could be DISMISSED soon since THERE ARE NO PROOFS to support this idea.
^
so if Science removes the Big Bang Idea (due to lack of proof), now you have another problem, what other ACCIDENT could have taken place for what exists as we can visibly see for ourselves?

if they remove the Big Bang idea (and i believe it's only being kept because the only other remaining solution would have to be GOD) then You believing Accident will literally be S.O.L again!!

and if you become S.O.L., that means following who you have been was NOT very INTELLIGENT after all!!

especially if it's not just Science, but your own self!!

and MK,

you will absolutely LOVE THIS point being made!!


do you know how Science coined the term, "Big Bang?"

100+ years ago, this phrase was coined because WHEN GOD SPOKE....it was like...a BIG BANG!!

so the Big Bang when being applied to Creation, was the result of God Speaking into the vast of Nothingness!!


that is HOW the catch term "Big Bang" literally and factually got here hahahahahahahahaha

it is a reference to God SPEAKING hahahahahahahahaha

so even to the followers applying the Theory of the Big Bang, via Science and their current explanations to their own Reasoning, are still following a CONCEPT CREATED by thinking GOD SPOKE = "BIG BANG!!"




that is priceless info to know hahahahahahahahahahahaha

and since the Theory of the Big Bang has not been proven, only accepted, that means by TECHNICALITY, it still is a CURRENT REFERENCE TO GOD SPEAKING hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha




they will never be able to prove it since they have changed the concept four times now hahahahaha they are failing and struggling.....


it must REALLY SUCK to those Atheist in
Science knowing if they DO NOT FIND PROOF, the Big Bang is technically GOD SPEAKING HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA


i'm sorry, but that is really hilarious!!