I don't believe in evolution... (2)

[Nathan Poe]

First, the Bible is not the only source of moral guidance.

And not a particularly good one -- "Do unto others, as long as they're members of your own tribe -- leave the others to rot."

 

[Assyrian]

Luke 10:29 Who is my neighbour?

 

[sdmsanjose]

Nathan, you twist and misrepresent the meaning of the bible with your statement of

"Do unto others, as long as they're members of your own tribe -- leave the others to rot."

The Bible says no such thing. This is what the Bible actually says

Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

The Bible is a good source for moral guidance

Nathan, why are you so quick to try and discredit the Bible?

 

[sdmsanjose]

Luke 10:29 Who is my neighbour?

Matthew 22
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38This is the first and great commandment.

39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

What is the BIBLICAL definition of Neighbor?

Neighbor in the new Testament Greek is “Plesion “
“it means neighbor, fellow man, or fellow creature…..the parable of the Good Samaritan, which teaches that that he who is outwardly near us should be the object of our concern in spite of the fact that there are no ties of kindred or nation between us”

 

[tulc]

Luke 10:29 Who is my neighbour?

My neighbor is the person near me who needs my help.
tulc(always tries to help)

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Either you are a Christian (member of the tribe) or an Atheist.

Muslims, Jews and other people who believe in a god different to yours are now Atheists (i.e. people who don't believe in any gods?) Do you see how this is nonsensical?

However, being a member of the Christian tribe only requires that a person accept Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and commit to following the commandments/doctrines of the Bible.

Christians are told to offer salvation to all.

You continue to dodge my question about the Atheist whom you can save from his burning home.

 

[tulc]

Either you are a Christian (member of the tribe) or an Atheist.

"He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters." Matt. 12:30

However, being a member of the Christian tribe only requires that a person accept Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and commit to following the commandments/doctrines of the Bible.

Christians are told to offer salvation to all.

Matthew 28:19-20 states, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."

I've always preferred Luke's way of saying it:

46Then there arose a reasoning among them, which of them should be greatest.
47And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart, took a child, and set him by him,
48And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.
49And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
50And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.(emph. added)

tulc(knows the Lord put Scriptures like this in the Bible just to annoy people who think their way is the only way to follow the Lord)

 

[HosannaHM]

Either you are a Christian (member of the tribe) or an Atheist.

"He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters." Matt. 12:30

However, being a member of the Christian tribe only requires that a person accept Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and commit to following the commandments/doctrines of the Bible.

Christians are told to offer salvation to all.

Matthew 28:19-20 states, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."

Your offering salvation?? Forgive me, I was under the impression you were advocating condemnation. Wow! You changed my mind completely!!

Let's go find some ruffian atheists and beat them to a pulp! Those silly straw man stiflers! Do you know where to find one?? Let's get them before they get us.....


...Such a hateful person when God is Love.

 

[HosannaHM]

Muslims, Jews and other people who believe in a god different to yours are now Atheists (i.e. people who don't believe in any gods?) Do you see how this is nonsensical?

You continue to dodge my question about the Atheist whom you can save from his burning home.

Dude you are wrong!! They are all atheists! They don't believe MY WAY so they are straw men.

Even though atheists are defined as those who don't believe in any deity it doesn't matter-Muslims and Hindus don't believe in deities! That's proposterous... and a straw man accusation.

I am nothing like those silly Muslims who cry death to the infidels!! Death to them though because they do no believe the same as me!

I believe God will show them what's up through me. He put me here to spread the words of His wrath.

I am Clirus- Hear me roar, snarl, and destroy any in my path that do not believe in my interpretation of God's Word.

I am the equivalent of cancer to the teachings of Christ. Distorting, destroying, and opposing all those who disagree with my teachings.

Jesus came to bring life... Clirus came to remind us of death.

 

[sdmsanjose]

Originally Posted by sdmsanjose http://www.christianforums.com/t7548635-87/#post57502026
Matthew 22
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38This is the first and great commandment.

39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

What is the BIBLICAL definition of Neighbor?

Neighbor in the new Testament Greek is “Plesion “
“it means neighbor, fellow man, or fellow creature…..the parable of the Good Samaritan, which teaches that that he who is outwardly near us should be the object of our concern in spite of the fact that there are no ties of kindred or nation between us”


CLIRUS RESPONDS
How do you resolve that the definition of "Plesion" is in conflict with the following verse from the Bible?

II Corinthians 6:14 states, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with the unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?"

Should the "concern" be a spiritual concern for salvation or a physical concern of Socialism?

The notes for II Corinthians 6:14 in the NIV Study Bible say:

“For the Christian believers to cooperate with false teachers, who in reality are servants of Satan, not withstanding their charming and persuasive ways, (see notes on 11:13-14) is to become unequally yoked destroying the harmony and fellowship that unite them in Christ”

To Clirus
The II Corinthians chapter 6 verses 14 that you refer to gets additional understanding by reading the whole book of II Corinthians. The notes of the NIV Bible and Warren Wiersbe’ commentary on II Corinthians points out that false teachers within the church and Judiaisers, masquerading as apostles of Christ were what Paul was mostly referring to in the Chapter 6 verse that you quoted.
In II Corinthians 11 the apostle Paul specifically states that these false apostles, deceitful workers had transformed themselves into the apostles of Christ


King James Version
II Corinthians 11
13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

It seems that the verse that you have been quoting for months does not conform to your position. Your position that we not be unequally yoked to people that you call socialist is not supported by the scripture that you quoted.

Clirus, you indicate that you have a spiritual concern for the salvation of the non-believer. Do you not see that your approach is very condemnatory? You constantly point out your believe that people you deem unworthy should be killed. You even want people killed that have no support at all in the Bible. You do not proclaim God’s love but instead take the position that you would not help a person if they were robed, raped, sick, injured, or in burning house if they were not what you deemed a Christian.

If there is judgment that needs to be constantly pointed it would be better if God did that and not you. Do you not read Romans 2:1-4 that says that “God’s kindness leads you towards repentance?” See Romans 2 below:


Romans 2
God's Righteous Judgment

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

I think same people discredit the Bible because they do not follow through with reading the books to get the right context and they do not do the study that is necessary to get a better understanding.


Clirus, there is a reason that you are opposed by almost everyone on this forum. You are constantly pointing out all kinds of groups of people that you deem as detriments to society and Christianity and no one agrees with you. If you believed what the Bible says in Romans 2 then you would realize that God’s kindness is what leads to repentance. Your constantly judging all kinds of people and not promoting God’s kindness is not the right spirit IMO

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Liberal Christian Concept

There are several tenants of the Liberal Christian Concept (soft on sin) that I have observed.

Socialism, Pacifism, "Love conquers all" and "Never consider the Old Testament".

The "Never consider the Old Testament" concept is associated with the "Love conquers All" concept because the Old Testament presents God as a God of Righteousness.

It is hard to disprove the "Love conquers All" concept, but Hope without realism is basically a lie.

The Catholic Church probably thought they were following the "Love conquers All" concept when they moved the homosexual priests from one location to another, instead of kicking them out of the church or asked them to repent, but that did not work.

Strawman exaggeration anyone?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Liberal Christian Concept

There are several tenants of the Liberal Christian Concept (soft on sin) that I have observed.

Socialism, Pacifism, "Love conquers all" and "Never consider the Old Testament".

The "Never consider the Old Testament" concept is associated with the "Love conquers All" concept because the Old Testament presents God as a God of Righteousness.

It is hard to disprove the "Love conquers All" concept, but Hope without realism is basically a lie.

The Catholic Church probably thought they were following the "Love conquers All" concept when they moved the homosexual priests from one location to another, instead of kicking them out of the church or asked them to repent, but that did not work.

I believe in the "tough love" concept.

Meaning that after the Muslims and the Atheists, Liberal Christians are the next ones against the wall in your world.

 

[sdmsanjose]

CLIRUS RESPONDS
I do not believe the "Love conquers all" and "Never consider the Old Testament" concepts to be a complete understanding of the Bible.

I have a good understanding of the bible, both old and New Testament and need not any insinuations by you about my understanding.
However, your quote above was a poor attempt to evade the issues of our previous posts. I responded to your questions below:

CLIRUS RESPONDS
How do you resolve that the definition of "Plesion" is in conflict with the following verse from the Bible?

II Corinthians 6:14 states, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with the unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?"

Should the "concern" be a spiritual concern for salvation or a physical concern of Socialism?

My previous post response proved that the bible does not support your idea about neighbor.
Your idea of neighbor does not reflect the Christian spirit but instead you take the position that you would not help a person if they were robed, raped, sick, injured, or in burning house if they were not what you deemed a Christian.

You discredit the Bible because you do not follow through with reading the books to get the right context and do the study that is necessary to get a better understanding.
Also, it may be that you care more about your attitude and personal beliefs than you do the Bible.

I believe in the "tough love" concept.

It seems to me that you use the “Tough Love” saying to try and cover for your attitude of judgment and condemnation

Your evasive response to the issues we were discussing is very obvious. You do not want to talk about the fact that the Bible does not support your position. Instead you change the subject and repost the same old posts that you have posted many times before.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

It is obvious one of us does not understand the Bible.

It's also obvious which one of you fits that description.

Knowing you will be executed is a deterrent.

A few centuries ago, thieves and poachers were publicly hanged, murder resulted in beheadings, heresy and homosexual intercourse earned you being roasted alive (which, by the way, is where the term "[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]" - originally a term for kindlewood - comes from), and treason was requited with drawing-and-quartering, a particularly grisly end.

Did it result in lower crime rates?
Not at all.

From the middle of the 20th century onwards, more and more states all across the world abolished the death penalty. Did this lack of a deterrent result in murder sprees and skyrocketing crime rates?
Not at all.

Quite the contrary: it seems that most violent crimes are committed in cultures who still believe that violence should be requited with violence. And that's none too surprising, either. As long as people equate justice with bloody payback, they won't hesitate to visit vengeance upon those who've wronged them.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Helping an Atheist

I believe the parable of the Good Samaritan does instruct Christians to help a person where there is no obvious indication whether they are a Christian, but I am very concerned about Christians helping known Atheists.

Many Christians believe the help leads to salvation, but I seriously doubt the help leads to salvation. People with a full belly seldom see a need for a change that would require them to give up their sinful lifestyle.

I believe government Socialism that helps Atheists more than Christians should be eliminated.

However, if a Christians has made it matter of prayer, then there may be some good come from helping an Atheist, but otherwise I believe the helping Atheists is more like subsidizing sin.

So... in the burning house scenario... you would do what?

 

[tulc]

Helping an Atheist

I believe the parable of the Good Samaritan does instruct Christians to help a person where there is no obvious indication whether they are a Christian, but I am very concerned about Christians helping known Atheists.

Many Christians believe the help leads to salvation, but I seriously doubt the help leads to salvation. People with a full belly seldom see a need for a change that would require them to give up their sinful lifestyle.

I believe government Socialism that helps Atheists more than Christians should be eliminated.

However, if a Christians has made it matter of prayer, then there may be some good come from helping an Atheist, but otherwise I believe the helping Atheists is more like subsidizing sin.

uhmmm...about the bolded portion? You've completely missed the point of the story. In the story it was (basically) the cultist/atheist who was the neighbor to the person in need and the religious people who weren't. Your position is we need to be the people who ignore the people in need.
tulc(thought you believed what the Bible said)

 

[Nathan Poe]

uhmmm...about the bolded portion? You've completely missed the point of the story.

No surprise there.

In the story it was (basically) the cultist/atheist who was the neighbor to the person in need and the religious people who weren't.

Clirus may not get the story, but she does live it. She wouldn't lift a finger to help anyone in need, but has no qualms whatsoever about accepting charity from atheists.

 

[tulc]

I don't believe in evolution... I don't believe in evolution. There, I've confessed my sin.

I say this because in today's political arena, coming out or testifying against Darwinian evolution is seen as a sin of gargantuan proportions. The unbeliever (as it relates to evolution) is met with so much hate, vitriol, and condescension by the pro-evolution crowd that it's really hard to speak one's mind for fear of not only being publicly rebuked, but for fear of being completely ostracized by one's peers and political constituents.

For example, last night I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher, and he had two guests on that openly admitted they didn't believe in evolution, they didn't believe they came from monkeys, that they did in fact believe in God as the creative force behind their existence, and they were derided and laughed at and completely de-legitimized for their unbelief in evolution.

I find this appaling and sad, that our religious beliefs can be used to devalue our political stature in the eyes of the (liberal) public. In today't political arena, If I tell people I didn't evovle from a monkey, they're likely to see me as a credulous lout. I'm I wrong about this?

I'm curious if the lesson we should take away from the above could be: develop a thicker skin if you're going to put yourself in a position to be challenged about your beliefs?
tulc(just wondering)

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Yeah, let's get back to the OP.

I don't believe in evolution... I don't believe in evolution. There, I've confessed my sin.

This alone sounds like a challenge, so I wonder what kind of response was expected here. Approval?

I say this because in today's political arena, coming out or testifying against Darwinian evolution is seen as a sin of gargantuan proportions.

It's not a "sin". It's just hilariously asinine, roughly the same as insisting that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth fixed to a sky-dome. It's insisting that a bronze age civilization knew more about the natural world than we do. It's taking ancient myths as literal events. It's ignoring all the most glaringly obvious evidence in favour of shoddy pseudo-scientific arguments.
Worst of all, virtually no creationist knows what evolution posits. They'll end up rambling about "monkeys giving birth to human babies", "something coming from nothing" and "the Big Bang" - none of which is a claim that's forwarded by the theory of evolution.

The unbeliever (as it relates to evolution) is met with so much hate, vitriol, and condescension by the pro-evolution crowd that it's really hard to speak one's mind for fear of not only being publicly rebuked, but for fear of being completely ostracized by one's peers and political constituents.

Politics have nothing to do with it (unless the religious fringe tries to cram their mythology into science class, at which point it does indeed become neccessary to oppose them). You are derided because you publicly insist on declaring your ignorance a virtue, as if your limited grasp of the ToE made you (and others like you) the ultimate specialist in the field of evolutionary biology. Of course, the fact that the alternative you put forward is the rough equivalent of "the earth came from the cosmic egg" does not help your case at all.

For example, last night I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher, and he had two guests on that openly admitted they didn't believe in evolution, they didn't believe they came from monkeys, that they did in fact believe in God as the creative force behind their existence, and they were derided and laughed at and completely de-legitimized for their unbelief in evolution.

Of course they were. They're like flat-earthers.
The thing is: I'm not slavishly attached to the theory of evolution. If somebody was to introduce an even better hypothesis, and then demonstrated that it's able to predict patterns such as, say, germs acquiring resistances against antibiotics even better than our current methodology - I'd campaign for giving him a Nobel prize and granting him a place in the hall of fame.

The thing is that Creationism is not a valid alternative. Creationism is to biology as astrology is to astronomy.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I wonder if Atheists will develop a thick skin when they are asked to prove their evolution theory and they fail because they cannot create life from non living matter.

Are you being deliberately deceitful here? You know that is not what Evolution claims.