randman

On my educational level, check on another thread.
On Genesis, it appeared some here were unaware of the 2 sets of "flying creatures", birds, that are spoken of.

Berzerker

randman - In other words, you have to add your speculations to the Bible for it to mean what you want? This is a very important matter since it goes to the heart of the question of whether or not God created the universe. I know why the Bible doesn't claim God created the waters, but why are we repeatedly told God created the Earth when all God did was reveal the Earth (literally, "dry land", not this planet) by gathering together pre-existing waters into "Seas"? Since these waters were already in existence, and they covered the dry land called "Earth", doesn't that mean the Earth - dry land - also existed before God revealed it, albeit submerged by the waters? This is why we are told in Gen 1:2 that the "Earth" was without form and void while implying it was nonetheless in existence.

My "predisposition" is based on what the Bible says, not on speculations that contradict the Bible.

Why? Where is the "water" meant to be something other than water? It may be used as a metaphor for some other phenomena such as the common view of the ancients that the planets and stars flowed across the sky as celestial "rivers", but not "spiritual". And this metaphor does not appear in the Bible to my knowledge.

But the Sun and Moon do have dominion. They are the two most prominent celestial objects in the sky. There is nothing "spiritual" or "allegorical" about that claim.

But aren't you one man? I'm using the actual text and you are offering speculations that contradict the actual text. Think about it, why did the authors neglect to attribute the waters to God when they attributed so many other aspects of existence to God? If they believed God created the waters, why not tell us in clear, unambiguous language?

While I agree there is symbolic language in the Bible, this leads us into the trap of claiming the Bible is inerrant while leaving the reader in the position of trying to figure out when language is symbolic and the true meaning of the symbolism. But none of this symbolic language can explain why the Bible never claims God created the waters. Genesis is quite clear as to what God "created" and what God did not create.

No it doesn't.

Since this is all supposedly history, why would you claim these are "prehistoric" fowl? And since when do fowl translate into dinosaurs? Isn't the argument that birds are an offshoot of some specie of dinosaur a claim made by some evolutionists? Strange that the Bible tells us about dinosaurs when it only mentions birds. Besides, the Bible doesn't say birds or fowl came from the waters. It says the fowl were to fly across the face of the firmament over the "Earth" and to multiply on land while claiming God caused sea creatures to abound in the waters. It next claims the beasts of the land were brought forth. There we have the sea creatures, the fowl of the air, and the land based creatures. The fact the Bible says birds were to multiple on land and not in the water shows they weren't brought forth from the water.

I don't think evolutionary theory claims creatures originated on land. They invaded the land from the sea.

I have two questions about evolution myself:

1) How did life begin in the first place?
2) Why did Homo Erectus remain in stasis for over a million years only to make the enormous "evolutionary" jump to anatomically modern humans in such a short amount of time?

The Bible says every winged bird was brought forth without specifying from where. It then tells us God commanded the sea creatures to multiply in the seas and the birds to multiply on land, but not on the same day as either man or the other land-based animals.

randman

Kosh, no you are wrong. The Bible does not state that the earth had form. I realize many have gotten the pre-earth and pre-Adamic man stuff from Dake's study Bible, but this is not what is written. Without form and void to my mind means that it was an idea first, a Design.
Obviously, the Bible elsewhere states that God created the waters, and everything actually. John chapter one might be a good read for you if you doubt that.
You are also wrong about the winged creature. The Bible most certainly states "let the waters bring forth" on the 5th day, and then in Genesis 2, God forms birds from the ground. Read it.
You must be reading a wacky translation if you are.
"Waters" and water, if you don't think the Bible repeatedly speaks of water as an image of spirit, then you are just not reading the Bible. Ever hear the phrase, living waters flowing out of one's belly? The water in this example is the Spirit of God. The OT ie also replete with this same imagery.
On allegorical, something can be both literal and allegorical. There was really an Ishmael and Isaac, but they, or rather their Moms, are allegories of 2 covenants according to the apostle Paul in the book of Galatians.
I'll ne glad to debate you, but thus far, you don't even appear to have a decent text.

Kosh

Please get your attributions correct. You want
Berserker. I'm harassing you about other stuff.

randman

I hear you.
Don't you know all you evolutionists sound alike (lol).