Genesis Chapter 2 presents creation in a different order than Genesis Chapter 1.  Some "soft literalists" are comfortable that it's just a matter of the bible presenting the material in a less-than-precise fashion.
    My minister says, "The Bible says it, I believe it, and that's the end of it."  When I asked him which part is true when they contradict, he said with conviction, "whichever part I'm reading."

        Sag.

    Almost forgot -- Darthran -- so evolution is completely out, yes?  Strictly as the Bible tells it in 6 days.

        J.

If that's the case, I've got a funny-looking Fish to show you.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0405_060405_fish.html

DarthRamna

I can tell your belief is very heartfelt and genuine. And I respect you for that. I have married into a very strong Baptist family and hear and see the same as with you wrote.

My problem is that you have prefaced your entire argument upon the Bible being the word of God. That is great until one meets the inconsistencies. The greatest of which is the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

If there is one message in the OT, it is "fear God". In the NT, Jesus preached "Love God and love Man".

The OT endorses casting out sinners while the NT wants us to embrace them.

Now as a Baptist, you must believe that Jesus was the Christ. If you have Jesus in your heart then you will find God in heaven. Yet you, and others, quote the OT to prove a point totally different from the love that Jesus preached.

Would you care to comment?

Mr Fusion,
I thank you for your comments and sense that your position is also genuine and I respect that, and I thank you for that as well.  However, I fear that I have already prepared too long a post in answer to the previouse questions presented to me so, if you will permitt me, I sahll endevure to address your concerns in my next visit.  Yet, there may be at least a partial answer for you in this post, though it deals specifcally with creation.  I pray you hear me when I say that there are no inconsitences.

Sagrilarius,
in a previous post you stated that your minister said "God said it, I believe, and that's the end of it."  You also said that Genesis 2 has a different order from genesis 1.

in a previous post you stated that Genesis 2 has a different order than genesis 1.  you also said that your minister said "God said it, I believe it, and that's the end of it."

both examples are true for my statements have nothing to do with the actuall order of events.  genesis 1 says God created land animals and God created humans.   genesis 2 says God created Adam from the dust of the ground.  God placed Adam in eden and made him the gardener.  God created animals (before or after man's creation is not conclusive based on the hebrew  words and grammer as discussed later in this post) and showed them to adam who named them all.  God created woman from adam's rib God brought her to adam (married them, essentially) and thus ends chapter 2.  note, there is no discussion of being fruitfull and multipying in chapter 2 but this does not mean that it didn't happen, it only means that it is written in chapter one, not chapter 2.

another example: last thursday i went to work and cooked my own breakfast.  for breakfast i had scrambled eggs, toast and sausage.  i talked about my breakfast at work because we were really bored.  i watched the news during breakfast.  events told in a different order do not contradict themselves, they are simply in a different order.  the one tells the story, the second adds more detail to the first story.  having something in one story but not the other is also not a contradiction.  everything does not need to be discussed every time.

An argument can even be made from the structure of the hebrew text itself, If I may quote a website I stumbled upon mere moments ago:
"It is argued that Genesis 1 represents animals as existing before man (24-26), yet Genesis 2 has Adam created before the animals are formed (19). The Hebrew text of 2:19 merely suggests that the animals were formed before being brought to man; it says nothing about the relative origins of man and beast in terms of chronology. The critic is reading something into the text that simply isn’t there."
This quote, and the entire piece I have just read regarding the questions of the continuity and even the single authorship question of Genesis can be found at http://www.christiancourier.com/feature/march2000.htm  a ver interesting read, I do highly recommend it.

and yes, macro evolution is completely out. strictly the 6 24 hour days of creation as described in the Bible.

Smartalix,
another interesting fish you might enjoy is the coelacanth fish (http://www.dinofish.com/).  long thought to be only a fossil, they have since been found living in indoneasian waters, and other parts of the seven seas.  like the Tiktaalik, the coelacanth has these 'pre-adaptaions' to landbased movement, ie pre-legs, yet it is not aggresively set forward as a transitional link.  two possible reasons for this; it is clearly a fish with the added benefit of extra fins, and no one has actually seen it walking even on the bottom of the sea floor.  some comparisions worth noting, both have bones inside those extra "pre-limbs" but the muscles in there in both animals are not attached to the bone but to the tissue.  this is very important because it means that these appendages are unable to support any weight.  thus these "pre-adaptations" are nothing more than extra fins.  please visit the following link for a creationist viewpoint of the Tiktaalik fish fossil written by scientists far smarter than myself.  (http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0406fishin.asp)

    There is extensive footage of the Coelacanth walking on the bottom of the ocean floor.  Discovery Channel.

    Sag.

dear mr fusion,
whole libraries have been written on the very subjects which you have raised.  Clearly I cannot go into that much detail here but I shall strive to clear up the picture a bit for you.  Your concerns bring up several subjects, the most obviouse are the differences in the old and new covenants which God offers to mankind.  Also, you bring up the "Fear of God" subject, the "Love God" subject and the use of these ideas in the two covenants/testaments, how they interact, and so forth.

Let me first convey to youa simple guideline for understanding that was taught to me when I first began to seriously study the Bible.  "The new testament is in the old testament concealed and the old testament is in the new testament revealed."  The best commentary for the Bible is the Bible for both the new and old testaments discuss the same subjects and draw examples from each other. 

The fear of the Lord is a fear of reverence and respect but it is also a fear of the power He wields and the judgement He brings.  Jeremiah 5:22 (AMP) Do you not fear and reverence Me? says the Lord. Do you not tremble before Me?.  Even the angels fear Him as seen in Psalms 89:7(AMP) A God greatly feared and revered in the council of the holy (angelic) ones, and to be feared and worshipfully revered above all those who are round about Him?  Fear Him for who He is, Fear Him for His awesome power, Fear Him for He is the judge of good and evil (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14) and Fear Him for it is wise to do so (Proverbs 1:7). 
The Fear of the Lord is also present in the New Testament.  2 corinthians 2:5-6  "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men;"  This particular chapter has the apostle Paul talking about his strong desire to be with God in heaven but fear of God's judgment  of his time spent here on earth brings him to focus his efforts on leading people closer to Jesus.  Even Jesus teaches the fear of the Lord in Matthew 10:28 and Luke 12:4-5.  Plus, one of the major themes of the entire book of Revelation is to install a sense of urgency in the believer to bring others to Christ for time is running short and the coming judgement of Mankind is something to be greatly feared, not so-much for what will happen to believers, though there is some of that with the anti-christ, but more what will befall the unbelievers.

Love the Lord is defienetly present in the new testament, in such places as Luke 10:27 and 2 Thessilonians 3:5 among others, but it is also present in the Old Testament, as seen in Deuteronomy 11:13, 22, and Joshua 22:5 and 23:11 just to name a few  The idea here is that if you fear God you will obey Him and if you obey Him you will love Him and if you love God you will obey Him and if you obey Him you will fear Him. 

The old testament does endorse casting out sinners, infact it has many stoned and otherwise slain for their sin, but so does the new testament.  Take Ananias and Sapphira of Acts chapter 5 who lied to the Holy Ghost in the presence of the Apostle Peter and they both were instantly struck dead by God.  also, the apostle Paul, in numerous letters, instructs the church to cast out those who persist in their sins yet claim to follow God and heaps curses upon those in the church who teach anything other than Christ Jesus alone as the way to God and salvation.  Even Jesus, in Matthew 18:15-17 instructs a method of excummicating persistent sinners.  In Luke 19:41-44, during His truimphant entry on palm sunday, Jesus weeps over the city of Jerusalem as He pronounces a coming judgement upon it for they did not recognize Him as the Messiah, the son of god, but merely sought after Him as a political 'savior' against Rome.  In all cases that are not fatal there is an option of restoration if the offender would repent of their sins and humble themselves before God.  Those cases which are fatal are reminders to us that He is God and we are not; He is worthy of our reverant fear, praise, obedience and love.  The new testament speaks many times of leading sinners to Christ as does the old testament spread messages of repentence to both Isreal and the outside world (Jonah, for example).  There are even converted gentiles in the bloodline of Jesus, such as Rahab of Jericho and Ruth, who married Boaz.

the way that this is taught in the Bible is like a picture of a child growing up.  When that child is young it knows only who his parents are, they give him food.  eventually he is taught that certain things are not done and there is punishment for doing them (fear of the parent).  love for the parent begins to develop and starts to replace the fear of punishment with obedience out of love yet that immediete punishment is still present into young adulthood (18 or so for most of us) though it becomes less and less present as time passes.  Now that mankind has  'grown up' we are not being directly lead as a population by God as a grown person is not directly lead by their parents, but rather indirectly through what He/they has/have already taught us.

yes, Jesus spoke of the love we should have for God and the love God has for us, but He also spoke of hell.  He wept for those who rejected Him, but in His love towards mankind He allows us each to choose if we wish to live with Him or without Him.  Unfortunity, the only place where one can live without God is in Hell.

Wow, this is a long post.  I do hope I didn't create too much confusion for you here.  In a nutshell, the fear of God, the love of God, casting out sinners, and welcoming sinners are all subjects which are present in both testements and indeed throughout the entirety of the Bible.  Thus there are no incinsitencies for while the methods which God uses to interact with man change as time progresses and man matures in his own nature and his understanding of God, the overall message of God's love, man's need for God and the coming judgement of sin remain present throughout the entire context of scripture.

I believe in God, I just don't believe in religion.

By definition, once a person relies on faith to answer the questions they have about life, the universe, and everything, they lose the ability to determine the facts for themselves. Once someone places their life in the service of any deity, they put themselves at the mercy of those who have appointed themselves the arbiters of that deity's intentions and desires.

Many religions use fear to keep the rank-and-file in line, leavened with promises of an idyllic life in the world beyond this one. A fear of "The Lord" is simply a displacement of critical thought in favor of accepting whatever rules that those who claim to be speaking for the lord give to their congregation. (They don't refer to the worshippers as "sheep" for nothing.)

Since no person alive has any real information about the nature of the mystery that is God, any person's interpretation of the nature of God is no more valid than the next person's. The Pope may have spent a long time in prayer, contemplation, and study, but his position on the nature of God is no more accurate than Jub-Jub the medicine man's. Any real discussion on the validity of any given faith is no more than a debate by children on who has the best imaginary friend.

You are so very close to what I believe to be the heart of the matter, smartalix, and i agree with you in many respects.  For all my beliefs, I do not consider myself to be religious.  Religion is about rules and ceremony, a meaningless list of dos and donts.  Yes, these things were given to the people of Isreal by God, but they were given to point to the Christ, who is the fullfillment of both the law and the festivals.  Once the rules become more important than the God who gave them then even these are sin.  Even Jesus rebuked the the religious leaders of His day, accusing them of looking good on the outside, but rotting within.  Religion is man's struggle to reach up towards God, but the bible tells of God reaching down towards man.

Yes, religious leaders do use fear to herd their flock.  With the promise of a glorious afterlife they blow up busses and chant while counting beads.  This is a fear of man for it is man who crafted the teachings of many religions, not God.  The fear of God does not send the believer fleeing from Him, rather it compells us to shed our wicked ways and turn towards His teachings.  It sheds all other fear for when you are in the hand of Him who can destroy both body and soul what have you to fear from someone who can only destroy your body?  It is the freedom to obey God rather than man.  Even a supernatural evil like Satan becomes powerless and insignificant before Him.

Infinite God cannot be fathomed or imagined by finite mind.  If man had to rely on his own senses to define God than we have nothing more than blind men speaking about elephants.  This is why the validity and consistency of the Bible is so important.  66 books written by 40+ authors over 2 thousand plus years in times of peace and times of war, peasents and kings both flattering and critical of its authors and audience without a single inconsistency.  this remarkable fact, though not the only evidence, is itself proof of its divine inspiration.  the job of our pastors and other leaders is not to teach their thoughts and ideas, but to teach the Bible and point to Jesus.  the Bible is the ultimate authority on God for it is written by God.  We cannot know God unless God reveals Himself to us which He has done through His prophets, His apostles and His Son and today, through the Bible.

Faith is the evidence of things hoped for, the substance of things not seen.  Perhaps I have lost the ability to determine facts for myself, but if God's understaning is far beyond mine and He provides this freely why would I want to rely upon my flawed understanding?  i cant determine the facts for myself anyway, no one can for our perspective is too limited and can never be objective.  Why then should I place my faith in myself, or any other man?  If God says it, then it is true, whether I believe it or not.  But if I believe it and I act upon that belief then it becomes faith and the more I act upon what God has said then my faith will grow and my belief increase.  Again, this is not faith in or obedience to any human but to God alone by going straight to His Word.  So i guess you could say that my information of God comes straight from God for i will believe nothing more or less than what is written in this book.

" A spherical earth is also described in Isaiah 40:21-22, "Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?  It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"  Note the phrase, 'circle of the Earth.' ... Thus it can be said that it may take a long time for us to get there, but God is already there and already told us about it in His word. 

Compelling argument. Wrong, but it sounds good to the lazy who don't want to fact check anything (you know, them that live inthe Red States). First, it doesn't say sphere, it says circle. You do know the difference, right? Use of the term "circle" sounds like flat Earth to me. Mesoptamian writings from antiquity (pre-dating the Tanakh) detailed Earth as a flat-disc (that would be a circle) floating in an ocean. This sounds like what Job is talking about. Since Job was from the area I think he would share this belief.

It would correspond to the reference in the Book of Job that a messenger said to Job, "The Chaldeans have carried away the camels, have killed all your servants, and I only am escaped." The Chaldeans were a group of people from Mesopotamia. Let's assume that this refers to the time that the Chaldeans rules Babylon (the Chaldean Dynasty) back in 6th Century B.C.E. He was speaking of the worldview common at that point in time that the world was a flat disc, not a sphere. They knew what spheres were... they didn't call a ball a circle, for instance.

However, in classical Greece they were getting right. Towards the end of the 6th Century B.C.E. Pythagoras wrote about a spherical Earth. however, Job would not have been aware of it. Aristotle further postulated the belief of a spherical Earth in 3rd Century B.C.E., and at that time Eratosthenes came very close to calculating the exact diameter of the Earth.

Now, here is what'sinteresting. While the flat-Earth believing YHVH loving followers like Job are getting riddled with disease and so on just because YHVH make a bet with Satan, the Greeks were at the height of science. Their math was top-notch, they even had psychiatric counseling and decent medical care. All this while worshipping the Greek gods? Who had the better diety? I guess that is why YHVH is such a jealous god and apparantly is against the idea of individual thought.

The fear of the Lord is a fear of reverence and respect but it is also a fear of the power He wields and the judgement He brings.  Jeremiah 5:22 (AMP) Do you not fear and reverence Me? says the Lord. Do you not tremble before Me?.  Even the angels fear Him as seen in Psalms 89:7(AMP) A God greatly feared and revered in the council of the holy (angelic) ones, and to be feared and worshipfully revered above all those who are round about Him?  Fear Him for who He is, Fear Him for His awesome power, Fear Him for He is the judge of good and evil (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14) and Fear Him for it is wise to do so (Proverbs 1:7)

I would fear anyone who kills for arbitrary reasons("You didn't wear underpants to temple and I saw your doink. DEAD!"), or that had his followers build the Ark of the Covenant which is one of the most deadly objects I can think of in myth. Look at it wrong and you are dead. Literally. Or how about the time Jehovah was running around town to find Moses to kill him (for some reason not mentioned in scripture), but decided not to when Moses' wife cut the foreskin off their son and rubbed the blood on Moses' feet. COOKOO!

How about how God tortures his subjects like Job or Abraham, just to see if they will still follow him. It is a religion where everyone has "battered wife syndrome." I bet when Abraham was about to kill his son because Jehovah wanted it, he propbably thought, "If I do it, I lose a son, if I don't then Jehovah will go ballistic, kill my son anyway, cover me in sores then have my guts explode out." Is that a choice?

You have an interesting argument and, I must admit, I had not heard of the disc floating in the sea theory before and perhaps I would find your points compelling if not for job 26:10 He has inscribed a circle on the surface of the waters At the boundary of light and darkness.  For the division of light and darkness, scientifically called the terminator, to be a circle on the surface of the waters the earth has to be a sphere. 

YHWH made no deal with Satan.  He does allow Satan to test us but never beyond what we are able for this testing is to improve our character and faith .  In order to shape the metal, the blacksmith must first place the metal into the fire.  Also, for all their acedemic persuits, the Greek, as a nation and culture, are gone but the Jews are still with us.

God does not kill for arbitary reasons.  The Ark of the Covenant is a symbol of the very pressence of a Holy, Allmighty God.  Sin cannot survive in the pressence of such a God therefore sin cannot interact with the Ark.  For this reason, it can only be carried by a priest and only then with golden bars through brackets on either side.  It is placed in the holy of holies in the temple for the protection of the people and can only be approached by the High Priest one day out of the year, the day of atonment.  First he must make a sacrafice of his own sins and then he may enter to apply the sacrafice for the sins of the people.  This becomes important imagery in the new testament for the sacrificng of animals to cover sin is profetic of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross who died for the sins of all who took up the position of the high priest, entering the pressence of God to apply the blood of His sacrifice to caver the sins of all who believe, and to raise all believers to a priestly satus symbolized by the tearing of the barrier which seperated the people from the holy of holies thus allowing everyone free access to the pressence of God for the law has now been satisfied.  Incidently, there is no indication of the ark killing because of looking at it, only touching it.

Oh, and the reason the Bible doesn't talk about God searching for Moses to kill him is because it probally didn't happen

How about how God tortures his subjects like Job

God didn't torture Job, Satan did. Satan confronted God and claimed that Job only worshipped him because life was good for him and said that if things went bad, Job would curse God. God then basically said, "prove it". Satan was wrong, Job stayed faithful.

or Abraham, just to see if they will still follow him. It is a religion where everyone has "battered wife syndrome." I bet when Abraham was about to kill his son because Jehovah wanted it, he propbably thought, "If I do it, I lose a son, if I don't then Jehovah will go ballistic, kill my son anyway, cover me in sores then have my guts explode out." Is that a choice?

Abraham was not tortured either. The Bible says what Abraham was thinking, it says that he assumed God would resurrect Isaac. After all, God has previously promised that the Messiah would come through Abraham's line, but he had no son at the time. Isaac's birth was a miracle to start with, Sarah was far beyond child bearing years at the time. So Abraham showed faith in God by attempting to go through with the sacrifice because he fully believed that God would make things right because God had made a convenent with him. He was not expecting to lose a son, and he was not afraid of his guts exploding.

DarthRanma

You have an interesting argument and, I must admit, I had not heard of the disc floating in the sea theory before and perhaps I would find your points compelling if not for job 26:10 He has inscribed a circle on the surface of the waters At the boundary of light and darkness.  For the division of light and darkness, scientifically called the terminator, to be a circle on the surface of the waters the earth has to be a sphere. 

YHWH made no deal with Satan.  He does allow Satan to test us but never beyond what we are able for this testing is to improve our character and faith . In order to shape the metal, the blacksmith must first place the metal into the fire.

If God was as good as he claims he would have told Satan to bugger off instead of torturing a good man like Job. But instead he tries to prove it to him, a deal to prove it I would say, an unspoken agreement.

How God tests it is like hitting a dog until it stops doing what you don’t like- while it also causes other personality disorders. How can you not reject this crap… certainly Jesus did. I don’t believe he ever wanted his followers to combine these two disparate views of God into one.

Also, for all their acedemic persuits, the Greek, as a nation and culture, are gone but the Jews are still with us.

Which proves… nothing. Jehovah didn’t destroy the Greeks.

God does not kill for arbitary reasons.

 

Since we are on Job let me grab a simple example: From Job 1:16  While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, "The fire of God fell from the sky and burned up the sheep and the servants, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

Then, minutes later:

18 While he was still speaking, yet another messenger came and said, "Your sons and daughters were feasting and drinking wine at the oldest brother's house,
19 when suddenly a mighty wind swept in from the desert and struck the four corners of the house. It collapsed on them and they are dead, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

Fire and wind from God for no good reason killed the servants and his kids! That is not arbitrary. That is damn cruel.

Then comes this quote: In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.

Well, I am. The God of the old testament is a horrible, uncaring, battering, killer of the people that care for him. This is the true fear of God: cross him and be damned- be good and if he wants to he will damn you anyway. And it is all detailed in this good book which you claim has NO INCONSISTANCIES.

The Ark of the Covenant is a symbol of the very pressence of a Holy, Allmighty God.  Sin cannot survive in the pressence of such a God therefore sin cannot interact with the Ark.  For this reason, it can only be carried [lots of really complicated rules cut] … Incidently, there is no indication of the ark killing because of looking at it, only touching it.[/quote]

Okay, you are right. I went back and look up arkicides in the Bible. None for looking at it. But here is another indiscriminate killing with the ark:

 6 When they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out and took hold of the ark of God, because the oxen stumbled.
7 The LORD's anger burned against Uzzah because of his irreverent act; therefore God struck him down and he died there beside the ark of God.

God could have let him live. He touched it be accident! But God has no remorse, no sense of right or wrong, you touch it, you die. God, being all powerful, could have stoped the ox fromstumbling. Maybe he made the oxenstumble.

Oh, and the reason the Bible doesn't talk about God searching for Moses to kill him is because it probally didn't happen:

From Exodus 4:20-30 (New International Version)

20 So Moses took his wife and sons, put them on a donkey and started back to Egypt. And he took the staff of God in his hand.
21 The LORD said to Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.
22 Then say to Pharaoh, 'This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son,
23 and I told you, "Let my son go, so he may worship me." But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.' "

Okay, the Lord tells Moses to go to Egypt, tell the Pharaoh what for, and tells him his the Pharaoh’s is going to sleep with the fishes. But the next line of Exodus comes out of left field, as if David Lynch was writing this thing:

24 At a lodging place on the way, the LORD met Moses and was about to kill him.
25 But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son's foreskin and touched Moses' feet with it. "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," she said.
26 So the LORD let him alone.

After this it switches back to Moses being this great figure, with no explanation for the wanting to kill him thing.

If God was as good as he claims he would have told Satan to bugger off instead of torturing a good man like Job. But instead he tries to prove it to him, a deal to prove it I would say, an unspoken agreement.

If God just told Satan to take a hike (or destoryed him), would that have answered his challenge? Satan basically challeneged God's way of doing things and claimed that people only worship him for selfish reasons. And he made this challenge while in heaven, with a multitude of other spirit creatures present (angels or what-not). If God just told Satan to take a hike, what would the rest of those present think? After all, Satan wasn't just a loner, he had his crew too who previously followed God. Others could have sided with Satan thinking that maybe he was right after all. God agreed to let Satan test Job in order to settle the issue. Satan was forced to put his money where his mouth was, and he lost.

Since we are on Job let me grab a simple example: From Job 1:16  While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, "The fire of God fell from the sky and burned up the sheep and the servants, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

Then, minutes later:

18 While he was still speaking, yet another messenger came and said, "Your sons and daughters were feasting and drinking wine at the oldest brother's house,
19 when suddenly a mighty wind swept in from the desert and struck the four corners of the house. It collapsed on them and they are dead, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

Fire and wind from God for no good reason killed the servants and his kids! That is not arbitrary. That is damn cruel.

Keep in mind, Job and his people were not aware of what had transpired between God and Satan, and from their point of view it was God doing these things to him, so that's what is reflected in the account. Admittedly God allowed Satan to test Job, but ultimately Job's eventual situation was better than where he started. And it serves as an example to people today that it is possible to remain faithful under trial, and a reminder of where hardship truly comes from.