They were the first with immortal souls. The issue is Eve. If she was formed miraculously from the side of Adam, then she did not evolve.
What you are referring to is called syncretism. It disrespects Revelation.IF you believe everything that scientists say, isnt that like saying they are infallible? it seems to me if a scientists interprets some new evidence to be in contradiction to a literal understanding, then we must throw away the literal understanding. Isnt that whats happening? More and more of the bible is turning in to a storys, in order for us to “fit in” to other peoples understanding of the world. Tell me if im wrong. Isnt science( or at least some branches of science) about finding out where we came from, and how everything works? For sombody to use science to do that, but then say science cant put God in a test tube, is flawed. At some point science is gonna become erronous and will not know it because it is ingnorant and it is claming ingnorance of the reality of god. Scientists do not take in to consideration, that thier mabe forces that are not “natural” as we know it, but play a hiden role of driving the natural forces that we know of in nature. Why keep saying Science doesnt adress the supernatural, when this is the problem and no doubt is gonna be the cause of Gods people being lead down the garden path, because they want to "Fit in.
Why is it that people dont think the devil will use “science” or rather are interpretation of the world, to fool us as much as are ignorance of scientific truths? WE dont know what reality is, we just munipulate it and give it names, and call are selves inteligent, only God knows what it is.
Im not saying that science doesnt get it wright, But let me just ask you all something. Do you believe that God "literaly parted the red sea? If you dont why not?, if you do, then why dont you except that God through his own power, flooded the whole world except for Noah and his familly. Is it because there is no evidence? Why does God have to leave evidence? If he didnt, does that make him a deceptive God? i certanly dont think so, since God doesnt have to explain him self, he simply asks you to believe.
To probe existence looking for an awnser to why we exist, is to be ignorant of God since he has already has told us where we came from. To see how things work is a different science which is justifiable Since he didnt tell us that the earth went round the sun, but we have to take God in to consideration. Just because the bible dont meet the human criteria for scintific understanding, doesnt mean the book is full of storys.
But If im wrong, which could be the case, then alot of Bible including genesis, is ment to be understood as a symbolic"revelation", meaning it isnt happening how it is written. Rather, the intentions of god is given to the recipient as a simple story to express how God feels about us, and how he destroys the wikid and saves the Good. But how come the church hasnt got a strong firm teaching and undestanding of this in the first place if this is the case?, it would have saved us from alot of embarassment. And if storys like the flood are symbolic revelations, then where does real history start? I feel this needs to be sorted out so people who are on the edge of there seats woundering what science is gonna reveal next, can know what parts of the bible are story and which parts are not. It feels like a big mind game. Any way God bless
You have rebuked me for somthing i have understood wrong but you havent explained why? please be loving and show me why my thinking is errorness, so i do not make the same mistake again. Why cant it be Symbolic revelation?
Sorry if you though I was rebuking you. I didn’t think you understood it wrong. I was only defining syncretism.You have rebuked me for somthing i have understood wrong but you havent explained why? please be loving and show me why my thinking is errorness, so i do not make the same mistake again. Why cant it be Symbolic revelation?
The big difference between Catholicism and other religions is that we know that Our God is not like the gods of other religions. Zeus for instance was a real jerk - basically a god made in the image of man only bigger and stronger.IF you believe everything that scientists say, isnt that like saying they are infallible? it seems to me if a scientists interprets some new evidence to be in contradiction to a literal understanding, then we must throw away the literal understanding. Isnt that whats happening? More and more of the bible is turning in to a storys, in order for us to “fit in” to other peoples understanding of the world. Tell me if im wrong. Isnt science( or at least some branches of science) about finding out where we came from, and how everything works? For sombody to use science to do that, but then say science cant put God in a test tube, is flawed. At some point science is gonna become erronous and will not know it because it is ingnorant and it is claming ingnorance of the reality of god. Scientists do not take in to consideration, that thier mabe forces that are not “natural” as we know it, but play a hiden role of driving the natural forces that we know of in nature. Why keep saying Science doesnt adress the supernatural, when this is the problem and no doubt is gonna be the cause of Gods people being lead down the garden path, because they want to "Fit in.
Why is it that people dont think the devil will use “science” or rather are interpretation of the world, to fool us as much as are ignorance of scientific truths? WE dont know what reality is, we just munipulate it and give it names, and call are selves inteligent, only God knows what it is.
Im not saying that science doesnt get it wright, But let me just ask you all something. Do you believe that God "literaly parted the red sea? If you dont why not?, if you do, then why dont you except that God through his own power, flooded the whole world except for Noah and his familly. Is it because there is no evidence? Why does God have to leave evidence? If he didnt, does that make him a deceptive God? i certanly dont think so, since God doesnt have to explain him self, he simply asks you to believe.
To probe existence looking for an awnser to why we exist, is to be ignorant of God since he has already has told us where we came from. To see how things work is a different science which is justifiable Since he didnt tell us that the earth went round the sun, but we have to take God in to consideration. Just because the bible dont meet the human criteria for scintific understanding, doesnt mean the book is full of storys.
But If im wrong, which could be the case, then alot of Bible including genesis, is ment to be understood as a symbolic"revelation", meaning it isnt happening how it is written. Rather, the intentions of god is given to the recipient as a simple story to express how God feels about us, and how he destroys the wikid and saves the Good. But how come the church hasnt got a strong firm teaching and undestanding of this in the first place if this is the case?, it would have saved us from alot of embarassment. And if storys like the flood are symbolic revelations, then where does real history start? I feel this needs to be sorted out so people who are on the edge of there seats woundering what science is gonna reveal next, can know what parts of the bible are story and which parts are not. It feels like a big mind game. Any way God bless
That is correct. If, on the other hand, Adam’s rib is a thinly veiled phallic symbol, then she could have been the product of evolution.
Sorry to interrupt but
I realize theory and testing are not mutually exclusive but thank you for pointing that out.
Tell me if im correct. What your saying is, God inspired man to help write a bible, within which we cant be sure whether or not if any of the storys which seem to be portraying history,(considering the writer goes in to great detail to explain heritage and blood line, running write up to abraham, who i assume and believe is a real person) is ment to be interpreted as a historical event, ( im talking about time here, from adam and eve all the way to “Jesus” an important human being who fits in quite neatly to historical blood line, which is how the bible seems to present its self). Tell me if im wrong. Is it your understanding that, well established scientific theorys Dictate how we should understand the bible, and that in fact it is “Gods will” that we should use science to help us interpret and determine the literality and symbolisom of the bible?
Yes. That is correct. There are different types of literature in the Bible. It is true that there is some history. But there is also some storytelling as well, mythology so to speak - which is storys that are about who God is and His relationship with His people - that are allegorical representations of the truth about God.
Yes, you are a little bit wrong in your representation of my understanding. Well established scientific theorys never ‘dictate’ how we should understand the Bible. If we used science alone, we would have to say that there is no God, because science by it’s nature cannot depend on supernatural causes as they are out of it’s realm.
You can count on the Church to definitively interpret Scripture when what that Scripture says is doctrinally important.
You are absolutely free to believe that.
And
These have been reconciled many times.
and only one is true.
Pat G, What is your position on this subject?
One what?
Yes, by interpretting them in a particular way, but they could be interpretted in other ways as well without denying the historicity of Christ Himself.
of those
Buffalo, do you believe that the earth was created in six days?
Are you proposing private interpretation aka as sola scriptura?
I don’t know exactly what you are asking here. I do not believe in Sola Scriptura. What does the Church definitively say about the geneology of Christ?