Daily Genesis

[DaveW]

Teach it Biblically and everyone will be happy.

But you have already shown you like to redefine words and terms, so we will be watching very closely.

We would also like to know why you should be trusted and what your doctrinal position and background that means you should be trusted.

And no, I won't stop pushing this point. 

Until you give us a reason to trust you, why should we?

[Zuno_Yazh]

-

● Gen 1:31 . . And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

 

Some feel that the cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --was created incomplete, not quite up to snuff: that it was to Man that God entrusted the task of putting on the finishing touches. But that is very doubtful. Why ever would God, after an overall inspection, conclude His work by pronouncing it all good-- and not just good, but "very" good. Why would He say the creation was very good if in truth it was incomplete?

 

In reality, Man hasn't improved the planet at all. He has actually ravaged it and left it with terrible damage-- leveled mountains, dried up rivers, emptied lakes, drained marshes, indiscriminately obliterated habitat, wiped out animals to extinction, scraped away perfectly good cropland and replaced it with warehouses and factories and malls and residential communities.

 

A prime example of this kind of destruction is INTEL's massive Ronler Acres Campus located on what was once agricultural land in Hillsboro Oregon. Thousands of cubic yards of perfectly good topsoil was scraped away during construction of the facility. What did they do with it? Was it transferred elsewhere in order to use it for farming? No, instead INTEL used it to build a massive berm all around the facility where the soil will never again grow food. NIKE did the very same thing with the topsoil scraped away during construction of its facility in Beaverton.

 

Man's denuding of watersheds has caused unnecessary erosion and stream sedimentation. He's dammed rivers, thus disrupting ancient fish migration routes. He's over-exploited natural resources, filled the atmosphere with toxins and greenhouse gas emissions, poisoned aquifers, contaminated soil and waterways with chemical fertilizers, pesticides, GMO vegetation; and made possible super germs, and seriously upset the balance of nature.

 

It seems that everything man touches, he ruins; and as if the Earth isn't enough, he's moved out into space where in the years since Russia launched its first Sputnik into low Earth orbit on Oct 04, 1957, humans have littered the sky around their planet with 13,000 catalogued pieces of space junk, which is only a fraction of the more than 600,000 objects circling the globe larger than one centimeter (a centimeter is a little over 3/8ths of an inch). Humans have even discarded 374,782 pounds of litter on the Moon, including the golf balls that astronaut Alan Shepherd left behind.

 

So; when God looked over His work and "found" that it was very good, does that mean He was surprised it came out like it did? (chuckle) No. It would be a strange craftsman indeed who couldn't look over their work with pride and satisfaction in a job well done.

 

I believe creation's creator knew precisely what He was doing, and where He was going with creation; and was highly pleased that it came out exactly as planned. I seriously doubt that God was feeling His way along like experimenters in medicine and rocket science. Nobody could build a fully functioning cosmos and all of its forms of life, matter, and energy unless they knew what they were doing from beginning to end.

 

"O Lord, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all" (Ps 104:24)

 

NOTE: The information disclosed in the first chapter of Genesis is incorporated in the text of a gospel labeled as "everlasting".

 

"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." (Rev 14:6-7)

 

The everlasting gospel is very elementary. Pretty much all it says is:

 

1• There's a supreme being.

 

2• He deserves respect.

 

3• There's a frightful reckoning looming on the horizon, and

 

4• The cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --is the product of intelligent design.

 

Of particular interest to me is the inclusion of water in the everlasting gospel. Scientists theorize the origin of the earth's amazing quantity of water without really knowing exactly where it came from, nor how it got here. Well; that is one of the things that I like about Genesis. It takes an essentially unsophisticated, uneducated blue-collar welder like myself and gives him answers to questions that people much brighter, and better educated cannot answer.

 

Giving "glory" simply indicates giving someone credit where credit is due; and "worship" can be roughly defined as reverence, i.e. honor and respect.

 

It's quite natural to admire celebrities, pro athletes, and super achievers-- to give them credit where credit is due --but not quite so natural to do the same for their creator.

 

Anyway, point being: people either believe in intelligent design, or they don't. If they do believe, then they will admire both the designer's genius and His handiwork. If they don't believe; then they will neither admire nor respect anything about Him: simple as that.

 

/

Edited April 12, 2018 by Zuno_Yazh

[DaveW]

You don't believe the Bible means what it says - we saw that in your totally false and unjustified redefinition of terms earlier in this thread.

Why on earth should we trust someone who doesn't believe the first chapter of God's Word?

Especially when that one is presuming to TEACH FROM THE FIRST CHAPTER OF THE BIBLE, but he doesn't believe it means what it says!!!!!

 

[Salyan]

Zuno_Yazh, could you make the attempt to engage with other forum members on points they bring up for discussion rather than pushing ahead? I think you'll see a better response from folks. 

I'm not going to lock this thread yet, but let's see 1) actual engaging, rather than didactic lecturing, and 2) focus on topic, not people (from both sides). I'll keep an eye on the reporting system, so feel free to use that if any significant issues arise.

 

[Zuno_Yazh]

33 minutes ago, Salyan said:

could you make the attempt to engage with other forum members on points they bring up for discussion rather than pushing ahead?

 

NO!

 

/

Edited April 12, 2018 by Zuno_Yazh

[Salyan]

Oooookay, then....

[Jim_Alaska]

Zuno_Yazh, "No" is not an acceptable answer to a moderator on these forums. Moderators are here to moderate at the request of the board owner and uphold his board policies. This type of response to a moderator will not be tolerated on this board.

Salyan's request as a moderator was reasonable and fair. Your reply to her was unchristian at best and absolutely rude by any standards. If you claim Christ as Savior you should hang your head in shame for your disrespect.