Jump to content

SovereignGraceSingles

Welcome to SovereignGraceSingles.com. Where Reformed Faith and Romance Come Together! We are the only Christian dating website for Christian Singles in the Reformed Faith worldwide. Our focus is to bring together Christian singles of all ages. Reformed single Christian men and women who wish to meet other Reformed Christian singles for spiritually, like-minded, loving relationships.
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” - Genesis 2:18
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

Meet Like Minded Believers Can two walk together except they be agreed? - Amos 3:3
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

SGS offers a "fenced" community: both for private single members and also a public Protestant forums open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene-derived Christian Church.
Join us now
Guest theophilus

Bible Science Guy

Recommended Posts

davidtaylorjr
7 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

I don't understand the issues with OEC.  It is able to fit the Biblical texts.

The issue is that it does not fit into biblical texts. There is no way to fit it in biblical texts without changing what the text actually says.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
2 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

Based on what? Curious, do you have any hermeneutical training?

Based on the chart in the article I linked to.  I don't have hermenutical training.  My background and education is in mechanical engineering.

1 minute ago, davidtaylorjr said:

The issue is that it does not fit into biblical texts. There is no way to fit it in biblical texts without changing what the text actually says.

I disagree.  I don't think that is the case here.

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
Just now, CDF47 said:

Based on the chart in the article I linked to.  I don't have hermenutical training.  My background and education is in mechanical engineering.

Then, no offense, you are not truly able to speak intelligently on the matter. This is not an insult to you, it is just to say that you have not been trained in proper biblical interpretation. There are many good resources on how to properly exegete a passage and I would be more than happy to share them with you. But the author of that article does not follow sound principles of biblical interpretation which is why he gets an interpretation that does not align with the text.  It sounds good, looks good to the untrained eye, but it is not good, it is false.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
1 minute ago, davidtaylorjr said:

Then, no offense, you are not truly able to speak intelligently on the matter. This is not an insult to you, it is just to say that you have not been trained in proper biblical interpretation. There are many good resources on how to properly exegete a passage and I would be more than happy to share them with you. But the author of that article does not follow sound principles of biblical interpretation which is why he gets an interpretation that does not align with the text.  It sounds good, looks good to the untrained eye, but it is not good, it is false.

I will take the resources but that would be the same as me saying he is discussing science and unless you have a scientific background you can't speak intelligently on the matter since this crosses into both Biblical interpretation and science.

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
5 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

I will take the resources but that would be the same as me saying he is discussing science and unless you have a scientific background you can't speak intelligently on the matter since this crosses into both Biblical interpretation and science.

A good starter is "Grasping God's Word" published by Zondervan.

 

Notice I am not discussing the science, I am discussing the text. I do not need to study the science itself if it conflicts with the text. That being said, I have studied some science, but I also have studied the Bible extensively as I have a degree in theology. As I have said, I have a paper on this very topic and they Day-Age theory is not compatible with the actual text of Scripture. All of the other places where the days of creation are mentioned in Scripture they are understood as literal 24 hour days and the creation week is understood as a literal creation week. There is zero evidence from Scripture of gaps in between the days. You have to read into the text to get that.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
1 minute ago, davidtaylorjr said:

A good starter is "Grasping God's Word" published by Zondervan.

 

Notice I am not discussing the science, I am discussing the text. I do not need to study the science itself if it conflicts with the text. That being said, I have studied some science, but I also have studied the Bible extensively as I have a degree in theology. As I have said, I have a paper on this very topic and they Day-Age theory is not compatible with the actual text of Scripture. All of the other places where the days of creation are mentioned in Scripture they are understood as literal 24 hour days and the creation week is understood as a literal creation week. There is zero evidence from Scripture of gaps in between the days. You have to read into the text to get that.

Thanks for the resource.

 

I take the days as literal though.  I believe God literally spent 6 days to create the universe and everything in it.  However, as He was doing this, eons were passing by inside the universe.  This is something beyond the chart I referenced.  

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
1 minute ago, CDF47 said:

However, as He was doing this, eons were passing by inside the universe.  This is something beyond the chart I referenced.  

Right, this is the part that is found nowhere within the text and has no evidence from the text.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
Just now, davidtaylorjr said:

Right, this is the part that is found nowhere within the text and has no evidence from the text.

Not all details are provided in the text. 

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
1 minute ago, CDF47 said:

Not all details are provided in the text. 

??? The text says it was one literal week. Moses affirms one literal week.... How in the world do you come to the conclusion that it is not a literal week without subjecting the Bible to "science" and not science to the Bible?

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
Just now, davidtaylorjr said:

??? The text says it was one literal week. Moses affirms one literal week.... How in the world do you come to the conclusion that it is not a literal week without subjecting the Bible to "science" and not science to the Bible?

One literal week for God it was, I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
Just now, CDF47 said:

One literal week for God it was, I agree. 

What in the world does that mean?

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
7 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

What in the world does that mean?

I believe that it took God one literal week to create the universe.  I believe eons were passing by inside the universe as God created it.

Edited by CDF47

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
6 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

I believe eons were passing by inside the universe as God created it.

Again, based on what evidence? Because the evidence within the text of the Bible refutes this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
3 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

Again, based on what evidence? Because the evidence within the text of the Bible refutes this idea.

Special relativity shows this is possible.  How does the Bible refute this idea?  

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
4 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

Special relativity shows this is possible.  How does the Bible refute this idea?  

Because the Bible says that it was a literal week. 6 literal days with vast spans of time in between is not a literal week.  What is special relativity?

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
Just now, davidtaylorjr said:

Because the Bible says that it was a literal week. 6 literal days with vast spans of time in between is not a literal week.  What is special relativity?

Einstein's theory.

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
1 minute ago, CDF47 said:

Einstein's theory.

And what in the world does that have to do with the biblical account of creation?

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
Just now, davidtaylorjr said:

And what in the world does that have to do with the biblical account of creation?

I was just saying God transcends time.  He sees the future and the past.  He could have created this universe with eons passing by inside the universe.  That theory could make this possible.

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
3 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

I was just saying God transcends time.  He sees the future and the past.  He could have created this universe with eons passing by inside the universe.  That theory could make this possible.

Could have, but Scripture says he didn't. Scripture says it was a literal week. So all the possibilities in the world do not matter if God said that wasn't how he did it.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
1 minute ago, davidtaylorjr said:

Could have, but Scripture says he didn't. Scripture says it was a literal week. So all the possibilities in the world do not matter if God said that wasn't how he did it.

I think those details could have been left out.  

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
1 minute ago, CDF47 said:

I think those details could have been left out.  

That's reading into the text something that isn't there. We can only go with what is there, not what "could have been there" that is not a sound way to interpret Scripture.

 

There might be other spiritual gifts, like the ability to fly, because those details could have been left out.  That is utter nonsense.

1 minute ago, CDF47 said:

I think those details could have been left out.  

That's reading into the text something that isn't there. We can only go with what is there, not what "could have been there" that is not a sound way to interpret Scripture.

 

There might be other spiritual gifts, like the ability to fly, because those details could have been left out.  That is utter nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
3 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

That's reading into the text something that isn't there. We can only go with what is there, not what "could have been there" that is not a sound way to interpret Scripture.

 

There might be other spiritual gifts, like the ability to fly, because those details could have been left out.  That is utter nonsense.

That's reading into the text something that isn't there. We can only go with what is there, not what "could have been there" that is not a sound way to interpret Scripture.

 

There might be other spiritual gifts, like the ability to fly, because those details could have been left out.  That is utter nonsense.

No, not every detail is included in all the text.  Sometimes just a summary is given.

Edited by CDF47

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
1 minute ago, CDF47 said:

No, not every detail is included in all the text.  Sometimes just a summary is given.

This is not one of those cases. Other places in Scripture refer to it as a literal earthly week.

Share this post


Link to post
CDF47
1 minute ago, davidtaylorjr said:

This is not one of those cases. Other places in Scripture refer to it as a literal earthly week.

Where else in the Bible does it state it was a literal earthly week?

Edited by CDF47

Share this post


Link to post
davidtaylorjr
3 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

Where else in the Bible does it state it was a literal earthly week?

Exodus 20:11 which established the Sabbath

Luke 13:14 which confirms the Sabbath and the 6 day work week because that is how God created.

Genesis 1 is a continuous narrative with no gaps in between. That is why God rested on the seventh day after six continual days. There is no break and no textual evidence to suggest a break. It is continuous which means no details were left out.

 

3 minutes ago, CDF47 said:

Where else in the Bible does it state it was a literal earthly week?

Exodus 20:11 which established the Sabbath

Luke 13:14 which confirms the Sabbath and the 6 day work week because that is how God created.

Genesis 1 is a continuous narrative with no gaps in between. That is why God rested on the seventh day after six continual days. There is no break and no textual evidence to suggest a break. It is continuous which means no details were left out.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...
Articles - News