Hi Interested

HEADER FOR Expressions

(Click picture to go back to Table of Contents)

Welcome

Enjoy... But remember
"Don't give in to winning the argument
and losing one of your eternal crowns..."

God bless you...

Hi Interested

Forum: Theological Expressions
Re:

What happens when we die? (Confused)
Re:

Ah, science to the rescue again (Interested )
Re:

Hi Interested, what did St Peter said about time? (eom) (Seeker)
Re:

Hi Seeker (Interested )
Date: 2001, May 26
From: Benjamin

Hi Interested, Pardon my intrusion, just some comments and friendly exchange, Interested: This did upset some christian then but there are other christians to this day who have kept alive the Darwinian controversy insisting the Creation in Genesis must be read literally. Benjamin: Is there any reason inherent in the Bible itself not to read the Bible literally in the ordinary sense of the passage, and with regards to Genesis? Or is it because of fallible man’s opinions that tell us that Genesis should not be read literally? Which is authoritative, God’s Word or man’s opinions? Who do we trust first, God or the scientist? If Genesis 1 should not be read literally and taken as historical narrative, then which part of Genesis should? If a day does not mean an ordinary day, then what does the words “years” and “months” in the same text mean? I submit that such a reasoning would make God’s Word highly unintelligible, since it does not mean what it says. In my going to churches to share on Creation vs Evolution, I have found that many Christians, even pastors, have been heavily evolutionised. And this has deep implications on how we handle the Word of God and our Christian foundations. For example, if Genesis is not to be taken literally, then was there a real Garden, a real Adam, a real Eve, a real Serpent, a real tree of knowledge? If a literal Garden, Adam, Eve, Serpent is to be taken, then why not a literal day? Who decides on such arbitrary distinctions? If Genesis be not taken as it is, then we have just undermined the very foundation of the Gospel, and the rest of our Biblical doctrines, and this should be sufficient cause for upsetting the believer. Regards, Benjamin