Theistic Evolution

[AV1611VET]

The mass of the sun pulls smaller masses towards it, slightly derailing their path. Everything is still moving outward though, as the sun is doing it too, and pulling the detracted masses along with it.

Okay, thanks.

 

[tiglathpileser]

-_- earth had a point in it's history that it didn't have water on it at all, neither above or underground, in significant amounts. The water had to come from an outside source, and a comet is the most reasonable explanation.

Then there's the truth.....

Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be dividing between the waters and the waters. And God made the expanse, and He separated between the waters which were under the expanse and the waters which were above the expanse. And it was so. And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be collected to one place, and let the dry land appear. And it was so. And God called the dry land, Earth. And He called the collection of the waters, Seas. And God saw that it was good.

This part of scripture has been peer reviewed thousands of time by theologians and language specialists and found to be correct. How many times has your theory about comets been peer reviewed...by anyone?

 

[tiglathpileser]

When have atheists ever "blamed God"? Now they may be able to show by your reasoning that God is at fault for various actions, but since that explanation comes from your beliefs you would actually be the person that is "blaming God".

When have atheists blamed God? Why does God allow suffering is probably the most oft asked question by atheists. So atheists are blaming God for suffering.

 

[tiglathpileser]

Sorry but they haven't. They have only demonstrated their own incompetence which is only trumped by their incredible dishonesty. Those sites can be refuted by bright high school students. That does not say too much for those sites that openly tell their contributors that they cannot use the scientific method.

Well, if that is the case, would you care to quote few bright high school students who have refuted what they have said and I don't mean their opinion. I won't hold my breath because I know you do not have one concrete example you can give.

 

[tiglathpileser]

If you take it literally, rather than for the allegory this obviously is. After all, our hands and feet cannot force us to do anything we don't want to do (except in exceedingly rare medical conditions that biblical authors would be unlikely to know about. And in those cases, the left hand does stuff all on its own, but not necessarily sinful things).

I could easily interpret the Matthew and Mark verses as telling people to take accountability for their actions, not cut limbs off. Not that it would be the most insane thing that the bible has advised; context beyond a sentence would be nice.

When taken in context the meaning is perfectly clear to anyone who knows God and his word. As you don't all you can do is offer your opinion which is about as useful as a thimbleful of petrol to a vehicle that has run out of it.

 

[tiglathpileser]

Theistic evolution is the least of your worries if you are going with a literal translation.

"First, . . . to want to affirm that in reality the sun is at the center of the world and only turns on itself without moving from east to west, and the earth . . . revolves with great speed about the sun . . . is a very dangerous thing, likely not only to irritate all scholastic philosophers and theologians, but also to harm the Holy Faith by rendering Holy Scripture false."--Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615

Thanks for the laugh. If I was to quote someone from 1615 to reinforce what the bible teaches the atheists would be all up in arms telling me that back then they did not understand what we know today.

 

[Hoghead1]

The reason why atheists blame God for evil is that this is exactly what many segments of Christianity did and still do. You have your church fathers, such as Calvin, who argued for predestination. That meant, yes, God is responsible for all the suffering. Calvin stated that murders larcenists and other evil doers are the instruments by which God exercises his judgments. If bad things, happen, such it up. It's well-deserved punishment. The way the OT depicts God is also an issue here, as it presents essentially a warrior God who can be merciless, kill innocent children, hand down draconian punishments, etc. The result that that many churches present a double-bind message in which they have God saying in effect, "Love me, or I'll beat the tar out of you." Because of this major contradiction, many have left the church and become atheists.

 

[tiglathpileser]

The reason why atheists blame God for evil is that this is exactly what many segments of Christianity did and still do. You have your church fathers, such as Calvin, who argued for predestination. That meant, yes, God is responsible for all the suffering. Calvin stated that murders larcenists and other evil doers are the instruments by which God exercises his judgments. If bad things, happen, such it up. It's well-deserved punishment. The way the OT depicts God is also an issue here, as it presents essentially a warrior God who can be merciless, kill innocent children, hand down draconian punishments, etc. The result that that many churches present a double-bind message in which they have God saying in effect, "Love me, or I'll beat the tar out of you." Because of this major contradiction, many have left the church and become atheists.

You have missed the whole point of my post. I was asked WHEN do atheists blame God? I was not asked WHY do atheists blame God? And the reason you have given does not hold water as not many atheists would have a comprehensive knowledge of church history like you as predestination DOES NOT mean God is responsible for suffering. It means that God is responsible for who is saved and who isn't. And what does "such it up" mean?

As for your claim which again is one which I hear from atheists ALL THE TIME so there is nothing original about it that God says "Love me, or I will beat the tar out of you" is quite laughable. I have been a christian 62 years and NOT ONCE have I heard him say that. What I have heard him say is "come unto me all you that are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest" or "I have come to give you life and life more abundant" so I don't know where you are getting your information from.

Being an apologist for atheists is not a smart move.

 

[PsychoSarah]

When taken in context the meaning is perfectly clear to anyone who knows God and his word. As you don't all you can do is offer your opinion which is about as useful as a thimbleful of petrol to a vehicle that has run out of it.

To the people that know god and his word, all of which have different interpretations of said word, and all who think theirs is the best.

The only difference between my interpretation and yours, is that you think yours represents reality, while I think mine represents what the text was attempting to convey. Not being a believer doesn't mean I lack basic reading comprehension.

Also, nice of you to criticise my interpretation without saying what is "wrong" with it explicitly. Perhaps instead of humoring your religion-based superiority complex, you can spare me the condescension and try to be tactful in your disagreement.

 

[tiglathpileser]

Earth was getting bashed from all sides at that early stage of existence. That kept the mass fairly round, but it is noteworthy that Earth isn't actually a perfect sphere. It is somewhat pear shaped. I don't know how many comets ended up providing the water either.

it is somewhat a figment of your imagination as this article shows.....

Gravity is a force that causes planets to form the shape of a sphere by pulling the mass of the planet close to the center of gravity. In the case of the Earth, gravity pulls the planet as close to the core as possible. The sphere-like shape of the Earth is distorted slightly by the centrifugal force of its rotation. This force causes the mass of the planet to move away from the center of gravity, which is located at the equator. For that reason, there is a minor outward bulge at the equator, creating a larger circumference and diameter.

Have you seen a pear that has an outward bulge in the middle? All the pears I have ever eaten have had an outward bulge at the bottom.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then there's the truth.....

Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be dividing between the waters and the waters. And God made the expanse, and He separated between the waters which were under the expanse and the waters which were above the expanse. And it was so. And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be collected to one place, and let the dry land appear. And it was so. And God called the dry land, Earth. And He called the collection of the waters, Seas. And God saw that it was good.

This part of scripture has been peer reviewed thousands of time by theologians and language specialists and found to be correct. How many times has your theory about comets been peer reviewed...by anyone?

You can't be serious right now.

1. To claim that scripture is peer reviewed like a science journal not only is incorrect based on the science bit, but it is sacrilegious to suggest that any human could be a peer reviewer of god's word, which is what you believe the bible to be.

2. Theologians and language specialists translate the bible, but they do not gather evidence that supports what it says, except for a small number of theologians that try to do it. The majority of the time, observations of the world around us contradict what the bible says. Instead of getting all of your information from Answers in Genesis and other biased sites, like the deceptive evolutionnews.com, you should check out a .gov or nonreligious college website.

3. The comet idea has been peer reviewed hundreds of time, and you give me too much credit for implying that I came up with that. In fact, it wouldn't shock me if that theory was older than me.

 

[PsychoSarah]

it is somewhat a figment of your imagination as this article shows.....

Gravity is a force that causes planets to form the shape of a sphere by pulling the mass of the planet close to the center of gravity. In the case of the Earth, gravity pulls the planet as close to the core as possible. The sphere-like shape of the Earth is distorted slightly by the centrifugal force of its rotation. This force causes the mass of the planet to move away from the center of gravity, which is located at the equator. For that reason, there is a minor outward bulge at the equator, creating a larger circumference and diameter.

Have you seen a pear that has an outward bulge in the middle? All the pears I have ever eaten have had an outward bulge at the bottom.

http://i.imgur.com/3AY1W.jpg a more precise shape of the earth. Looks like a slightly misshapen pear to me. Earth doesn't have a high enough mass for it's shape to be completely gravity driven by the mechanism you mentioned. But hey, feel free to disagree with me on the fruit I chose to describe the shape; the point was that earth is not a perfect sphere.

 

[tiglathpileser]

To the people that know god and his word, all of which have different interpretations of said word, and all who think theirs is the best.

The only difference between my interpretation and yours, is that you think yours represents reality, while I think mine represents what the text was attempting to convey. Not being a believer doesn't mean I lack basic reading comprehension.

Also, nice of you to criticise my interpretation without saying what is "wrong" with it explicitly. Perhaps instead of humoring your religion-based superiority complex, you can spare me the condescension and try to be tactful in your disagreement.

Point one. I belong to a church of 10,000 members as we do not all think differently about the Word of God. We are very united in our understanding of the Word of God and what God is wanting to do through us. So your claim that all those who know God and his word have differing opinions about that word is wrong.

Point two. The scripture is very clear. The natural man CANNOT understand the things of the Spirit which means YOU cannot understand the things of the Spirit. All you can do is give your opinion which in most cases is wrong because you need understanding to discern the spiritual.

Point three. What you call my religious based superior complex is nothing more than me telling you the truth which you obviously can't handle. It is no use you coming onto a christian forum and then crying over spilt milk when someone calls a spade a spade.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Point one. I belong to a church of 10,000 members as we do not all think differently about the Word of God. We are very united in our understanding of the Word of God and what God is wanting to do through us. So your claim that all those who know God and his word have differing opinions about that word is wrong.

Unless you have spoken with all of them on every line in the bible, you can't possibly know that for sure. Additionally, you know that there are hundreds of different Christian denominations that sprouted from disagreements in interpretations between believers.

Point two. The scripture is very clear. The natural man CANNOT understand the things of the Spirit which means YOU cannot understand the things of the Spirit. All you can do is give your opinion which in most cases is wrong because you need understanding to discern the spiritual.

Then what was wrong with my interpretation exactly? Also, try me, give me the benefit of the doubt, I have been a seeker for over 7 years. I have heard many biblical interpretations. I have read the text. I interpreted it for myself.

Point three. What you call my religious based superior complex is nothing more than me telling you the truth which you obviously can't handle. It is no use you coming onto a christian forum and then crying over spilt milk when someone calls a spade a spade.

I could definitely handle not being able to comprehend something. Some of the finer points of physics fall into that category. However, there is no logical reason that I should not be able to comprehend something because I don't believe it to be true. In fact, there is some contradiction there, because that would require that at some point, a person believes it to be true without reading it or interpreting it for themselves... actually, that sounds like the majority of Christians, never mind.

Regardless, how do you expect me or anyone else to believe, if we can't understand the text to begin with? If you are trying to help, you need more tact, and if you don't expect people to believe because of your efforts, then why are you here?

 

[tiglathpileser]

You can't be serious right now.

1. To claim that scripture is peer reviewed like a science journal not only is incorrect based on the science bit, but it is sacrilegious to suggest that any human could be a peer reviewer of god's word, which is what you believe the bible to be.

2. Theologians and language specialists translate the bible, but they do not gather evidence that supports what it says, except for a small number of theologians that try to do it. The majority of the time, observations of the world around us contradict what the bible says. Instead of getting all of your information from Answers in Genesis and other biased sites, like the deceptive evolutionnews.com, you should check out a .gov or nonreligious college website.

3. The comet idea has been peer reviewed hundreds of time, and you give me too much credit for implying that I came up with that. In fact, it wouldn't shock me if that theory was older than me.

Point one. it is difficult to be serious when what is posted by atheists is laughable.

Point two. For someone who does not believe that God exists, you seem to know a lot about him. Like most atheists you have totally failed to realize that knowing God does not require science that is peer reviewed. In fact, it does not require any science as the scripture says that without FAITH it is impossible to please God. It does not say that without scientific peer reviewed material it is impossible to please God. You being an atheist would not have a clue about what faith is which means you have no idea about God or his word.

Point three. Your comment here is so laughable. My bookshelves are full of books written by theologians and language specialists who have gathered evidence that support what the bible says. Derek Prince a friend of mine is such an example. He has degrees in ancient Hebrew and Greek, was Professor of Philosophy at Cambridge University and had written numerous books that show without a doubt that what the bible says is true. Having read all of them I know that what you say is totally wrong but that does not surprise me as you have a tendency to speculate so that what you say supports your ideology, not the truth.

When you are interested in the truth you will find that the world around us supports what the bible says. I can read several scriptures and see it happening right now and Jesus death and resurrection was spoken of in the book of Isaiah but I don't expect you to understand that because satan has blinded your eyes to the truth.

Point four. Your arrogance is very evident like that of so many atheists when you rubbish christian sites and suggest atheist site are superior so one might ask "superior to whom?" Definitely not to those who seek after the truth which you obviously cannot handle or understand.

Point five. I did not attribute the comet idea to you. You did as you gave no reference which suggests to me that the idea it has been peer reviewed hundreds of times is a figment of your overactive imagination.

So let me put things into perspective for you to save you a lot of angst. The Scripture is very clear. The natural man CANNOT understand the things of the spirit. Not now, not ever. Your writing makes it very clear that all you ever do is try to understand the things of the spirit with natural means. You put a natural bias on your interpretation of things so whatever you say, it does not mean what you think it means and that is not me pronouncing judgment. That is me telling you the truth.

As a born again believer, I CANNOT understand the things of the Spirit with the natural. Unless I tap into the realm of the Holy Spirit I will learn nothing. If I do tap into the realm of the Holy Spirit then I can know all things as the scripture says that the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth. That is me, not you.

So I suggest that you stop trying to convince me or anyone with your man made ideas because all you're doing is wasting your time and ours as nothing you say can change anything we believe and have faith in, least of all God who does exist. To keep doing that is to say the least quite stupid. And Please don't make a superficial accusation that we have closed minds. The fact that we do know the realm of the Spirit clearly indicates that we do not have closed minds because we are prepared to listen to the Holy Spirit and learn from him whereas atheists a totally closed to anything other than what they can produce out of their own thinking.

 

[tiglathpileser]

Unless you have spoken with all of them on every line in the bible, you can't possibly know that for sure. Additionally, you know that there are hundreds of different Christian denominations that sprouted from disagreements in interpretations between believers.

Then what was wrong with my interpretation exactly? Also, try me, give me the benefit of the doubt, I have been a seeker for over 7 years. I have heard many biblical interpretations. I have read the text. I interpreted it for myself.

I could definitely handle not being able to comprehend something. Some of the finer points of physics fall into that category. However, there is no logical reason that I should not be able to comprehend something because I don't believe it to be true. In fact, there is some contradiction there, because that would require that at some point, a person believes it to be true without reading it or interpreting it for themselves... actually, that sounds like the majority of Christians, never mind.

Regardless, how do you expect me or anyone else to believe, if we can't understand the text to begin with? If you are trying to help, you need more tact, and if you don't expect people to believe because of your efforts, then why are you here?

Point one. As you have never, ever been to my church, you have no idea what we do or do not believe and what we know or do not know so please do not make yourself an authority on my church. That is arrogant in the extreme.

Point two. Your comment "I interpret it for myself" sums it all up and emphasises what I have said. As I have said but which you do not seem to want to know is that the natural man CANNOT discern the things of the Spirit. CANNOT full stop. So whatever you say about God and scripture is wrong because you CANNOT discern the things of the Spirit. All you're doing is trying to make excuses for not believing based on your natural thinking.

Point three. You said "However, there is no logical reason that I should not be able to comprehend something because I don't believe it to be true." Sorry it won't happen because the natural man CANNOT discern the things of the Spirit. You could spend 24 hours a day trying to think through the gospel logically but it will change nothing. Until you are prepared to approach God in faith and forget all your atheistic nonsense, you do not have a hope in hell of ever understanding the spiritual.

1 Corinthians 2:12 But God has given us [believers] his Spirit. That's why we don't think the same way that the people of this world think. That's also why we can recognize the blessings that God has given us. Every word we speak was taught to us by God's Spirit, not by human wisdom. And this same Spirit helps us teach spiritual things to spiritual people. That's why only someone who has God's Spirit can understand spiritual blessings. Anyone who doesn't have God's Spirit thinks these blessings are foolish. People who are guided by the Spirit can make all kinds of judgments, but they cannot be judged by others. The Scriptures ask, "Has anyone ever known the thoughts of the Lord or given him advice?" But we understand what Christ is thinking.

 

[AV1611VET]

The reason why atheists blame God for evil is that this is exactly what many segments of Christianity did and still do. You have your church fathers, such as Calvin, who argued for predestination. That meant, yes, God is responsible for all the suffering. Calvin stated that murders larcenists and other evil doers are the instruments by which God exercises his judgments. If bad things, happen, such it up. It's well-deserved punishment. The way the OT depicts God is also an issue here, as it presents essentially a warrior God who can be merciless, kill innocent children, hand down draconian punishments, etc. The result that that many churches present a double-bind message in which they have God saying in effect, "Love me, or I'll beat the tar out of you." Because of this major contradiction, many have left the church and become atheists.

And your Malthusian catastrophes say war, famine and pestilence are nature's way of keeping the human population in balance.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The mass of the sun pulls smaller masses towards it, slightly derailing their path. Everything is still moving outward though, as the sun is doing it too, and pulling the detracted masses along with it.

According to Newton gravity is a pull. According to Einstein gravity is more of a push do to the curvature of space and time.

 

[PsychoSarah]

According to Newton gravity is a pull. According to Einstein gravity is more of a push do to the curvature of space and time.

You are being nitpicky about me calling it a pull rather than a push? Seriously? Because that is probably the least relevant detail of my post.

 

[Hoghead1]

Well, Tiglath, I am neither an atheist nor an apologist for them. Apparently, in your 62 years, you managed to miss out on the hell-fire-and-brimstone dimension of Christianity. Calvin, for example, stated that murderers, larcenists, and other evil doers are the instruments by which God exercises his judgment upon us. Many Christians today are very Calvinistic and do believe that suffering, in any form, was landed on them by God as a righteous punishment. At the same time, you have the doctrine of election, where only a tiny minority of the human race is saved, the vast majority sent to Hell. Such doctrines are in fact preached in many churches and, as I have said, lead to serious problems, as they seriously conflict with the notion of a truly loving God.