Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

Interesting question indeed ! I made some researches on wol.jw.org, and came accross this reference : http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2010649 Here is the summary : Although this is often asked as a trick question by Bible skeptics, the Bible does provide sufficient detail to give a satisfactory answer. Genesis chapters 3 and 4 present the ...


0

Adam probably never heard her say that. She was talking to the serpent (Gen 3:2) when she said "you must not touch it, or you will die" (NIV). Later, when she actually ate the fruit Adam was with her but I think we might easily assume that at the time the first conversation took place Eve and the serpent were not actually near the tree and Adam wasn't with ...


3

This question stems from a lack of understanding of what the ancients believed "heavens and earth" mean, or what they believed the whole of creation looked like. The Ancients weren't aware of other planets. Just earth, hence they are referring to the Earth when they say "earth". It was not out of neglect that they don't also say "and other planets", but out ...


-1

If the human race evolves to such a state that we can colonize other planets. In my opinion no land will be necessary. As the humans can create living space anywhere in space. We could create our own artificial planets (mother-ships) that would hold millions of people and actual 'Earth'(planet) will not be required. I would suggest that all living space ...


3

The only good answer to this is "We don't know". And we don't know because the people writing the book had no concept of 'land outside of our planet'. For them there were only three parts to creation: Heavens, Earth and the Underworld, floating on a cosmic ocean. It is completely impossible to definitively state whether their words were intended to include ...


0

God actually tells is specifically why He created the earth, in Isaiah 45:18 "For this is what the Lord says, he who created the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited..." His specific, stated purpose in creating the earth was so that it could be inhabited: he ...


0

I don't think anyone argues that all of Seth's line was blameless. The argument is that Seth's line had special favor from God, Cain's line did not, and that the rebellion of Seth's line was (or was caused by) intermarriage with Cain's offspring. Matthew Henry comments on the circumstances leading to the Flood: In all ages there has been a peculiar ...


0

Since "seed" is a singular, just like Christ (singular) being the seed of the woman, it seems natural to think that the seed of the serpent is the antichrist, or the beast from Revelation, who is attempting to gain the worship of the world.



Top 50 recent answers are included