Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Sunday School And A Worldwide Flood (Pt.3)

cinepro

By cinepro
in General Discussions

Recommended Posts

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

Written in first person?  What does this look like in the physical magazine, because I reads like it belongs in The Friend, not in the Ensign.

 .

Perhaps it is part of the effort to make the home the center of gospel learning...it feels like a FHE aid to me.
Tiki Proficient

Tiki

Posted
Posted (edited)

Written in first person? What does this look like in the physical magazine, because I reads like it belongs in The Friend, not in the Ensign.

also... as someone who believes the church's current stance is global flood... I have to admit that I find nothing in this article to require that. This article seems to allow local flood as the interpretation no problem. Unless I missed something.

We believe in baptism by immersion. A local flood would only be a Catholic baptism. :) Edited by Tiki
Brian 2.0 Veteran

Brian 2.0

Posted
Posted (edited)

We believe in baptism by immersion. A local flood would only be a Catholic baptism. :)

 

I heard the flood lasted so long because the earth keep sticking its toe (Mt. Everest) out of the water.  Thankfully the two witnesses (the sun and the moon) caught it.

Edited by Brian 2.0
1
David T Veteran

David T

Posted
Posted (edited)

Cool! The Church is publishing modern Pseudepigrapha every month this year! Texts attributed and claimed to be by a biblical character to teach current religious ideas in a familiar context spoken by voices of recognized authority, but actually of much later date. It's a good setup to help let members appreciate that this might be what Joseph did with Abraham and JST. ;) If it's okay for the Ensign editors to put words in an old prophet's mouth, why not for the Prophet of the Restoration?

Edited by David T
3
thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted

Rob, you are quite right.

It isn't that evolutionists have evidence that disproves creation/flood etc, it's just that the evidence that does exist can be interpreted in more than one way.

 

The moon looks like a wheel of green cheese. So it must be that it is a wheel of green cheese because God did it.

Alan Veteran

Alan

Posted
Posted

The moon looks like a wheel of green cheese. So it must be that it is a wheel of green cheese because God did it.

 

Do you have a different moon in your part of the world?

My friend, I've seen green cheese, and the moon does not look like it.

thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted

Do you have a different moon in your part of the world?

My friend, I've seen green cheese, and the moon does not look like it.

 

I've seen both. To me it looks like a man riding a bicycle. Plus some of my ancestors fully believed it was made of green cheese.

https://www.google.com/search?q=green+cheese&client=firefox-a&hs=ZH&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=ipADU5j9LcqT2QXn3oDYCQ&ved=0CDsQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=568#facrc=0%3Bgreen%20cheese%20moon&imgdii=_&imgrc=_

thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted

Heard about this one? 

 

http://www.youroriginsmatter.com/conversations/view/scientist-stumped-by-actual-dinosaur-skin/157

 

 "But a team working in Canada found an exhilarating bonus on a hadrosaur fossil fragment—it had actual skin still attached."

 

Better yet here is a "museum" that has man riding around on a coconut eating T-Rex.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-science-of-the-creation-museum

thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted

I am convinced that the whole Creationism movement is a bad ripoff of the DinoRiders cartoon I watched as a kid.

 

Coulds be. But I believe it is more fundamental problem than that. Science isn't able to answer the basic human questions of WHY sin and death. Those question have plagued mankind in every generation since Adam. Most deal with by accepting a religion and some by rejecting all religion. I don't foresee a resolution to those basic questions any time soon.

danielwoods Grand Master

danielwoods

Posted
Posted (edited)

I would suggest that Adam was "man" but not a man

 

If thats the case, how do you interpret, Romans 5

 

"12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."

 

 

I want to hear how you unwrap this scripture. Using your view as a context. That "Adam" doesn't mean "a man" but all mankind. 

Edited by danielwoods
Gray Grand Master

Gray

Posted
Posted

Huh...?

 

Adam means man. The story, IMO, is a metaphor for human development from innocence to knowledge, on the macro level and the individual level. Adam wasn't a person. 

Gray Grand Master

Gray

Posted
Posted

If thats the case, how do you interpret, Romans 5

 

"12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."

 

 

I want to hear how you unwrap this scripture. Using your view as a context. That "Adam" doesn't mean "a man" but all mankind. 

 

 

It's Paul's opinion, who obviously took the Genesis story literally. However, you don't need a literal Adam to assert the need for atonement. We fall short regardless of whether we were poofed into existence or if we evolved. 

Rob Osborn Grand Master

Rob Osborn

Posted
Posted

Adam means man. The story, IMO, is a metaphor for human development from innocence to knowledge, on the macro level and the individual level. Adam wasn't a person. 

Thats as bad as saying Christ isn't real

thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted

Adam means man. The story, IMO, is a metaphor for human development from innocence to knowledge, on the macro level and the individual level. Adam wasn't a person. 

 

i have no problem with Adam being an actual person. Fortunately or unfortunately what he did is lost in the mists of time and religion.

danielwoods Grand Master

danielwoods

Posted
Posted

It's Paul's opinion, who obviously took the Genesis story literally. However, you don't need a literal Adam to assert the need for atonement. We fall short regardless of whether we were poofed into existence or if we evolved. 

 

It's also the opinion/belief/message of every biblical writer and prophet. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...