Do Baptists appear to be intellectually challenged baboons...?

[Hupomone10]

- - - deleted, I put it in the wrong order - - -

 

[Hupomone10]

I greatly fear for the fate of your two older sons, for it is likely that they will eventually come to realize that the “evidence” that you shared with them was nothing but bogus nonsense that any knowledgeable scientist could very easily refute in a matter of minutes. Why do you suppose it is that over 99.99% of scientists today who have earned at least one Ph.D. believe in the theory of evolution? ...
a religious point of view that is disproved by science.

Forgive me, but I don't think you fear for the fate of my sons; I think you are so confident in science that you think the same decisions you made and you know others made are the decision they will make.

I guess I should explain where I'm coming from. First, I do not come from the perspective of trying to disprove macro-evolution, merely to throw doubt on its validity. No one can "prove" evolution to be wrong any more than evolutionists can "prove" creation wrong, anymore than someone can prove God doesn't exist.

It is the reverse of what Satan has done by the assertion of evolution to throw doubt on the creation story. It is still just a philosophy, not even a theory since it lacks the evidence (but i don't want to get side-tracked on that) to prove the theory. That is what God did in my life. He didn't have to prove evolution wrong, because I merely conveniently believed evolution because I thought the facts lined up with it. God punched holes in my theory, showed enough evidence for creation and doubt of evolution to get me back on track seeing I could believe His Word as written.

That's all I have to do with them. Cause doubt in the worldly theory. That's where Christians make one of the most serious mistakes - being subtly led into thinking they have to prove creation, when as a believer and ostensibly a believer in God's infallible Word all they have to do is show the doubts and holes in the other theory.

If there are holes, then it is not a proven fact.

If it's not a proven fact, I would be a fool to side with scientists, who wanted to seed the arctic circle with soot in 1973 because we were entering an ice age that was going to cause mass starvation. Scientists can be wrong; scientists can be and are biased.

99.99%? I don't know that this figure is accurate. But I'll give that most scientists are believers in the religion of evolution. Why is this so? For the same reason most non-scientists are believers in evolution. Because they don't want to believe and be accountable to God first of all, and secondly because they consider it to be intellectual folly to believe this and their intellectual pride kicks in.

This is IMHO the reason most intelligent people who believe in evolution do so, because the intellectual pride thing is too big a hurdle to jump over. They, like everyone else, are governed largely by OPO (other people's opinions), what others think of them. This molds what they think of themselves.

In the end, Jesus asked the question "when the Son of Man returns, will He find faith on the earth?" I think it's significant that He did not say "will I find intellectual pride or falsely perceived intellectual integrity on the earth?"

How about the scientists today who are Christians but interpret the first eleven chapters of Genesis from an informed point of view? Not a single one of them interprets the so-called evidence for creation in a manner that supports the theory of young-earth creationism.

First of all, I reject the notion that those who disbelieve the Genesis account are doing so from an informed point of view. That is your assertion. There is no documentary or historical evidence for concluding such an assertion. There is only the basis of intellectual pride that can be the motivation. It is interpreted this way from a doubt and intellectual pride point of view. This is increasingly more obvious to me.

The assertion that they do not interpret from a young-earth point of view is wrong because your initial assertion is wrong - that they proceed from an informed point of view.

Those who believe the so-called evidence for macro-evolution do so from an OPO and intellectual pride point of view, so naturally they will not believe in a young earth, in spite of evidence to support it.

I believe in God the Father who loves you and gave His only begotten Son, that upon your belief in Him, your sins were forgiven and you were given a new life in His Son. I believe in God the Son who loved you and suffered and died, shedding His blood on the cross for your sins, and who has risen from the dead and who loves you today. I believe in God the Holy Spirit who brought to you the good news of the redemptive act of God, and who loves you, and who is always present with you, ministering to your needs.

Why do you believe this? 99.99% of all scientists do not. Aren't you concerned about all the evidence that raises doubt about the manuscripts being accurate? For most people those doubts are enough. Why do you hold onto this part and not even consider the possibility of the other part?

I know there are a lot of posts to answer, but you never answered the other brother's post concerning the scriptures that say that by one man sin entered the world, and death by sin. Surely you cannot believe that scripture either? And if death didn't enter by sin, then why would you believe that we need a Savior to die for our sins if death can't be tied to sin?

When we take the Bible in pieces, the pieces our supposed intellectual integrity will allow, we not only have made ourselves god and made our own religion that fits our brain capacity, but we have lost our witness to others. They need only say "you reject the part about creation, I reject the part about needing a supposed Savior.

That's why I really do believe the message does go "back to Genesis" to a certain degree. And down to the last person, all Christians I've known who believed in macro-evolution did so because of fear of what others would think or plain out intellectual pride, not objective faith and objective evidence. You may be an exception, but I must go with the evidence I've seen.

One thing I know for sure; when I see the Lord, if I'm wrong about beilieving His scripture literally He will not fault me for that, for I am siding with faith in Him over my own understanding (trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding" Prov 3:5). But if I side with scientists directly in the face of God's Word, it is not a damning position, but I will only have intellect to fall back on. It will be shown to be walking after the flesh, not after the Spirit.

Has any Christian scientist told you "the Spirit led them to believe in macro-evolution"? Can you personally say that?

Blessings,
H.

 

[Hupomone10]

I greatly fear for your fate also, for it is likely that your two older sons, when they come to realize that the “evidence” that you shared with them was nothing but bogus nonsense that any knowledgeable scientist could very easily refute in a matter of minutes, they will not only lose their faith in God, but in you!

I beseech you, examine very carefully with much prayer the so-called scientific evidence for creation.

Who can deny that the most common cause, by far, of a crisis in faith among Christian young people today, and even adults, is their being presented with the evidence for an old earth and the theory of evolution? When people are taught in their early years a responsible and academically defensible interpretation of Genesis 1 -11 and the relevant New Testament passages, a crisis of faith upon being taught the theory of evolution becomes an impossibility!

Believe God's word literally unless given in the Word reason to believe it is figurative

on the one hand,

Believe scientists when they tell you they have proven evolution just as they have proven global warming

on the other hand.

I will believe God's word that delivered me from several strongholds and has indeed saved my life.

Apart from sin entering the world through man and death by sin, they have no need of a Savior. However, if they choose to believe evolution I will not fall out with them. That is their right, just as it is their choice to believe in Christ or not. The philosophy that leaves out the whole basis of death and sin leaves far more holes in the whole Christian philosophy than belief in creation, either with young or old earth, which leaves no holes.

A choice: man thinks you're a fool; God says you are a fool. I think I'll go with God being true even if 99.999% of all scientists are liars, or merely deceived.

Blessings,
H.

 

[phoenixdem]

I do feel as if there is an elephant in the room in many churches. The elephant is in fact this subject matter. I don't agree with all of his points, but I do see where he is coming from.

This type of response is the real shame. I don't see how you can attack his faith when he is expressing genuine, founded concerns. Absolutely uncalled for.

Unless it is my imagination, he himself told us that story. A scientist ripped him apart on what he believed from the Bible, the beginning of Genesis. He couldn't respond to what the scientist type said, and he lost his faith for a long time. Then, he decided to place "scientific findings" first and adjusted his belief in the Holy Bible to jive with those findings.

Now, he is trying to do the same thing to other believers. He has become that person who made him lose his faith. Seriously, you haven't read this?

 

[joshua41]

Unless it is my imagination, he himself told us that story. A scientist ripped him apart on what he believed from the Bible, the beginning of Genesis. He couldn't respond to what the scientist type said, and he lost his faith for a long time. Then, he decided to place "scientific findings" first and adjusted his belief in the Holy Bible to jive with those findings.

Now, he is trying to do the same thing to other believers. He has become that person who made him lose his faith. Seriously, you haven't read this?

Have I read this? I have lived it, and I am living it. It doens't take faith to make up lies about what science says. And if people lie about science to make their faith stronger, how can you expect anyone to agree with that?

Osage, sorry for implying that. I greatly appreciate and respect your statement. I do agree with what you said.

 

[Mikecpking]

Some people on this thread should take heed of one of God's commandments "Do not bear false witness" when it comes to branding scientists as liars.

If it were not for science, you would not be typing your views on the internet!

I commend you on your defence of the word, but your interpretation is faulty as God himself revealed by scientists, geologists and biologists how he created through the witness of a 4.65 billion year old earth, a 13.7 billion year old universe to bring it about that you could have a relationship with himself through the Lord Jesus Christ!

 

[MichaelKelley]

Evolution – The process of natural selection resulted in the evolution of all species known to man, including man.Contemporary, Biblical Christianity – Genesis 1-11 are not an accurate account of historic events. They are a collection of very early epic tales woven together by God to teach men spiritual truths.

Really? Show me where in Genesis it says that. Seems to me you're putting your own words and pre-suppositions into the text, rather than letting the text interpret itself. The Bible is the WORD OF GOD and does not need any of your pre-suppositions.

 

[phoenixdem]

Some people on this thread should take heed of one of God's commandments "Do not bear false witness" when it comes to branding scientists as liars.

If it were not for science, you would not be typing your views on the internet!

I commend you on your defence of the word, but your interpretation is faulty as God himself revealed by scientists, geologists and biologists how he created through the witness of a 4.65 billion year old earth, a 13.7 billion year old universe to bring it about that you could have a relationship with himself through the Lord Jesus Christ!

I must have missed someone branding scientists as liars, but then I often miss things. I suppose you're right about the Internet, although many people probably think Bill Gates invented it.

I do know other things that science has invented: nuclear weapons, biological weapons, chemical weapons, and theories that often prove wrong, after all a theory is still just a theory right? When all is said and done, there is only one God and that isn't science.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Unless it is my imagination, he himself told us that story. A scientist ripped him apart on what he believed from the Bible, the beginning of Genesis. He couldn't respond to what the scientist type said, and he lost his faith for a long time. Then, he decided to place "scientific findings" first and adjusted his belief in the Holy Bible to jive with those findings.

Now, he is trying to do the same thing to other believers. He has become that person who made him lose his faith. Seriously, you haven't read this?

I did NOT tell that story; that was Hupomone10 personal testimony—not mine! You are confusing two very different people with very different beliefs and experiences and commingling their beliefs and experiences, and, therefore, arguing against a man that does not exit!

 

[joshua41]

I must have missed someone branding scientists as liars, but then I often miss things.

Then people shouldn't treat scientists or their arguments like they would treat a liar.

The Bible is the WORD OF GOD and does not need any of your pre-suppositions.

If you truly believed that the Bible didn't require any presupposition then you would not be arguing for its scientific proof. And, you certainly wouldn't be a fan of manipulating scientific arguments to fit your presumptions.

 

[DeaconDean]

Then don't treat scientists or their arguments like you would treat a liar.



If you truly believed that the Bible didn't require any presupposition then you would not be arguing for its scientific proof. And, you certainly wouldn't be a fan of manipulating scientific arguments to fit your presumptions.

For all science has give us, it has yet to find any proof of the legendary "unicorn" or the "behemoth".

1. Numbers 23:22
   God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.
   Numbers 23:21-23 (in Context) Numbers 23 (Whole Chapter)
2. Numbers 24:8
   God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.
   Numbers 24:7-9 (in Context) Numbers 24 (Whole Chapter)
3. Deuteronomy 33:17
   His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.
   Deuteronomy 33:16-18 (in Context) Deuteronomy 33 (Whole Chapter)
4. Job 39:9
   Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?
   Job 39:8-10 (in Context) Job 39 (Whole Chapter)
5. Job 39:10
   Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
   Job 39:9-11 (in Context) Job 39 (Whole Chapter)
6. Psalm 22:21
   Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
   Psalm 22:20-22 (in Context) Psalm 22 (Whole Chapter)
7. Psalm 29:6
   He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.
   Psalm 29:5-7 (in Context) Psalm 29 (Whole Chapter)
8. Psalm 92:10
   But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.
   Psalm 92:9-11 (in Context) Psalm 92 (Whole Chapter)
9. Isaiah 34:7
   And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.
   Isaiah 34:6-8 (in Context) Isaiah 34 (Whole Chapter)

Job 40:15 (King James Version)


15Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

Why is that?

It can find many fossels, but not once has science found these animals mentioned in the scriptures.

Perhaps scriptures are in error?

And if they are in error, then perhaps, just perhaps, we did evolve from apes.

NOT!

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[joshua41]

Personally, I don't read the Old King James. I read more modern interpretations. And evolution doesn't say that we evolved from apes: )

Most of the translations that I have used refer to this as a buffalo or an ox.

There is also nothing there for me to believe that the behemoth couldn't be a modern animal or one that was once extinct.

God bless.

 

[DeaconDean]

Personally, I don't read the Old King James. I read more modern interpretations. And evolution doesn't say that we evolved from apes: )

Most of the translations that I have used refer to this as a buffalo or an ox.

There is also nothing there for me to believe that the behemoth couldn't be a modern animal or one that was once extinct.

God bless.

Wow!

For a person who places so much stock in "science",...

Yea, modern versions of the Bible are more correct than the old reliable versions.

Like the version that says it is good for a man not to marry.

Yea, those modern versions have it right.

I bet your a geocentricist too.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[joshua41]

Maybe if you would state your stance on geocentrism then we could get some real dialogue going.

 

[MagusAlbertus]

Sadly it is clear that intellectual honesty has left the building. I expected as much from some of you, but from others I am very disappointed .

The Bible is the WORD OF GOD and does not need any of your pre-suppositions.

Huh?
Who's pre-suppositions are to be used? Every time you read something you come at it from your own set of pre-suppositions; to be ignorant of that fact and ignore historical context is simply asserting your own pre-suppositions as superior without any basis.

Now; please explain this verse using the same set of suppositions you use for gen 1-14

"22It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"

Are you arguing that the earth is flat? If you aren't then you are being inconsistent.

 

[phoenixdem]

Then people shouldn't treat scientists or their arguments like they would treat a liar.

If a scientist or anyone else pushes Evolution over Creationism, I will call them on it. You may call it whatever you wish. I haven't called anyone a liar, that is your statement. When the Evolutionists say that evolution tops Creationism, is that calling the scripture a lie? Think about that for a moment. A believer in the Holy Bible cannot pick and choose what to believe from the scripture. Once, anyone begins doing that, every thing in the scripture comes under question. The Old Testament is the foundation of the New Testament. It is one continuous storyline from the beginning of this world to the end of it.

 

[phoenixdem]

I did NOT tell that story; that was Hupomone10 personal testimony—not mine! You are confusing two very different people with very different beliefs and experiences and commingling their beliefs and experiences, and, therefore, arguing against a man that does not exit!

In that case, I apologize to you for attributing to you words from another poster.

 

[leothelioness]

For all science has give us, it has yet to find any proof of the legendary "unicorn" or the "behemoth".

1. Numbers 23:22
   God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.
   Numbers 23:21-23 (in Context) Numbers 23 (Whole Chapter)
2. Numbers 24:8
   God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.
   Numbers 24:7-9 (in Context) Numbers 24 (Whole Chapter)
3. Deuteronomy 33:17
   His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.
   Deuteronomy 33:16-18 (in Context) Deuteronomy 33 (Whole Chapter)
4. Job 39:9
   Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?
   Job 39:8-10 (in Context) Job 39 (Whole Chapter)
5. Job 39:10
   Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
   Job 39:9-11 (in Context) Job 39 (Whole Chapter)
6. Psalm 22:21
   Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
   Psalm 22:20-22 (in Context) Psalm 22 (Whole Chapter)
7. Psalm 29:6
   He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.
   Psalm 29:5-7 (in Context) Psalm 29 (Whole Chapter)
8. Psalm 92:10
   But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.
   Psalm 92:9-11 (in Context) Psalm 92 (Whole Chapter)
9. Isaiah 34:7
   And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.
   Isaiah 34:6-8 (in Context) Isaiah 34 (Whole Chapter)

Job 40:15 (King James Version)


15Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

Why is that?

It can find many fossels, but not once has science found these animals mentioned in the scriptures.

Perhaps scriptures are in error?

And if they are in error, then perhaps, just perhaps, we did evolve from apes.

NOT!

God Bless

Till all are one.

It's quite possible that they have already been acounted for in the fossil record, but that modern humans know them by a different name. For instance, the Behemoth sounds an awful lot like a Brontosaur.

 

[leothelioness]

Do Baptists appear to be intellectually challenged baboons suffering from the late stages of dementia when they argue against the theory of evolution?

I would lean more towards yes, since most Baptists know little to nothing about the theory of evolution except what is regurgitated by other ill-informed people. I by no means believe in evolution, but I would think that in order to effectively argue against something you should know as much about it as possible.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Then people shouldn't treat scientists or their arguments like they would treat a liar.

If a scientist or anyone else pushes Evolution over Creationism, I will call them on it. You may call it whatever you wish. I haven't called anyone a liar, that is your statement. When the Evolutionists say that evolution tops Creationism, is that calling the scripture a lie? Think about that for a moment. A believer in the Holy Bible cannot pick and choose what to believe from the scripture. Once, anyone begins doing that, every thing in the scripture comes under question. The Old Testament is the foundation of the New Testament. It is one continuous storyline from the beginning of this world to the end of it.

The literal interpretation of the Bible before the evidence from Science became accepted by most Jews and Christians:

“How darest thou revile the very words of God with your lies and mischief! Carest thou not that the very words of God in the Holy Scriptures declareth in Isaiah 40:22, Proverbs 8:27, and other passages in the word of God that the earth is flat, a circle and not a sphere? Knowest thou not the penalty for blaspheming the word of God?”

This poor gentleman must not have read Rev. 7:1; he thought that the earth was circular rather than square! (Hint: Circles do not have four corners!)

Rev. 7:1. After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, so that no wind would blow on the earth or on the sea or on any tree.

Even today, there are Christians who hold to their literal interpretation of the Bible and believe that the earth is flat. There are others, also, who believe that scientists are liars and therefore staunchly insist that the earth is flat rather than spherical—or nearly so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society