Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_Drifting
_Emeritus
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:52 am

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _Drifting »

LittleNipper wrote:I know the Bible has never been proven wrong. Somethings have been questioned, but not discredited.


Ahem...flood...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”
Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric

"One, two, three...let's go shopping!"
Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _SteelHead »

Nipper what would you accept as proof that it was wrong?

What is the rubicon?
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_LittleNipper
_Emeritus
Posts: 4518
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:49 pm

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _LittleNipper »

Drifting wrote:
LittleNipper wrote:I know the Bible has never been proven wrong. Somethings have been questioned, but not discredited.


Ahem...flood...

It has never been proven either impossible or not to have happened. It is entirely a matter of convictions concerning the data which we have and weighting that against what we do not know.
_LittleNipper
_Emeritus
Posts: 4518
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:49 pm

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _LittleNipper »

SteelHead wrote:Nipper what would you accept as proof that it was wrong? You would have to prove that Jesus Christ never existed.

What is the rubicon?

Apparently the river now called fiumicino.
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _Themis »

LittleNipper wrote:
Themis wrote:
So you really don't know the Bible is the word of God from God, but think it is true from what you think you understand about historical events in regards to the Bible. That's fine. I was just trying to see where you are coming from.

I know the Book of Mormon is not from God. I know the Koran is not from God. They contradict the Bible and yet both cling to portions of the Bible for their own support. I know the Bible has never been proven wrong. Somethings have been questioned, but not discredited. I accept Jesus to be my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ fulfills and embraces the entire Old Testament. Jesus Christ lives and sanctions the entire New Testament.


So another-words what I say above. You don't have any knowledge from God and depend on what you think is accurate historical evidence and your own personal interpretations of the biblical text. I have no idea what this historical evidence could be to be certain of any of the events of the Bible.
42
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _Themis »

LittleNipper wrote:
It has never been proven either impossible or not to have happened. It is entirely a matter of convictions concerning the data which we have and weighting that against what we do not know.


So another-words the global flood has been proven not to have occurred.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
42
_Drifting
_Emeritus
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:52 am

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _Drifting »

LittleNipper wrote:
LittleNipper wrote:I know the Bible has never been proven wrong. Somethings have been questioned, but not discredited.


Drifting wrote:Ahem...flood...

It has never been proven either impossible or not to have happened. It is entirely a matter of convictions concerning the data which we have and weighting that against what we do not know.


Well, given the chronology from the Bible record, we can place this supposed happening at around 2,300 bc.

There are civilisations that have a consistent record of being in existence before that period and after it. With no interruption, such as their civilisation being wiped out by a flood.
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”
Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric

"One, two, three...let's go shopping!"
Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
_jo1952
_Emeritus
Posts: 1118
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 3:04 am

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _jo1952 »

Themis wrote:He can believe what he wants as you can. I think it might be wise tom believe things that are actually true, but you know he probably thinks you are going to hell for your beliefs.


Hello Themis!

I am not concerned with whether LittleNipper thinks I am going to hell or not. I am encouraging Him to keep trying to love others. That's what we should all be doing. It's difficult to do when people like you live for the fight. We can still remember to love you no matter how you try to cause another to stumble and lose their faith.

Regardless of whether or not a person even knows about Christ, they can become perfect in loving others. Thus, they can keep the second Great Commandment perfectly even though they are living outside of the law of God. There are many who DO believe in Christ who cannot love others perfectly because they judge and condemn others (though they will say that they aren't condemning anyone...they claim they are trying to save us and that we condemn ourselves by not agreeing with them).

Who is going to appear justifed to Christ? The one who truly loves others? Or the one who claims to love God but does NOT love his neighbor? The Bible already gives us the answer to that question.

To me it does not matter what a person believes, or says, or does. I try to love them all. We need to look beyond what a person does in the flesh, and see them for who they really are. In the same way, we need to see ourselves for who we really are. Until we do, we cannot truly love ourselves or love others; even though we can see ourselves and others in bodies of flesh and blood. If we cannot love who we have seen, how can we begin to truly love who we have not seen (i.e., God)?

Blessings,

jo
_Drifting
_Emeritus
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:52 am

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _Drifting »

jo1952 wrote:To me it does not matter what a person believes, or says, or does. I try to love them all. We need to look beyond what a person does in the flesh, and see them for who they really are.


How do you feel about Osama Bin Laden?
What about child molesters?

Who are they really?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”
Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric

"One, two, three...let's go shopping!"
Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
_Albion
_Emeritus
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Adam, first man circa 4,000 bc....?

Post by _Albion »

Loving others does not necessarily mean tolerance or acceptance of their views, their behavior or their preaching of false doctrine. Jesus demonstrated his love for everyone by dying on the cross for their salvation...the epitome of selfless love...and yet he was known to castigate the religious leaders of his day for their hypocrisy Matthew 23, the Sermon of Woes. Sometimes tough love is required.
Post Reply