God's beautiful creation

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

A answered your last statement by saying that only know the basics of evolution.

So did evolution claim that life begins by itself? Or is silent about this?

The theory of evolution only talks about the changes of lifeforms. That's it.

 

[Joseph G]

Again: still rude.

Yeah, but ya know ya luvs me, Warden. Me and Roman have got you captivated into the wee hours of the night! Wheee!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yeah, but ya know ya luvs me, Warden. Me and Roman have got you captivated into the wee hours of the night! Wheee!

It's just after half 10 in the morning over here.

 

[Joseph G]

It's just after half 10 in the morning over here.

Ah... cartoons and cereal, huh? Wait a sec, you're all the way round in Wales but only 5 hours ahead of me? *scratching head*

 

[BCP1928]

As I mentioned, numbers are unimpressive to God. As are denominational or any other categorizing labels. Wolves and sheep are in every flock.

Here is what defines one as truly saved from cover to cover in Holy Scripture - so often repeated and thematic of the entire Gospel - that it is impossible to miss a proper interpretation if one really studies the OT and NT of Scripture. That requires, though, that one actually cracks it open first. And I mean beyond Genesis 1...

"And he believed God, and it was accounted unto Him as righteousness."

The true remnant I spoke of? They have been around since the Book of Acts (gathered in believer's homes and such - later as gatherings only identified as "the church of [city]"- and have never required official recognition as being part of "church history" as identified exclusively by your list of institutions.

They have operated since then to present times under one motto:

God said it, I believe it, that settles it.

What any "church historian" declares as "new doctrine" as being introduced or added to genuine faith may apply to institutions, but not to the true remnant (located within and without) - the invisible Church universal - the Body of Christ. Our faith has remained unchanged - because He Who is in us never changes.

Totally bogus. Have you actually read the NT?

The title of patriarch should intimidate my God? Or that of pope?

God's Word says that His children are ambassadors for Christ. We don't even need fancy robes or comical hats to invite anyone to place their devotion to the Person of Jesus Christ or to the trustworthiness of HIS Word. Sackcloth is fine, Holmes!

As for the coptic church, I have no idea what they teach nor do I care to learn. If its anything other than the Gospel of Jesus Christ - including that His Word is trustworthy - along with His promises (including, you betcha, a personal relationship with Him via indwelling of His Holy Spirit) - then yes - they are calling God a liar.

And 2000 years is small potatoes. As mentioned, the celebrated majority of the populace - heading by the broad path that leads to destruction - have been calling God a liar ~ 6000 years now.


Er, here you say all "christians" agree and elsewhere that they don't - which is it?

Is that kinda like the guy who said earlier in this thread (choking back tears) that all geologists agree? Kinda like all evolutionists agree? Do ya'll really think we all just fell off the turnip truck?

Do you believe these Scriptures as they are plainly stated, yes or no? If not, how do you interpret them?

Isaiah 40:8 ESV
"The grass withers, the flower fades,
but the word of our God will stand forever."

Matthew 24:35 NIV
"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away."

John 16:13 NIV
"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth."

2 Timothy 3:16-17 NIV
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

And the Word Himself (John 1) - Jesus Christ...

Hebrews 13:8 NIV
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."


Question. Are you willing to take any Scripture and declare, "This is what God says"?

So is *anybody's* interpretation valid from your viewpoint?

And far be it from me that I would claim to be the sole interpreter of Scripture. If that is what anybody believes I'm claiming, then they aren't paying attention. I've stated it before, my word is certainly fallible, and I also stumble in reflecting His love - but He and His Word do not. Ever.

Having said that - all genuine believers indwelt and guided by the same Holy Spirit do agree on the essentials. And I've stated clearly what we believe they are. Exactly why I have confidence to proclaim HIS Gospel, particularly because that is what He commands His disciples to do. One can sit on the sidelines and merely take potshots at those bold enough to quote Him, but should consider that they risk this warning:

Luke 9:26 NIV
"Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."


That's easy...

2 Corinthians 4:1-8 ESV

"Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart. But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God."

"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."

"For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

My sincere prayer is that we will all simply take God at His Word. It really isn't as difficult as some would make it seem. Merely the faith of a child...

God bless!

biblegateway.com

So you belong to this secret sect of Christians which has existed since the beginning of Christianity and are the only real Christians, having believed in the literal inerrancy of the Bible even before it existed. Nobody else is a real Christian, even if they think they are. Got it.

 

[Juvenal]

So you belong to this secret sect of Christians which has existed since the beginning of Christianity and are the only real Christians, having believed in the literal inerrancy of the Bible even before it existed. Nobody else is a real Christian, even if they think they are. Got it.

Pretty sure I couldn't express that thought more economically, so I won't try.

From Wikipedia:

The Shepherd of Hermas (Greek: Ποιμὴν τοῦ Ἑρμᾶ, romanized: Poimēn tou Herma; Latin: Pastor Hermae), sometimes just called The Shepherd, is a Christian literary work of the late first half of the second century, considered a valuable book by many Christians, and considered canonical scripture by some of the early Church fathers such as Irenaeus.[1] The Shepherd was popular among Christians in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries.[2] It is found in the Codex Sinaiticus.[3][4] The Muratorian fragment identifies the author of The Shepherd as Hermas, the brother of Pius I.[5]​

The scriptures in use by Christians today are not the same scriptures known to Jesus' original disciples, most of whom could not read, or by early Christianity among those who could. Early Christianity was spread as an oral tradition.

There is only one Word of God acknowledged in the gospels, and that Word is Jesus himself.

The elevation of Christian writings to a place of ultimate authority, with a description arrogated from God Himself in the person of Jesus Christ, would have been deemed blasphemous by the authors of the texts they have chosen to honor. The risible justification that the texts can function as an objective measure of God's will should be judged by the shattering of the church into endless denominations by those who've chosen to live and die by that sword.

If God gave these people brains, it does God no honor to refuse to use them to seek out his mysteries, in the pretense that all important truths have already been provided.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It does not mean the elements travel from star to earth.

The same kinds of stars seen making elements are near the Earth. The final states (supernova remnants, planetary nebulae) are near the Earth. The Sun has a typical composition to other stars, near and far. (Obviously the Earth was made of elements here before it formed such that it formed from them, and not accreted from distant sources.)

We can use common sense and logic to interpret what we see, to use probability to decide the odds of more than 300,000 lifeforms be transformed from tiny cells designing and transforming themselves. In case you insist that common sense is not scientific, but does everything has to proceed from science only? Many daily and common stuff do not run on scientific proof.

The topic is science, you are in the science section, and science is partly an effort to overcome "common sense" to get to the reality that is beyond normal human comprehension: vast distances, tiny things, long periods of time, etc.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Ah... cartoons and cereal, huh? Wait a sec, you're all the way round in Wales but only 5 hours ahead of me? *scratching head*

I was getting ready for work at that time actually. And also, that's how time zones work.

 

[River Jordan]

To believe and profess that one has a relationship with Jesus, one has to believe what He says - that He promises as much. To believe Him is to believe He is, in fact, the Word Himself. Therefore it is required to believe that yes, from cover to cover, the Holy Bible is inspired, inerrant, and perfectly capable of being correctly interpretated and obeyed through the inspiration of the indwelling Holy Spirit in the genuine believer - as also precisely promised.

No. Believing that all of the Bible is 100% inspired and infallible is not a requirement for salvation. If it were, Christians would have to believe that the earth sits on pillars and doesn't move, and a host of other ridiculous things.

The Bible is a compilation of many different types of writings, so to demand that it all be read one single, simplistic way is not at all reasonable.

 

[AV1611VET]

No. Believing that all of the Bible is 100% inspired and infallible is not a requirement for salvation. If it were, Christians would have to believe that the earth sits on pillars and doesn't move, and a host of other ridiculous things.

No such thing as "infallible poetry"?

In your opinion, is this passage contradicting itself?

1 Corinthians 15:58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

How can I be both "steadfast and unmoveable" and "always abounding" at the same time?

 

[River Jordan]

1. What is evolution according to the view, and what are the main points?

Evolution is basically a change in a population's genetics over time.

As far as its "main points" you can use this website: Evolution 101

I know evolution doesn't say there is no God, but it implies so. Do you think evolution implies no God?

Not at all. I have no idea how populations evolving would mean there is no God. That doesn't make sense.

2. According to evolution, can one kind of living lifeform change to another over a long time, for example can an amphibian gradually change into a reptile? If yes, why are there no fossils of in-between species?

There are tons and tons and tons of intermediate fossils. And the evolution of new species has been seen to happen many, many times.

3. As to why I believe Dr Werner instead of the community of evolution biologists, the reason is simple: He got his feet wet exploring fossils for 30 years, so he should know what he is talking about.

But professional paleontologists have done that far more often and extensively than Werner. So if studying fossils is a reason to listen to a person, why not listen to the professionals who do exactly that?

It is said that when you understand something very well, you can express it in very simple terms. That’s what he could do, he asked the right questions and find answers to dissect evolution, eg: If lifeforms change as evolution claims, then fossils from eons of time ago should be different from today's skeletons, so he examined fossils found near dinosaurs' bones but these fossils do not show change from the same skeletons of species today, even after so many millenniums have passed when dinosaurs used to live on earth.

He's making two fundamental mistakes. First, he's assuming that if a taxa's skeleton doesn't change (as shown by fossils) then it didn't change at all. However, it's possible that there were changes to structures and/or biological systems that aren't preserved as fossils. Second, he doesn't seem to be aware of stabilizing selection, which tends to keep organisms that are well suited to their environments from changing too much. It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the gist of it.

If you're really interested in fossils, why not read or watch some material from professional paleontologists?

 

[River Jordan]

No such thing as "infallible poetry"?

Seems like a silly concept that assumes the primary intent of poetry is to be absolutely 100% accurate in every detail. So when Psalms says the earth rests on pillars and doesn't move it's making a point about the power and authority of God, not conveying an infallible description of the nature of planet earth.

In your opinion, is this passage contradicting itself?

1 Corinthians 15:58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

How can I be both "steadfast and unmoveable" and "always abounding" at the same time?

That's exactly my point. Picking apart that passage word by word and evaluating it through a lens of infallibility completely misses it's message (about standing firm in our faith). It's an example of missing the forest for the trees.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's exactly my point. Picking apart that passage word by word and evaluating it through a lens of infallibility completely misses it's message (about standing firm in our faith). It's an example of missing the forest for the trees.

Then I suggest you don't bring up the Bible saying the earth sits on pillars and is unmoveable, lest you miss the forest for the trees.

Knowing the difference between poetic and literal helps contribute to Biblical maturity.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Then I suggest you don't bring up the Bible saying the earth sits on pillars and is unmoveable, lest you miss the forest for the trees.

Knowing the difference between poetic and literal helps contribute to Biblical maturity.

Oh the irony of that statement coming from you of all people...

 

[River Jordan]

Then I suggest you don't bring up the Bible saying the earth sits on pillars and is unmoveable, lest you miss the forest for the trees.

I'll keep citing it as an example of how literalism isn't always appropriate.

Knowing the difference between poetic and literal helps contribute to Biblical maturity.

Yes it is.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'll keep citing it as an example of how literalism isn't always appropriate.

But it's often cited as a go-to passage to try and get literalists to stop interpreting Genesis 1 as literal.

Yes ... literalism isn't always appropriate.

One doesn't have to be a Rhodes scholar to know that.

But using this passage:

1 Samuel 2:8 He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the world upon them.

... to try and say you shouldn't take this passage literally ...

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

... is treading on thin ice.

Expecting to treat every passage in the Bible literally, is what I call "x-ing a paragrab."

Ever heard of X-ing a Paragrab?

That's what Internet scientists here expect us to do with the Bible.

Instead, there are Boolean standards that can be employed to reconcile science and the Bible.

 

[River Jordan]

But it's often cited as a go-to passage to try and get literalists to stop interpreting Genesis 1 as literal.

Yes ... literalism isn't always appropriate.

One doesn't have to be a Rhodes scholar to know that.

But using this passage:

1 Samuel 2:8 He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the world upon them.

... to try and say you shouldn't take this passage literally ...

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

... is treading on thin ice.

Expecting to treat every passage in the Bible literally, is what I call "x-ing a paragrab."

I agree.

 

[Joseph G]

So you belong to this secret sect of Christians which has existed since the beginning of Christianity and are the only real Christians, having believed in the literal inerrancy of the Bible even before it existed. Nobody else is a real Christian, even if they think they are. Got it.

I figure your offense is not ultimately with me, but with the Word of God. Your avoidance to engaging in discussing it is noted.

In His Word you would readily find answers to your confusion over: how God has always chosen a remnant, how faith in His Word was exercised before being written down (hint: through believing the prophets in the OT times and oral accounts of Jesus in the NT times), and that, yes, there are and have always been genuine Christians and fraudulent ones ("Not all who say to me, Lord, Lord..." - sound familiar?). I encourage you to study His Word for yourself, if you do not already do so. That does take a willingness, though.

One point of contention. This is purely my opinion, but I don't believe that anyone who isn't saved truly believes in their heart that they are - not via atonement - because they don't really believe God raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 10:8-10) - no matter how adamantly they identify as Christian. They preach a religion rather than a relationship.

Otherwise, they would receive His Spirit, they would believe what He says, they would proclaim it as written, and they would strive to obey His living commands - in gratitude for His grace, mercy and compassion.

Jesus, and His Words, are a rock of offense to some. To others, they are Life. We each ultimately make our own choice...

John 6:65-70 NIV
"He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”

From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

“You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.
Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.”

And Peter again:

1 Peter 2:4-10 ESV
"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture:

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone,
a cornerstone chosen and precious,
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,

“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,” and
“A stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offense.”
They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do."

"But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy."

God bless us all!

biblegateway.com

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I figure your offense is not ultimately with me, but with the Word of God. Your avoidance to engaging in discussing it is noted.

In His Word you would readily find answers to your confusion over: how God has always chosen a remnant, how faith in His Word was exercised before being written down (hint: through believing the prophets in the OT times and oral accounts of Jesus in the NT times), and that, yes, there are and have always been genuine Christians and fraudulent ones ("Not all who say to me, Lord, Lord..." - sound familiar?). I encourage you to study His Word for yourself, if you do not already do so. That does take a willingness, though.

One point of contention. This is purely my opinion, but I don't believe that anyone who isn't saved truly believes in their heart that they are - not via atonement - because they don't really believe God raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 10:8-10) - no matter how adamantly they identify as Christian. They preach a religion rather than a relationship.

Otherwise, they would receive His Spirit, they would believe what He says, they would proclaim it as written, and they would strive to obey His living commands - in gratitude for His grace, mercy and compassion.

Jesus, and His Words, are a rock of offense to some. To others, they are Life. We each ultimately make our own choice...
John 6:65-70 NIV
"He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”

From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

“You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.
Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.”

And Peter again:

1 Peter 2:4-10 ESV
"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture:

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone,
a cornerstone chosen and precious,
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,

“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,” and
“A stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offense.”
They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do."

"But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy."

God bless us all!

biblegateway.com

It's so easy to pretend that someone getting annoyed at you is them getting annoyed at God, isn't it? Makes it easy for you to deflect any criticism against you.

 

[River Jordan]

Fundamentalists just love to try and set it up to where disagreeing with them is disagreeing with God.