Has evolutionism become a leading religion?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Right. We all know that not every Father and Son are named in genologies. It is not uncommon for several people to be skipped. That doesn't make them figurative or symbolic, they are still literal, they are just not exhaustive.

So then they can't be used for dating purposes then, can they?

In fact, one would have to conclude that the author (who knew he was "skipping" generations) never even intended that the genealogies be used as such.

They weren't dummies back in antiquity. And, they weren't trying to pull some sort of "coadie-like" stunt in trying to get us to believe something that had never really happened (like coadie speaking "6 languages").

[DAII]

Originally Posted by pelathais

So then they can't be used for dating purposes then, can they?

In fact, one would have to conclude that the author (who knew he was "skipping" generations) never even intended that the genealogies be used as such.

They weren't dummies back in antiquity. And, they weren't trying to pull some sort of "coadie-like" stunt in trying to get us to believe something that had never really happened (like coadie speaking "6 languages").

No, they didn't bear false witness.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by pelathais

So then they can't be used for dating purposes then, can they?

In fact, one would have to conclude that the author (who knew he was "skipping" generations) never even intended that the genealogies be used as such.

I wouldn't say they can't be used for dating purposes. I would be open to the possibility that we cannot nail down the age of the earth to the year through geneologies, though I'm not saying its all together impossible.

I certainly think geneologies are helpful for dating. Particularly the one in Genesis 5, and the 11 chapters worth in Chronicles.


Irregardless there is a HUGE difference between the thousands of years and the millions of years were talking about here, which isn't answered if someones great grandparent isn't mentioned in a list on geneologies.

Furthermore, the Bible itself warns of endless discussions on geneologies. So appearently Paul, under inspiriation of God, knew that there would be attacks waged on God's word through geneologies. Not saying your particularly attacking His Word thorugh geneologies, just that I don't think its a slam dunk point, or even all that relevant.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I wouldn't say they can't be used for dating purposes. I would be open to the possibility that we cannot nail down the age of the earth to the year through geneologies, though I'm not saying its all together impossible.

I certainly think geneologies are helpful for dating. Particularly the one in Genesis 5, and the 11 chapters worth in Chronicles.


Irregardless there is a HUGE difference between the thousands of years and the millions of years were talking about here, which isn't answered if someones great grandparent isn't mentioned in a list on geneologies.

Furthermore, the Bible itself warns of endless discussions on geneologies. So appearently Paul, under inspiriation of God, knew that there would be attacks waged on God's word through geneologies. Not saying your particularly attacking His Word thorugh geneologies, just that I don't think its a slam dunk point, or even all that relevant.

What Paul was instructing Timothy (and Titus) to avoid the dependency of some to base their faith on "fables," genealogies, commandments of men and other things that "turn from truth."

1 Timothy 1:4; Titus 1:14 and Titus 3:9.

Can't you see how Fundamentalist Literalism fits that description so completely.