Originally posted by mancha:Thus the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. - Genesis 5:5
This was passed down by word of mouth for don't know how many centuries and then written down in Hebrew, and then translated into English.
What does it originally mean?
Adam did not live on earth for the duration of 930 circumnavigation round the sun.
He live to a ripe old age, number unknown, he was mature and extremely well renowed and respected in the community he lived in. The 930 years is the gauge of his maturity and wisdom, respect and renown he received from the community he lived in.
Lee Kuan Yew would also in the same context be said to have lived nine hundred years.
Don't read the bible literary. Think about what it is trying to say.
It ORIGINALLY MEANS that Adam lived 930 years. LITERALLY. How can you say number unknown when it is clearly stated he lived till 930?? What else would this verse be trying to say other than how long Adam lived. What do you have to back what you have just posted. Me thinks you have over thought the issue here.
if i dun get this thing wrong, the reason why he said it cannot be taken literally is cos living in the AD years makes it illogical to believe tat humans could actually live tat long...i mean the world record for mortality is abt 150years old???tats a far cry from adam's age when he died...
Brey, many here choose to see the bible thru human logic...so u get stuff like how is it possible to create the whole universe in 6 days...who created God??? etc...
Originally posted by despondent:
Brey, many here choose to see the bible thru human logic...so u get stuff like how is it possible to create the whole universe in 6 days...who created God??? etc...
What other logic would one use? There is hardly any other systems that can be counted upon to actually produce results. When something exists outside the realm of logic and evidence, it most likely is a fairytale. One may try to justify reasons about how god might exist, but if the explanation is illogical, how can the reasons actually be considered justified?
funny how come after i became christian, i had another kind of logic that is illogical to humans...i am sure brey noes wad logic is tat...
Originally posted by despondent:funny how come after i became christian, i had another kind of logic that is illogical to humans...i am sure brey noes wad logic is tat...
Do you really have another kind of logic or is it an illusion?
But if you believe your God needs a body, soul and spirit aka Trinity, you're using human logic.
Originally posted by despondent:funny how come after i became christian, i had another kind of logic that is illogical to humans...i am sure brey noes wad logic is tat...
Well you're still human, and I feel that to follow such "religiously inspired" logic is undoubtedly dangerous. Logically what kind of person would strap bombs around his chest and blow himself up in a subway? Only one with a sub-par logic standard would attempt something like that. Of course I am not saying that everyone is going to become a terrorist, but to point out that religious standard logic would be said to be very foolish indeed
Originally posted by mancha:Thus the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. - Genesis 5:5
This was passed down by word of mouth for don't know how many centuries and then written down in Hebrew, and then translated into English.
What does it originally mean?
Adam did not live on earth for the duration of 930 circumnavigation round the sun.
He live to a ripe old age, number unknown, he was mature and extremely well renowed and respected in the community he lived in. The 930 years is the gauge of his maturity and wisdom, respect and renown he received from the community he lived in.
Lee Kuan Yew would also in the same context be said to have lived nine hundred years.
Don't read the bible literary. Think about what it is trying to say.
your logic is the same as the buddhism. i read about buddha pointed to a cup of water and told his disciples that there were 840,000 (i think is this number) of micro organisms in it. it said it was not exactly this number but to denote many or countless. so i agree with your logic that 930 years is to denote adam lived to ripe old age.
u use buddhism to judge the bible? can an apple ever be called an orange? sigh...
Originally posted by despondent:u use buddhism to judge the bible? can an apple ever be called an orange? sigh...
they belong to the same type called fruits and they both are rich in vitamin c. you see the similarities ?
hai...u still refuse to heed my advice and view christianity differently from other religions? so wad if both are fruits? apple and orange are fruits but are they the same? forget it...u carry on viewing christianity liek other religions then...wish u all the best...
To Fairyfairy86:
dun say i didnt help u...christianity teaches salvation by grace while most other religions teach salvation by gd works...buddhism teaches getting enlightened also thru accumulating of gd karma...one pt to note is that the emphasis of buddhism is not to get to heaven...reaching nirvana is diff from getting to heaven...
think of tis...if the essence of christianity is salvation by grace while the essnece of most other religions(buddhism in this case) is salvation/enlightenment thru good karma/works, then can u still view christianity in the light of buddhism? the reverse is also true...which is why when i view buddhism, i dun use christianity as a gauge...this is the last time i am going to tok abt viewing christianity diff. if u still insist on ur way, then all the best...
yes, cannot use simple human logic to explain divine work.
must be faithful and love God then you will be saved. come join me now.
why should we use different rule to measure all religions, or non-religions alike?
u mean i can say this metal rod measures 6 inches some other people say its 7 inches
can suka suka like this?
Originally posted by TrueSon:yes, cannot use simple human logic to explain divine work.
must be faithful and love God then you will be saved. come join me now.
some people like you can readily accept this kind of teachings and follow it faithfully, but some people can't. they have the brains to think for themselves and not follow it blindly. there are so many people in this world with different thinking. if cannot use logic and rationale, then whats the purpose of having a brain. some people have brain, but they didnt utilise it.
Originally posted by despondent:To Fairyfairy86:
dun say i didnt help u...christianity teaches salvation by grace while most other religions teach salvation by gd works...buddhism teaches getting enlightened also thru accumulating of gd karma...one pt to note is that the emphasis of buddhism is not to get to heaven...reaching nirvana is diff from getting to heaven...
think of tis...if the essence of christianity is salvation by grace while the essnece of most other religions(buddhism in this case) is salvation/enlightenment thru good karma/works, then can u still view christianity in the light of buddhism? the reverse is also true...which is why when i view buddhism, i dun use christianity as a gauge...this is the last time i am going to tok abt viewing christianity diff. if u still insist on ur way, then all the best...
may be you can explain why there is a need for jesus to preach the 10 commandments. did he say it is good if you follow the 10 commandments and it is absolutely fine if you don't as long as you believe in him and you will be saved.
if jesus did not preach the 10 commandments, i will agree with you that salvation by grace.
to Fairyfairy86,
well, i am afraid u will have to find that out urself since u are not comfortable wif PM...but its not a matter of whether u agree that salvation is by grace according to christianity...its abt wad does christianity teach regarding salvation...the isssue here is not abt u agreeing...its abt did u try approaching it based on wad it teach and see if it makes sense...
like i said, i approached buddhism not on the basis on grace since it doesnt teach salvation by grace...i approached it from the perspective of good works...do i agree wif buddhism? mostly not...but tat doesnt mean i refuse to try understanding it based on its essence...if i had tried understanding it based on grace, i would nvr have grasped even its fundamentals...
Fairyfairy86,
i read the thread u started...so did u get any answers in the end? u see wad i mean when i wanted PM?
Originally posted by despondent:to Fairyfairy86,
well, i am afraid u will have to find that out urself since u are not comfortable wif PM...but its not a matter of whether u agree that salvation is by grace according to christianity...its abt wad does christianity teach regarding salvation...the isssue here is not abt u agreeing...its abt did u try approaching it based on wad it teach and see if it makes sense...
like i said, i approached buddhism not on the basis on grace since it doesnt teach salvation by grace...i approached it from the perspective of good works...do i agree wif buddhism? mostly not...but tat doesnt mean i refuse to try understanding it based on its essence...if i had tried understanding it based on grace, i would nvr have grasped even its fundamentals...
Chrisitianity may have some difference in its teachings, yet majority of it can be said to have been interpolated from other sources, down to the very story of Jesus. How many can claim that good works don't play any role in chrisitianity, and afterall, Christianity is essentially highly simillar to the thousands of religions over the ages that have floated around. One may choose to see it differently, but in the end, Christianity is still a religion.
Originally posted by Rooney9:some people like you can readily accept this kind of teachings and follow it faithfully, but some people can't. they have the brains to think for themselves and not follow it blindly. there are so many people in this world with different thinking. if cannot use logic and rationale, then whats the purpose of having a brain. some people have brain, but they didnt utilise it.