Creationism/Evolution
See other Creationism/Evolution Articles
Title: Pope Francis says Big Bang theory and evolution 'compatible with divine Creator'
Source:
telegraph.co.uk
URL Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor ... tible-with-divine-Creator.html
Published: Oct 28, 2014
Author: By Nick Squires
Post Date: 2014-10-28 13:42:04 by Ferret Mike
Keywords: None
Views: 61895
Comments: 132
Theory universe born in cosmic explosion 13.7 billion years ago 'doesn't contradict' divine Creator but 'demands it', says pontiff The theory of the Big Bang is compatible with the Catholic Church's teaching on creation and belief in both is possible, Pope Francis has said. The Pope insisted that God was responsible for the Big Bang, from which all life then evolved. The Big Bang - the theory that the universe was born in a cosmic explosion about 13.7 billion years ago and has expanded and evolved since - "doesn't contradict the intervention of a divine Creator, but demands it," the Pope said. The beginning of the world was not "the work of chaos" but part of a divine plan by the Creator, he said. The Jesuit Pope made the remarks during an address to a meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which gathered at the Vatican to discuss "Evolving Concepts of Nature". "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve," he told the meeting. God should not be regarded as some sort of "magician", waving a magic wand, he said. "When we read about creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so," he said. "He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that He gave to each one so they would reach fulfilment." The Pope's remarks were in line with Catholic Church teaching of the last few decades. As far back as 1950, Pope Pius XII said that there was no intrinsic conflict between Catholic doctrine and the theory of evolution, provided that Catholics believed that the human soul was created by God and not the result of random evolutionary forces. That stance was affirmed in 1996 by Pope John Paul II. "The Pope's declaration is significant," said Giovanni Bignami, the president of Italy's National Institute for Astrophysics. "We are the descendants of the Big Bang, which created the universe. You just have to think that in our blood we have a few litres of hydrogen, which was created by the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago. "Our blood is red because it contains iron, which was created by the explosion of a star millions and millions of years ago. Out of creation came evolution."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-67) not displayed.
.
.
.
#68. To: Vicomte13 (#59)
I don't know if it's more about reading carefully enough or again, context and interpretation. Genesis 2:17 -- "but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." What did God mean by "die?" Didn't God curse Adam with both physical AND spiritual death? Can't we conclude Adam's act affected all of God's original plan -- and that death begat all His Creation? Pork chops and steak weren't eaten until after the fall. So, what is your interpretation or belief about "Death" as per scripture?
Some Christians become stubborn and don't like seeing the femininity of God ALSO right there in Genesis, particularly the femininity of the Holy Spirit. That is disturbing, because it's not the Christian tradition. No Bible scholar am I, but frankly, the concept wasn't "strange" or the ends "loose" until now :-) The reason it's disturbing is that it feeds into pagan concepts of Mother Earth and "Goddesses." I'll have to further examine your thesis, Vic, because I've never heard of your translation related to in gender terms other than "God the Father." We have the Father, Son...and yes, "Holy Spirit." Of note: Man (Adam) was created first; Jesus (the Father's Son, in His place) also male. I hope Mary doesn't play into this equation somehow.
LOL sorry thought everyone knew. The same Rangers and Cowboys threads etc.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
There is no demand to acknowledge Jesus as personal savior. What Jesus SAID was "follow me" and "do as I say" and "you will be judged by your deeds" and "nobody comes to the Father except through me". So, let's be clear: Jesus' deal, his judgment, is going to be personal to each person. None of us has been appointed the judge of the world, or guardian of it, or bearer of its weight. We've each been charged to look after ourselves and our immediate family, firstly, primordially. The formula demanding a particular mouthing of belief isn't in the Bible at all. It's a doctrine of a Church that seeks to answer the question "What about all those others", and it leads to an answer that isn't true. And it's irrelevant anyway. You're going to be judged on what YOU do. So, whether you mouth that Jesus is personal savior or not isn't going to HELP you if you don't do as he said. Now, the notion that the Law is too hard to follow is also wrong. Gentiles, like you and me, NEVER were under the JEWISH law at all. We ARE under the law of Jesus. What HE said was that if you murder people, engage in sexual immorality, engage in pharmakeia, traffic in lies and fraud, worship idols or are a coward he rejects you and will throw you in the fire. He does forgive those who slip - but he said that he only forgives them TO THE EXTENT that THEY are forgiving of other men for the sins other men do. So, Jesus has a high standard, but it is not impossible to keep. If you slip, you're on your way to the lake of fire...BUT there's still a save for you: you'll be forgiven IF you're forgiving. If you forgive others the evils they do you and turn the other cheek and let it go, then Jesus will let it go, but if you refuse to do that, if you are proud and arrogant, you are establishing the standard of your own judgment. Since you'll probably slip on something, if you're not forgiving, you're not going to enter the City because YOU set a rule of harsh and condemnatory judgment which you, then, will experience yourself. Some Christians have taught the doctrine that Jesus forgives everything if you believe he was the Son of God and that his sacrifice forgave all sin. That's a wonderful doctrine, but it isn't what Jesus SAID. In fact, he said things pretty baleful for those who cry "Lord, Lord!" but who don't DO what he said to do. And he asked, quite testily: "What good does it do you to say you follow me if you do not keep my commandments?" Christians like to throw up that Torah list of laws and say they're off the hook for that. This is a false doctrine. It is ILLITERATE. Read the Torah: who does it apply to: HEBREWS, who were THERE. And what was promised? A farm in Israel. Nowhere in the Old Testament does God EVER ONCE promise the Hebrews "Eternal Life" or anything like it if they follow his laws. He promises them a farm in Israel and security during life - that's IT. So, the whole business about being "relieved of the burden of the Law" is a red herring. Sure, JEWS like Peter and Paul and the Apostles and early disciples were relieved of the Law, but they were JEWS. Gentiles like you and me, though, were never under the Law in the first place. If we placed ourselves under it and did it all, it wouldn't give us eternal life, because God never PROMISED eternal life in exchange. It would give us a farm in Israel while we lived, and nothing more (and then only if enough of the rest of the community also obeyed). So when we see all of the JEWISH anguish over "The Law" in the Gospels and Epistles, we need to remember that none of that has one thing to do with us. We were never under the law in the first place, and adherence to the law never promised eternal life. For us, it's easier: what are JESUS' Commandments. Jesus' sacrifice does NOT release us from obeying THOSE. He'll forgive us our past sins, but if we keep on sinning - with sin defined as what Jesus said would damn us - then we'd better be FORGIVING OF MEN, because if we're not, we're dead. Up in Scotland there were some hard-bitten leaders who "did not suffer a witch to live". They enforced, in the 1500s and 1600s, a law given to ISRAELITES, never Gentiles, and burnt 20,000 witches. They were harsh and unforgiving and very Christians, and they very probably will all be thrown into the lake of fire because they committed MURDER (God never once authorized GENTILES to kill witches - the Torah was EXCLUSIVELY for Hebrews under the Covenant - that the Jews were given the right to kill the Canaanites does NOT mean that the English were given ANY right to go kill the Welsh to take their land), so that's one strike against them. They did it on the basis of a law that did not apply, so they lied and twisted Scripture to authorize them to do evil. Strike two. And, having captured sinners, they were harsh and judgmental and unforgiving. Strike three. They committed murder, deceit and their own form of idolatry by putting people into the fire, and they were unforgiving, and Jesus - on the standards he stated - will probably throw them all into the fire. They will say "But we prophesied in your name!" And he will say "Into the fire, you evildoers". Being a "Christian" does not get you out of the fire. You have to be good, and if you're not, you have to be forgiving. Those are JESUS' terms, and Christians don't get to make up a doctrine that contradicts him and makes his blood more powerful than his own commandments at forgiving them from doing whatever the Hell they please. This is all obvious on the text. So, circling back to us. Do we murder, lie, commit sexual immorality, indulge in pharmakeia or idolatry? Are we cowards? If yes, then STOP IT. When we converted, all before was forgiven, but sins since are not forgiven so easily. Now we have to ask for forgiveness from God, and we have to temper ourselves to be very forgiving of others. And until we've done all that, we had best not waste our time looking over the hedge to cluck at what is in somebody else's mind, because we are so obviously lost ourselves that nothing very useful will come out of our mouths. After all, those "Christians" burning Scottish witches thought they were purifying their land, but really they were just murderous assholes condemning themselves to hell, and committing crimes against humanity that have made people ever since disgusted with Christians and Christian religion - their crimes and evil barred the bridge to others by making Christ disgusting. We still here today about all of the crimes of Christians in their Churches, and those accusations are JUST. Christians need to take care of their own gardens first. And be forgiving. That's load enough.
I'm...somewhat...willing to do it, to show the template and the language and the facts. BUT I'm not willing to generate heat, or take abuse for it. If there must be heat and abuse, then I'd rather leave that scroll sealed, because it doesn't ultimately MATTER to the final disposition of the spirits of people - what one believes about creation is not on the list of things that Jesus said would get one thrown into the lake of fire. I always appreciate your honesty, effort, and sincerity -- even if we don't happen see eye to eye. What IS important is the bottom line of Salvation, true... That said, opening the Vic Scrolls is entirely up to you. Protestants are more heavily invested in Genesis because it happens to provide the foundation for the rest of Scripture. Genesis sez God's Creation took exactly 6 Days. He rested on the seventh. I don't know if there's much to debate other than whether one believes Genesis' Creation is an allegory, believes "one day" is figurative, or chooses to believe some parts of Genesis, but not others.
They were not supposed to be eaten until after the Flood.
I've seen much of what you have to say on this subject. I don't think the Christians here will start a flame war. I'm up for it.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Good question. Adam lived for hundreds of years after he ate the fruit, so if we take the English translation literally: "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Did God change his mind? Did Adam die, or didn't he, on the day that he ate of the tree? The Hebrew verbs make a difference here. The way this has been translated, God changes his mind, doesn't do what he said he was going to do. Either that, or something DID die, but it wasn't Adam's body. The Hebrew partially answers the question - and in the process demonstrates that whole translation issue front and center. The Hebrew imperfect verb tense does not translate well into English. The Hebrew says merely that in the day that Adam eats it, he WILL die - which can be understood as "he will BEGIN to die", or he will eventually die. So, in the Hebrew, death means his physical death. And indeed, when we read the genealogies, we see the antediluvian patriarchs all dying. "And he died." So, in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, death is physical death, and God does not reveal life after death and resurrection until very late in the prophets (with increasing clarity in the books that the Protestants don't accept as canonical). This is why the Sadduccees did not believe in the resurrection or life after death. Remember: the Sadduccees were the hereditary priests. Nobody was closer too or more consistently bathed in Hebrew Scripture than they were, their whole lives (Pharisees were not priests), and yet THEY did not see the resurrection or eternal life in the Hebrew Scriptures at all. The Pharisees saw resurrection in their. It's JESUS who gives a new meaning to "death", when speaking of people reputed dead, such as Abraham and Isaac, and says that God is the God of the LIVING, when referring to them. He also refers to those who are dead (physically) as having fallen asleep. So it's with Jesus - who is the one who promises eternal life and resurrection (not the Torah) - that the veil is peeled back and we begin to see that after physical death, the spirit lives, and that the spirit IS the person. But Jesus doesn't give this to us in nice scientific terms.
That is true. But consider this. Psalm 11:3King James Version (KJV) 3 If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? The religion of evolution seeks to destroys the foundation of the Bible. The story of Adam and Eve. The reason Jesus came. So if someone believes in evolution and tries to take the Bible literally. Then they see a conflict. If they then believe in evolution. It makes it more likely they will not believe the Bible. We have to restore the foundation. Genesis. Because if it is under attack and not to be taken literally. Then why would they believe in Jesus if he came because of something that Adam and Eve, which they believe to be fiction. That is one of the reasons I see it as important. There is somewhere in the Bible that says you have to preach to the greeks different then the Jews. Because the Jews had a a foundation in the Bible and the greeks didn't. So you have to reach different people with different methods. So if you destroy the lie of evolution, many people will have the door opened to possibly seeing the light of Gods word found in the Bible.
The death that God said would surely come over Adam and Eve it they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So because there was no physical death before that time. Natural selection would be incompatible because you would have Adam and Eve standing on a pile of bones of dead things.
It was a load, but enjoyable load to read. Plenty to consider that I'll expound upon when my battery isn't so low. For now my commentary will be on the following related bits of you dissertation... "IF you're forgiving. If you forgive others the evils they do you and turn the other cheek and let it go, then Jesus will let it go, but if you refuse to do that, if you are proud and arrogant, you are establishing the standard of your own judgment....For us, it's easier: what are JESUS' Commandments. Jesus' sacrifice does NOT release us from obeying THOSE. He'll forgive us our past sins, but if we keep on sinning - with sin defined as what Jesus said would damn us - then we'd better be FORGIVING OF MEN, because if we're not, we're dead." Two themes are struck: Lack of "Forgiveness" and continued "sinning." The end result of which will be Judgement by our own standard. Vic, IF we as fallible sinners are not capable of quelling sin 100%, where does that leave us? Answer: As sinners. Period. ONE SIN, TWO SINS, 100 SINS, 1000 SINS. You are NOT leaving this world without a tab. Neither am I. So either the Blood of Jesus for Believers meant...EVERYTHING or NOTHING. Which is it?? That said, this isn't to discount the importance of good deeds and forgiveness either. I'm now going to back up the WIDE LOAD truck and re-quote you: "So, let's be clear: Jesus' deal, his judgment, is going to be personal to each person. None of us has been appointed the judge of the world, or guardian of it, or bearer of its weight. Yes, I'm going with your "Jesus deal" as a consideration because ONLY the Lord knows our unique, respective heart, road, trial, and tribulations. The kid in Sri Lanka can't possibly be judged the same as the guy in Seattle; OR, the girl in Galilee, 5 B.C. with the Jew in Jerusalem 2014 A.D. Same with the Catholic sinner in CT and Baptist sinner in Jersey. Do we murder, lie, commit sexual immorality, indulge in pharmakeia or idolatry? Are we cowards? If yes, then STOP IT. When we converted, all before was forgiven, but sins since are not forgiven so easily. Now we have to ask for forgiveness from God, and we have to temper ourselves to be very forgiving of others. And until we've done all that, we had best not waste our time looking over the hedge to cluck at what is in somebody else's mind, because we are so obviously lost ourselves that nothing very useful will come out of our mouths. Of course we can't continue to indulge routinely in your above sins...especially and importantly, without repentance. I know you don't agree with me here, but through my belief in the Blood of Jesus Christ, I *know* I am the Lord's. Far from perfect, a wretched sinner, a liar, holds grudges, lusts, hates, etc. Yes, sins ARE forgiven. Through the grace of Jesus Christ. Thus I am NOT condemned. I will ask and pray for mercy and strength from the Holy Spirit to repel contain my sins and repent when I am weak (which frankly is often.) Here's the primary problem with Catholicism and your perspective and criteria for reaching Heaven: In practice...IT. IS. AN. IMPOSSIBLE. STANDARD. This standard is what causes many Catholics or potential Christians to TOTALLY give up on maintaining ANY standard, surrender ALL hope, and toss their hands up in futility and frustration. The thought process (infused by Satan) is..."See? You can't meet God's ridiculous standard, so GIVE UP!" And guess what? They DO give up completely. I know such people. They become narcissists who ignore the soul, caring only about satisfying the flesh since Heaven (they've been told) is such a long shot. Merely eating, drinking, and being merry...until they die, as they readily accept their inevitably swan dive into Lake Hell. Speaking of "forgiveness," why does the RCC insist that ONLY clergy can act as intermediary between man and God? Where in Scripture is it written that we become sin-less the moment man exits that Confessional Box? Were the sins on that tab REALLY erased after muttering a few Hail Marys and Our Fathers, and Act of Contrition as "penance"? Because of this, do you want to know what my first and only thoughts after swinging wide the doors open from the Church afterward? "Gee -- IF I get hit by a bus RIGHT NOW, I'm in Heaven!!"
Was it? And then after that, not even pork chops ;-)
We have to restore the foundation. Genesis. Because if it is under attack and not to be taken literally. Then why would they believe in Jesus if he came because of something that Adam and Eve, which they believe to be fiction. That is one of the reasons I see it as important. Hear ya, Stoney.
So it's with Jesus - who is the one who promises eternal life and resurrection (not the Torah) - that the veil is peeled back and we begin to see that after physical death, the spirit lives, and that the spirit IS the person. But Jesus doesn't give this to us in nice scientific terms. Onboard, Vic.
We should not only observe the words of Christ but His actions of mercy, kindness and longsuffering. The Greatest act of all being crucified for the ransom of many. Matthew 20: 27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: 28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. Which as Christ's ministry moves toward Calvary, He reveals more to His disciples His mission on earth: Luke 9: 22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day. 23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. Also here: John 3: 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. After the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ we have this: Luke 24: 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And ye are witnesses of these things. 49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. And as Christ said the disciples were witnesses to these things, we see the faithful transmission of the above Gospel message: From Peter: 1 Peter 1: 18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God. Which also Paul confirms all the apostles preached the same Gospel: 1 Corinthians 15: Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed. The above is what Jesus Christ commanded the disciples to proclaim, and the above is what the disciples proclaimed, preached and taught. So yes according to the NT the Blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:7) Jesus and His apostles also emphasized firmly that those who follow Christ must walk in His ways. We who believe, trust have faith must be faithful and we are called to holiness. And of course God did not keep us out there flapping in the wind. He promised the Holy Spirit, and delivered on the promise starting at Pentecost.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Prior to Vatican II Beatnik metrosexuals revisionist history, it was "Holy Ghost" masculine. Yes. The ones not saved.
For Hebrews, if they wanted the farm in Egypt. Pork chops have been fine for my line all the back to the Flood. The Law of Moses, on its own terms, was a covenant between YHWH and the Hebrews there in the Sinai and their circumcised lineal descendants. And the covenant was: Do this, and you'll get a secure farm in Israel. I didn't have any relatives standing there in the Sinai, I'm not an heir to that covenant, and God never promised me and my folks anything for not eating pork. So ever since God told Noah and his sons they could eat any animals, it's been licit for me and my line to eat pork. The Torah after about Genesis 11 never applied to them (and by extension me) either before or after Jesus, and probably didn't apply to you and your'n either.
Read Revelation again and look at whom Jesus was warning. It was a letter addressed to the CHURCHES. The recipients of this letter, being told by Jesus they would be judged by their deeds, where all Christians and Christian Churches. Christians are judged by the deeds, and the standards that Christ set are high, that is true. And Christ set the standard, too, when men fall short. He did not say that it was all covered by his death, not at all. Rather, he said that if YOU want to be forgiven by God for the sins YOU have committed against HIM, YOU have to forgive other men the sins they commit against you. The Lord's prayer itself establishes this standard, and we're always asking God to apply it: "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us." There is a strain of theology that essentially sets everything Jesus said aside and says that it's all about the blood. It's an interesting theory, but it isn't based on what Christ SAID, and after all, HE was God, not the Christian theologians. So I'll stick with Christ on this one: what you do matters, there's a (short) list of "Don't dos". Once you find Christ and are baptized, your past sins are indeed completely washed away. But if you commit new sins after that, then you've got to ask God for forgiveness, and he will forgive you TO THE EXTENT THAT you forgive other men their sins. We ask for this very standard every time we say the Lord's prayer, so if we don't really MEAN "Lord, forgive me my sins against you to the extent that I forgive the sins of other men against me", then we should stop saying it.
In Hebrew, the Spirit of God is feminine singular. Ruach is a feminine singular word. It is not masculine. Genesis through Malachi is written in Hebrew, with the feminine spirit, not English. It is what was inspired by God. In Greek, Ruach is translated as "Pneuma", - Spirit - Pneuma Hagion - the Holy Spirit. Pneuma in Greek is neuter. Pneuma was translated into Latin as "Spiritus", which is a masculine word, in Latin. But now we're two translations removed from the inspired autograph. God inspired the Scripture to contain the feminine Spirit. In Hebrew and in Aramaic, the language of the Jews and of Jesus in the Galilee, "spirit" and "Holy spirit" are feminine. In Greek transcription, this is the neuter pneuma. It only becomes masculine in Latin, two translations away from the original inspired words. The Spirit of God is feminine singular in most of the inspired Scriptures, and neuter in the rest. Translations are echoes. They are not themselves inspired. The gender of the "Spiritu Sancto" in Latin is masculine, and the masculine pronouns have passed into English. That's nice, but the Scripture is the inspired word of God, and when God spoke of God's spirit, God used the feminine. So the Holy Spirit IS feminine, whether the Latins and English- speakers like it or not. (The only reason to DISLIKE that, given that God says outright on the sixth day that in Elohiym's image he made them male and female, is because of a desire to cling to tradition. Here, the tradition is erroneous, contrary to something very obvious in the Scripture. The tradition needs to be chucked. In Latin, the Holy Spirit is a he because of grammar. But in English, there is no gender of nouns. One can follow the Greek neuter and call the Holy Spirit IT, but if one is going to personify the Holy Spirit, then she is a SHE, not a HE, in the Bible anyway. Why resist the Bible?)
I'm not going to talk about the Catholic Church, only Scripture.
Thought I would share. A man who I think fully understood God's Holiness, Law and how lacking he was. He was also a man God said was a man after His Heart. Psalm 51 King James Version (KJV) 51 Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. 2 Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. 3 For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. 4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest. 5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. 6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom. 7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. 8 Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice. 9 Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities. 10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. 11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me. 12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit. 13 Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee. 14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness. 15 O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise. 16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. 17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. 18 Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem. 19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Is that Gilligan from Gilligan's Island?
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
No, it's Maynard G. Krebs from the show Dobie Gillis. Gilligan was a beatnik before that three hour tour.
Do you believe that you have to be baptized to be saved? If so what do you base that on sir?
"Fraud"?? "Death"? Sorry, not following that supposition. Putting myself in the place of the Apostles.....with my life literally being threatened by a horrible, painful death and all I have to do is say "it was all make believe" and I'd get to live? But they didn't say that, none of them did. If it were me, and the whole Jesus story was made up in part BY me, I would have confessed in order to save my own skin. Not one of those guys did that. That tells me a lot.
Not one of those guys did that. That tells me a lot. Very good point that I had never considered.
I'm surprised meggy hasn't demanded the heads of all "intolerants". Or will that be coming later?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
But they didn't say that, none of them did. Aaah, ok. Thanks for the clarification, 4gi. Really hard sometimes to understand context and gists in posts. I don't think the apostles wanted to die...but it was easier to do so than deny God and Jesus. Look at all the Middle Eastern Christians doing the same, and accepting their beheading fate rather than denying Christ instead of converting. True martyrs. If it were me, and the whole Jesus story was made up in part BY me, I would have confessed in order to save my own skin. Not one of those guys did that. That tells me a lot. Well yes -- maybe in the "Save-My-Own-Skin" mode you're in at the moment you can't quite relate. But when push came/comes to shove, you just might surprise yourself and take the bullet at the moment of truth. When you "shook the dust from your sandals" at LP, you did it reflexively without even thinking. You knew it was the ONLY thing to do. When the moment of truth arrives, IF it arrives in our lifetime, many of us may have to make that same decision. I know some may chuckle at that notion, but we ARE in the last days in my opinion (and I know Spot agrees with me.)
Homo-San would add "intolerants" to his list of "homophobes" and "haters." AS he and his warped hypocritical ilk order the mass Waffen-SS style executions. Think about this for a moment -- to the Homos, the Fascist Left, militant Atheists....AND Muslims, WE are considered "infidels."
Lol...As opposed to "Gilligan" from LP?? As hondo confirmed, this "Gilligan" is Maynard Krebs from Dobie Gillis (those of us old enough to remember.) As to "Gilligan" from Gilligan's Island, can someone tell me how HE wasn't gay in that show? Mary-Ann and Ginger were all over him...and yet, it wuz all he could do to avoid those smooches and quickly run back to the Skipper (no, NOT H'up)
Matthew 20: 27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: 28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.... Luke 24: 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem... 1 Corinthians 15: Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. Worthy of further contemplation. Moreover, we need to bear in mind that not only are the Gospels a definitive authority of instruction of faithfulness, holiness, addressing sin and the redemptive reason for Christ's death...but also the Epistles. Paul wields as the same authority as he speaks on behalf Jesus on all matters -- including the subject of "ransom."
I didn't have any relatives standing there in the Sinai, I'm not an heir to that covenant, and God never promised me and my folks anything for not eating pork. So ever since God told Noah and his sons they could eat any animals, it's been licit for me and my line to eat pork. The Torah after about Genesis 11 never applied to them (and by extension me) either before or after Jesus, and probably didn't apply to you and your'n either. Your points are well taken about the laws for Jews and Gentile. God *did* give the reasons why the meat of shellfish, pork, and birds of prey were considered dirty and unsanitary.
As you readily concede, it can be said that the standard is SO high that ALL men fall short. "He did not say that it was all covered by his death, not at all." Revelation 21…5And He who sits on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." And He said, "Write, for these words are faithful and true." 6Then He said to me, "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. 7"He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.… We note a promise. "It is done" (indicated by Jesus redemptive blood.) And the "water of life" for those who are faithful in accepting His Sacrifice and Grace. There is a strain of theology that essentially sets everything Jesus said aside and says that it's all about the blood. It's an interesting theory, but it isn't based on what Christ SAID, and after all, HE was God, not the Christian theologians. So I'll stick with Christ on this one: what you do matters, there's a (short) list of "Don't dos". Once you find Christ and are baptized, your past sins are indeed completely washed away. But if you commit new sins after that, then you've got to ask God for forgiveness, and he will forgive you TO THE EXTENT THAT you forgive other men their sins. I disagree here. No, I don't believe in such a "strain of theology" that essentially dismisses Christ's "DO's and DON'Ts" instructions and ground rules. The "Our Father" is a prayer to God asking for the Holy Spirit to infuse us with encouragement in deed. BECAUSE WE ARE WEAK AND PRONE TO SIN: In layman's terms, YES, in the finality, "past sins" ARE "washed away" by the blood of Jesus Christ in a pure act of Grace to those accepting this gift. This is not heresy or a misunderstand. ANY admission into the Kingdom of God is based on nothing BUT grace, since NONE of us are worthy. Even IF we've achieved all those "good deeds," and acts of "forgiveness," what about all the other sins left sullying our "account"? Still we remain sinners. "IT. IS. DONE." What's it mean to you, Vic? No one is saying that the importance and requirements of good deeds and forgiveness commanded by Jesus is to be ignored or dismissed. But by THAT criteria, man will still fall short of sinlessness in God's Kingdom because...he is "man." Thus man remains condemned without Jesus blood paid as ransom for an imperfect, sinful man.
Same book, Revelation chapter 7: 13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? 14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. The apostles emphasized we are saved by God's Grace. It was the subject of the Jerusalem council: Acts 15: 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. The message throughout all epistles is we are saved by Grace through faith in Jesus Christ; His sacrifice is for the remission of sins; and all those who follow Him will obey Him. From 1John 1: 5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. God will not be mocked. If we say we walk with Him, and then go to a brothel, we are liars. It has always been Trust and Obey.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Wonder if meggy went to his funeral?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
To me, the issue is to read EXACTLY what Genesis says. Now, to REALLY do that, you have to do it in Hebrew, and you can't even look at just the words, you have to look at the old hieroglyphic-pictographic letters in which it was originally written. Each word is composed of pictographs, and those pictographs THEMSELVES spell out a sentence. So, the words have a surface meaning, but the words are themselves sentences that also carry the meaning of the pictographic sentence of which the word is composed. And the pictographs themselves are words that convey a meaning. When one looks at these three levels of meaning, a fractal picture emerges. God inspired this text, and God has a divine mind and can do things at multiple levels that we can see if we look, but that we could never do. Especially not in the first piece of literature written in a given language. So, where there is ambiguity in meaning on the surface, the pictures beneath the surface bring what is meant into sharp relief, and the sub-pictographic words do too. Translation erases all of this. If the translation is good, the surface meaning is conveyed. The surface meaning is important - the fractal sub- meanings don't contradict it but amplify and clarify it - so if we just look at a good English translation, we have the surface meaning, but we don't have the clarification support, so we have to be careful not to drift. Some assertions can be made that are plausible on the surface meaning in English, but that don't hold up when the deeper Hebrew details are examined. Still, in the case of creation, the surface English meaning serves us reasonably well. "Day" is defined on the first day of creation as "Light", and "Night" is defined as darkness. A day is the evening and the morning. IF we read that to mean the period of darkness and light, then we do have the alternation of dark and light on the first day, second day, third day, fourth day and thereafter, but something changes completely on the fourth day. This is important for understanding time. A "day" is always the alternation of darkness and light, but the Sun and Moon and stars are not placed in the sky to regulate the day and night and times and seasons. There is no yardstick by which to measure the passage of time until the fourth day. After the fourth day, the alternation of day and night in a day is the result of the earth turning and the sun passing overhead, the seasons are measured out by the moon, etc. But before the fourth day none of those things exist. A "day" is the period of darkness and light, but there is no celestial clock for its measurement. So, there is no basis at all in Scripture to conclude that the first four days were 24 hour solar days. They were periods of light and dark, to be sure, but how long the light or dark lasted is not told to us. It is wrong to take the English word "day" and say that a "day" to US is 24 hours, and THEREFORE that means that the first 4 days were 24 hours. That is quite ridiculous. For God DEFINED "day" as meaning "the light". He didn't give a time span for the light. So, what Genesis actually says (in English) is that there were four alternating periods of light and dark in which light was made, the sky was stretched out, land and sea were separated, the beginnings of plant life were placed into the land, and the sun, moon and stars were placed. How LONG those days were is not said, and cannot be surmised. Specifically, to assert that a solar "day", OUR use of the word" is what existed before the fourth day is imposing upon the text and adding a strict detail to Scripture without any authority at all. God DEFINED what a day was, and he didn't define it like that. So, whomever asserts that the first four days were 24 hour solar days is flat out wrong. It's not a matter of opinion. The solar day did not, and could not, exist until God made the sun, and he didn't do that until the FOURTH day. The fourth day ENDED with the Sun being there, but it did not BEGIN so, so we don't have any concept of its length either. The first four days are of unknown length. They were periods of alternation of light and dark. That's all we know from the English. For evolutionary purposes, all of the animals came to be on the fifth and sixth days, and those WERE solar days. So, by Scripture, the flying creatures and swimming creatures began to be made on one day, and the land animals, including man, began to be made on the very next day. All of this was completed on the seventh day, which was a solar day. So, when you say that Genesis sez God's Creation took exactly 6 days, I say that's not right. It took six days and PART OF the seventh, for Genesis, in the English, tells you that on the seventh day God COMPLETED the creation he had begun to make. In the Hebrew this is even clearer, for on all of the earlier days of creation, the verbs are imperfect verbs, meaning that God began to create thus and so, not fully created. Creation wasn't complete until the 7th day, and then God rested. Otherwise, it is true that there are 7 days, but days 1 through 4 are periods of light and dark, not 24 hour solar days. Only after the creation of the sun on the 4th day were solar days visible and possible. The first complete solar day, that began and ended as such, was the fifth day. We cannot say that solar days were exactly 24 hours then. They may have been somewhat faster (18 hours). So yes, Genesis does indeed have all animal life beginning to be created on two solar days (and completed on a third). And those days are probably somewhere in the ballpark of 24 hours. But we can't state how long the first four days were, because there was no sun, moon and stars by which to measure out time as we experience it. The first four days may have been seconds long, or they may have been eons long. There is no way of knowing. That they were periods of evening and morning, light and dark - THAT we know. When the animals were created, then we're talking about recognizable solar days. This doesn't offer any solace to evolutionists at all: animals were created over the course of three days (fifth, sixth and part of the seventh). But it also means that we have to stop short of creationists who go past Scripture and assert things that Scripture doesn't say (in English or otherwise). The earth and stars MAY be billions of years old, if those first days, light and dark, were long periods. But animals came to be on three solar days. Now, when we go into the Hebrew, we discover that the word we translate as "light" is the word AWR, which we'd transcript as "OR". This is the root of "order", "ordinance", "ordain". Pictographically, this is God - El - linked to the head. There are overlapping concepts here. The fundamental message is that from the original conditions of God's spirit hovering in blackness over the primordial chaos, the mem, God said "let there be ORDER", and God brings order out of the chaos. The order and organization is the period of day. What is "light"? Light is the visible form of energy. And what is necessary to overcome entropy and chaos? Energy. A trilogy of ideas come together here, and link to God's breath/spirit over the chaos of the dark mem, the abyss. Now consider of what the universe is composed. Mostly hydrogen and helium. And at absolute zero, in the complete absence of energy (or at extremely low levels - after all, God's spirit was moving the surface of the waters - think of the foam at the level of Plank's Constant), what are hydrogen and helium? They are a liquid. Now think of the "earth" land - matter -being dissolved into that mass of liquid - unformed, invisible, "void" - waiting to be divided out of it. Here, to see the deeper features, we'd have to go into the Hebrew. Just sticking with the English, though, there's a striking set of facts in the text that correspond to much of the physics. The abiogenetic evolution of species, however, simply did not and could not occur in the 3 days of animal life being created and completed in the Genesis account. Genesis IS important. I don't personally believe that it's an allegory. I think it's revealed history. But what is actually REVEALED is the history, and what is actually revealed is different on the granular details than what is said to be revealed by some of the Protestant creationists. Do these differences in details matter? As far as the details go, no, they are irrelevant. God made it all. God made the animals. But the way of looking at Scripture does matter. The Scripture says what it says, and I am very stubborn about insisting that it means what it SAYS. It does not say that creation was done in six days. It says six and part of the seventh. And it does not say six 24-hour periods. Functionally, that latter thing shouldn't matter because it DOES say that animals were made on two solar days (and part of a third), but there could be billions of years of planetary globules floating around in the dark before the fourth day. The length of the early days, before animals, is NOT said, and the it is NOT a solar day, because the solar days don't exist until the fourth day and afterwards. This sort of punctiliousness about Scripture matters, because later on, when we get into Christian doctrine, we're going to be wrestling over a few lines of Paul versus lines of Jesus, and arguing about authorities. So, Genesis is the testing ground. What it says, as far as it goes and where it stops, is really pretty clear. Traditional interpretation has run past what the text actually SAYS, and that's a bad habit of mind that I think should be cut off with Genesis. Example: Christians say how hard the law is, that we can't follow it. Really? Jesus said that the following things will get you thrown into the fire: Murder, sexual immorality, lying, dealing drug "magic", idolatry and cowardice. I don't think that's such a hard law to follow, and I think it's a lie to say that we can't follow that. I follow that. It is not hard to not murder people, not deal in drugs, not follow magic, not worship false gods. It can be harder not to engage in sexual immorality, not to lie and not to be a coward., but it isn't all THAT hard. I recall the honor code at Annapolis, how lying would get you expelled. I recall being very conscious of it all, and I recall wondering how I could possibly get by without fibbing. The answer is, pretty well. I told no lies nor fibs, nor lying by omissions, throughout my time there. In fact, not lying greatly enhances your courage. You tell the truth, you get yelled at sometimes. And the world does not end. Sexual immorality? You have to look at what God said sexual immorality is. Is it hard not to have gay sex? Is it hard not to have sex with animals? Is it hard not to cheat on your wife? Actually, no, really it's not hard. So, I dispute - I deny outright - that it is all that hard to follow the Law of Jesus. Jesus said "My yoke is easy and my burden is light", and for the most part that's right, unless you're addicted to drugs or power or money or flesh or lies. So, what's all this endless business about how the law is too hard and nobody can follow it. That's not true! What has happened is that people have decided that The Law of Moses, given at Sinai to the Hebrews, is "the law". It's not. That was the law FOR THE HEBREWS. Are you a Jew? No. It never applied to you. Christ's coming didn't MAKE it apply to you. The covenant with Abraham was that his descendants would fill that land forever. Arabs and Jews are both descended from Abraham, and that's who fills that land. So, God upheld those covenants, both with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and also with Hagar and Ishmael. And none of that has a thing to do with a Sami Basque Celt like me, or with whatever sort of Gentile you are either. And then there's the Law of Moses: all of you circumcised Hebrews here at Sinai - do this all and I'll give you a secure farm in Canaan and prosperity. Refuse to obey and I'll take it away. Not one word in that about eternal life. Nothing. Are you a circumcised Hebrew, or a descendant of them? Even if you were, do you want a farm in Israel? You won't have it regardless unless a certain number of other similar circumcised Hebrews follow all the laws with you. Are all of those Hebrew commandments - 613 of them by tradition (I could fewer) - really "impossible" to do? I don't know, and I don't care either, because even if I did all of them, I'm not a Hebrew and all that covenant ever offered was a farm in Israel. The deal I'm interested in is Jesus' new covenant. He said I had to follow HIS commandments. And he gave a "bare minimum" list at the end of Scripture. On the last page of Scripture he twice gave the list of things that will earn you the fire and lose you your life: Murder. Not committing murder isn't hard unless you take up the sword as a profession. Sexual immorality. Not committing buggery or bestiality is not a hardship. There is certainly a temptation to adultery and to harlotry, but it is a temptation that men certainly can master. I've mastered it. This is hardly an overwhelming demand for normal people. Lying. Not lying is demanding. It goes hand in hand with not being a coward. Not engaging in pharmakeia. What's that? It's purveying mind-altering drugs to bring on magical hallucinogenic states. I've never done drugs and don't have to resist that temptation. I feel for those who are addicted. They have opened themselves to demons. But note well, pharmakeia isn't being a drug ADDICT, it's being a drug PEDDLER. The poor addict was stupid and got himself infected with devils. But the pharmakon is the guy who sold it to him. Jesus forgives people who have fallen into addiction. He hurls the dealers into the fire though. No, you are NOT FORGIVEN BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST if, being a Christian, you continue to SELL mind-altering drugs to infect people with demons. Not engaging in idolatry. Well, I believe in God, in El Elyon, God most high, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible or invisible. And I believe that Jesus was his only begotten son - the only one he FATHERED in the FLESH, and that one has to follow Jesus by doing what Jesus said. And I believe that God breathes out his spirit upon the world. That is what I believe. Jesus told me to pray to the Father, so that's who I pray to. I walk with Jesus, and I pray with him to the Father. This is not idolatry. There is nothing remotely idolatrous about it. And that is obeying the laws that will get a man thrown into the fire if he breaks them. The rest - well, that determines one's status and proximity to God in the City at the end. Those who didn't commit the damnable offenses but who were sour, bitter, unloving, uncaring and hectoring of others - they don't get the fire, they followed Christ, but they didn't follow him well, so they end up in a little apartment in the far corner of the City of God. It's eternal life in the city, and that's wonderful, but it's at a level appropriate to their relative lack of compassion and forgiveness. Those who give all and do all, they are much closer to the head table and the throne. None of this should be surprising. It's all there IN Scripture, right out Jesus' mouth. I don't like it when I hear that the law of Jesus is impossible to follow. No it isn't. That's calling Christ a liar! "My yoke is easy and my burden is light" is what HE said, and that means that NO, it is NOT TRUE that his law is brutally hard to follow and his yoke is heavy. Jesus wasn't lying to us. His yoke is easy. But it IS still a yoke. And there are rules. The things that are most important he listed twice at the end of the Scripture. THAT is the law you have to follow if you want to see heaven. And no, it is really not that hard.
See above. This shouldn't be as hard as it always is.
I don't think so. Christ set the standard for the lake of fire twice on the last page or two of Scripture: Don't: murder, commit sexual immorality, lie, engage in pharmakeia or idolatry or be a coward. That's not such a high standard that nobody can meet it. In fact, with a change of heart, wrought by Christ, it's a pretty easy standard to meet. It's a high standard, but it's not a particularly hard one. His yoke is easy and his burden is light. Christianity is about following Jesus by doing what he said to do and not doing what he said not to do. That is the marrow of the religion.
My wife and I were playfully "arguing" over that very thing recently and I "won" when I suggested that maybe she is right. Maybe the pre-trib rapture IS correct.....it already happened and Jesus took all 4 of those who were His...... My couch is rather uncomfortable. ;o)
There are two "operatives" in our (many posters not just you and me) discussions. The first being God's redemptive Grace through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Which we are taught Christ is the propitiation for our sins the mercy seat. The second being the holy standard required of Christians as commanded by Christ and exhorted and instructed by the apostles in the NT. So yes the above is foundational to the Christian faith, and are not mutually exclusive. They can't be. Of all the apostles who we have epistles from, John communicated Trust and Obey in the same thought or "paragraph". So it is not easy to pluck isolated verses from John to come up with a "works based" soteriology nor a disobedient faithless "walk." AKA antinomian belief structure. And you are right. The changed heart and mind seeks the things of God, His Son and strives to walk in the footsteps of Christ. That is our sanctification. And we are to have the same trust and obedience in sanctification as we did as being justified by His Grace. As we are to have the faith, hope and love of our eventual glorification with Christ at His second coming. So yes not difficult. It's all there in the text and written on our hearts and minds. Trust and Obey, there is no other way to be happy in Jesus but to trust and obey.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Comments (109 - 132) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIf we believe that Genesis tells us that [No Death before Adam's sin], then we are not reading carefully enough. Genesis doesn't say that.
#69. To: Vicomte13 (#67)
This [Masculine/Feminine Godhood] should be a source of joy, because all of a sudden all sorts of strange and messy loose ends in Scripture make sense, and we realize that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all right there in the very first SENTENCE of Genesis. Indeed, it's pretty obvious when one looks at the words, the plurals. It's easy to see the Trinity, and Christians love to see this.
#70. To: CZ82 (#55)
#71. To: Liberator (#66)
"Final judgment is not a science test but a morals and deeds test." Well, we are sinners even though that IS true. Do the "morals and deeds" tests trump considerations acknowledging Jesus as my personal Savior?
#72. To: Vicomte13 (#65)
It's very comforting to me to see this. The Catholic Church doesn't really CARE. But it's GOING to cause anguish to some Protestants who have invested a lot in the subject, because even though the outcome is that, yes, the world really is only a few thousand years old, some of the key arguments that Protestants use are actually quite wrong, and they're wrong on SCRIPTURE. They're taking ENGLISH and making assumptions, but they have to take Hebrew and pictographs instead, to actually get the template.
#73. To: Liberator (#68)
Pork chops and steak weren't eaten until after the fall.
#74. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone, liberator (#65)
So, those who really love philosophy, theology, history, science, language and truth might enjoy the read. I'm really hesitant to start posting over here and to get in an hellacious fight with my fellow Christians on the first day. I'd rather clean out the garage or get my teeth cleaned than that.
#75. To: Liberator (#68)
What did God mean by "die?"
#76. To: Vicomte13 (#65)
what one believes about creation is not on the list of things that Jesus said would get one thrown into the lake of fire.
#77. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
What is "death"? Jesus said that God is the God of the living, and spoke of those whose bodies had died as nevertheless living.
#78. To: Vicomte13 (#71)
#79. To: Vicomte13 (#73)
They [Pork chops and burgers] were not supposed to be eaten until after the Flood.
#80. To: A K A Stone (#76)
The religion of evolution seeks to destroys the foundation of the Bible. The story of Adam and Eve. The reason Jesus came. So if someone believes in evolution and tries to take the Bible literally. Then they see a conflict. If they then believe in evolution. It makes it more likely they will not believe the Bible.
#81. To: Vicomte13 (#75)
It's JESUS who gives a new meaning to "death", when speaking of people reputed dead, such as Abraham and Isaac, and says that God is the God of the LIVING, when referring to them. He also refers to those who are dead (physically) as having fallen asleep.
#82. To: Liberator (#66)
Regarding "human tradition" not being "quite right," I agree with you -- which is coincidentally what many Protestants find objectionable about the RCC rites, creeds, and Marian addenda. In THIS case, my assertion of "accepting the blood of Jesus Christ as ransom for my sins" may not be scriptural verbatim, but the interpretive context is the same when I acknowledge Jesus' words to He and the Father.
#83. To: Vicomte13, Vatican 2 Beatniks (#56)
(Edited)
The Holy Spirit and the Glory of God are feminine.
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#84. To: Vicomte13 (#58)
says that men will be judged by their DEEDS
#85. To: Liberator (#79)
And then after that, not even pork chops ;-)
#86. To: A K A Stone (#84)
(Edited)
Yes. The ones not saved.
#87. To: hondo68 (#83)
Prior to Vatican II Beatnik metrosexuals revisionist history, it was "Holy Ghost" masculine.
#88. To: Liberator (#78)
why does the RCC insist
#89. To: Liberator (#78)
repentance
#90. To: hondo68 (#83)
#91. To: redleghunter (#90)
Is that Gilligan from Gilligan's Island?
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#92. To: Vicomte13 (#86)
Once you find Christ and are baptized, your past sins are indeed completely washed away. But if you commit new sins after that, then you've got to ask God for forgiveness, and he will forgive you TO THE EXTENT THAT you forgive other men their sins.
#93. To: Liberator (#35)
You tell me that all I have to do is cop to a fraud and I will NOT get tortured to death?
#94. To: 4 givan 1 (#93)
If it were me, and the whole Jesus story was made up in part BY me, I would have confessed in order to save my own skin.
#95. To: Liberator (#62)
#96. To: 4 givan 1, out damned spot (#93)
Putting myself in the place of the Apostles.....with my life literally being threatened by a horrible, painful death and all I have to do is say "it was all make believe" and I'd get to live?
#97. To: CZ82, redleghunter (#95)
I'm surprised meggy hasn't demanded the heads of all "intolerants". Or will that be coming later?
#98. To: redleghunter, hondo68, CZ82 (#90)
Is that Gilligan from Gilligan's Island?
#99. To: Redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#82)
We should not only observe the words of Christ but His actions of mercy, kindness and longsuffering. The Greatest act of all being crucified for the ransom of many.
After the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ we have this:
Which also Paul confirms all the apostles preached the same Gospel:
#100. To: Vicomte13 (#85)
(Edited)
The Law of Moses, on its own terms, was a covenant between YHWH and the Hebrews there in the Sinai and their circumcised lineal descendants. And the covenant was: Do this, and you'll get a secure farm in Israel.
#101. To: Vicomte13 (#86)
(Edited)
Christians are judged by the deeds, and the standards that Christ set are high, that is true. And Christ set the standard, too, when men fall short.
"...And forgive us our debts,
As we forgive our debtors.
And do not lead us into temptation,
But deliver us from the evil one." (NKJV)
#102. To: Liberator (#101)
No one is saying that the importance and requirements of good deeds and forgiveness commanded by Jesus is to be ignored or dismissed. But by THAT criteria, man will still fall short of sinlessness in God's Kingdom because...he is "man." Thus man remains condemned without Jesus blood paid as ransom for an imperfect, sinful man.
#103. To: Liberator (#98)
and yet, it wuz all he could do to avoid those smooches and quickly run back to the Skipper (no, NOT H'up)
#104. To: Liberator (#72)
Protestants are more heavily invested in Genesis because it happens to provide the foundation for the rest of Scripture. Genesis sez God's Creation took exactly 6 Days. He rested on the seventh. I don't know if there's much to debate other than whether one believes Genesis' Creation is an allegory, believes "one day" is figurative, or chooses to believe some parts of Genesis, but not others.
#105. To: redleghunter (#104)
#106. To: Liberator (#101)
As you readily concede, it can be said that the standard is SO high that ALL men fall short.
#107. To: Liberator (#96)
I know some may chuckle at that notion, but we ARE in the last days in my opinion (and I know Spot agrees with me.)
#108. To: Vicomte13, liberator (#105)
This shouldn't be as hard as it always is.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]