Rudolph Hucker
Senior Member
- Jun 26, 2007
- 1,540
- 332
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- UK-Conservative
Not in the flesh, but on other boards in other places. He is well known.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not in the flesh, but on other boards in other places. He is well known.You know this guy??
because you have been with me from the beginning.
Or maybe it is only YECs who are afraid to see the deceitfulness of fellow creationists. The dishonesty is plain form the letter
An unsupported claim that doesn't answer the point. If science missed like buckshot technology would not be getting more and more advanced
You would not be a non denominational whatever you are, or believe the earth goes round the sun, if doctrine and interpretation of scripture had not changed over the last two millennia
You ask for independent confirmation for science and you reject scientists as not being independent, but asking how it can come from non scientists is 'elitist'.
Maybe because there were not modern scientist around at the time
Sure, just show us where God says the six days are literal...
Except not one of the verses said anything about creationism. That seems a regular feature of the verse lists you post and your public service cut and pastes
And you are in danger of taking his word in vain when you paste verses that have nothing to do with the discussion and claim they support you.
Yes, he is very well known elsewhere. He has been active on a couple of other boards in other countries, in one of which he lives. When my post count is high enough, I'll put up some links if you are interested.You know this guy??
Good heavens. I hope your fellows can talk some sense into him!Yes, he is very well known elsewhere. He has been active on a couple of other boards in other countries, in one of which he lives. When my post count is high enough, I'll put up some links if you are interested.
I really did not know he was here, and was not seeking him.
I am sure he will be pleased to see me, and some others who will follow.
We have tried, believe me we have tried.Good heavens. I hope your fellows can talk some sense into him!
How you extrapolate that yet completely ignore the possibility of evolution is intellectually astounding.amazing! so God's punishment on the snake means nothing and the fact that Newsweek had an article on snakes and that they used to have limbs is just more creationist propoganda.
We've had threads that go on for twice this length. It's not a matter of talking sense into him. It's a matter of him listening and grasping what is being said.Good heavens. I hope your fellows can talk some sense into him!
How you extrapolate that yet completely ignore the possibility of evolution is intellectually astounding.
Darwin was a non-believer? Are you sure?evolution is a concept from the imagination of an unbelieving man, why would i not ignore it when there is no factual proof for its existence, just inferrences from those who do not believe or believe in God?
evolution is a concept from the imagination of an unbelieving man, why would i not ignore it when there is no factual proof for its existence, just inferrences from those who do not believe or believe in God?
Direct observation of mutation, natural selection and speciation is not factual proof?
It is only literalists like you who have the problem with evolution.evolution is in direct opposition to God. the two and the agenda's of both are not compatible but seek different results.
evolution is a thoery that has been constructed to deceive and lead people away from the truth. all attempts to 'christianize' it fail because 'righteousness has no fellowship with unrighteousness'.
it is a shame that people who call themselves followers of God have allowed themselves to be caught up in evolution's grasp.
what is attributed to evolution robs God of credit and glory and steals from man that which they need; truth, confidence, reality, and the opportunity to praise God for what He has done.
allowing evolution to take root in the believer's lives, gives victory to the evil one and defeats the believer in their spiritual walk with God. something that God does not like or approve of as christians are to be free fromevil and not entangled with it.
amazing! so God's punishment on the snake means nothing and the fact that Newsweek had an article on snakes and that they used to have limbs is just more creationist propoganda.
{can't find the article right now, the title escapes me}
You want to preach on the snake but are afraid to tell us who who the seed is???
Well it could be interpreted literally, but it would mean we have a weary God who is refreshed after having a rest. The bible says God does not get tired. That's why I think it is a metaphor. Is Exodus 20:2 literal? Did the Israelites all live in a single house? Exodus 20:2 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. Who decides any passage is literal or metaphoriorical?yes it does. who decided that exodus became metaphorical at that moment? please provide credible sources for such thinking.Genesis doesn't even say the world was created in six days, that is only found in the metaphorical description in Exodus which describes God as a weary labourer refreshed after a days rest.
OK then lets look at our conversation:sorry,i am not a great typist: staught = is taught.
Not mentioning evolution is not God saying one thing. No matter how many passages you find about the creation where God does not mention evolution, it is not the same as God saying evolution does not happen. So if God does not mention evolution in the bible and uses evolution it is not God lying about evolution just as God not mentioning gravity or heliocentrism is not lying when he does use them, or when people misread the bible to .not at all. i would have to study all the references to creation to give you a better idea of what i taught BUT God would not say one thing then do another--that would be sin nor would He allow His writers to misrepresent what He did, thatwould be sin. God is sinless.You claimed evolution was unbiblical because God did not mention it. Yet we see that God did not mention gravitation theory or heliocentrism. Are you dropping that claim
Your other argument is that evolution did not happen. Well God not mentioning evolution, and then not using evolution isn't lying either.
You originally claimed if God had used evolution, he would have written genesis in a way that would have told us that is what He did. he certainly wouldn't let people believe it tobe one way, write it that way when he used some other process. you make God out to be deceitful and a conniver who has no interest that His creation knows the actual truth. But as we have seen God is under no obligation to explain his method to us and when he doesn't he is not a deceiver. The bible describes the sun rushing around the earth but doesn't explain the heliocentric orbits rotation of the earth or gravitation that God actually uses. Not mentioning the science does not make God a liar.
Actually here we find it is the YECs who go in for translational gymnastics trying to make their literal translations work. Meanwhile Genesis 1 never says the world was created in six days, it never says the days are consecutive, and if you read it as six days, the days don't match biblical calendar days. But it really should be enough for us that Moses did not take God's days literally.and genesis is not worded in the same fashion. it would take great translational gymnastics to prove it was allegorical.
Astronomers are independent from biologists and geologists.science is true because science and its tools say it is true. sorry. i renew my call for independent corroborration.
You call is pure rhetoric, you are asking for non scientists to provide evidence about science and seem to believe that only people who disagree with the age of the universe are independant enough to corroborate it.
No that is just your interpretation. Unless you are equating yourself and your interpretation with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.so you are calling God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit sinful?? they are the ones who wrote the Bible and it is very clear that 6 days was the time frame.
True enough. Calling the Good Shepherd metaphorical doesn't change the truth. Jesus wasn't a shepherd.calling something allegorical or metaphorical doesn't change the truth.
People like you and me who can get our interpretaiton wrong. Their geocentric interpretations were shown to be wrong by science. Science has shown your six day interpetation is just a bad.people have doubts about luthor, who it seems was very anti-semetic. calvin had his own problems since he advocated killing his adversaries.
they are mere men like anyone else.
Jesus taught interpretation to his disciples. Luke 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.i don't believe that Jesus taught that we are to follow interpretations. that is a word people hide behind whenthey do not want to deal with the truth.
No one here changes God's word.also, i could careless if you disagree with me, but when you change God's word, declare it something it is not then those actions open a person up to a charge of heresy.
that is if you count modern technology an advancement. i started a thread in Bib. Arch. on ancient technology and used as my starting point the ancint greek computer.
we do have one and here is one linkof many that talks about it:
http://www.ancientx.com/nm/anmviewer.asp?a=28&z=1
Of course modern technology is an advancement. We left clockwork behind long ago. Or computers are based on the modern scientific understanding of subatomic physics, something the ancient Greeks knew nothing about. If our science was wrong the computers, cell phones and satellites would not work.
You are not suggesting Solomon had mobile phones, television, stealth fighters and microwave ovens??? Of course the things Solomon had been talking about are still the same.solomon tells us that 'there is nothing new under the sun' so i wouldn't herald modern technology just yet.
You probably do not realise the abuse people who talk to you put up with.you do not have to put up with the abuse that i do.
Genesis 1 cannot prove creation because we believe by faith that it is the word of God. Your claim you can prove creation while science cannot prove evolution is without foundation. Not only is you view of creation based on faith rather than proof, it is also based on your interpretation of Genesis 1. Why do you claim 'creation happened as stated in Gen. 1'? Why not Genesis 2 which gives us a different order of creation altogether?why? creation happened as stated in Gen. 1 and throughout the Bible it just didn't happen according to theistic evolution or other alternative models.
for they accept, adopt, adapt secular theories that have no basis in divine origin and are meant to deceive not lead to the truth.
How do you know? A round earth, gravitational theory, heliocentrism, evolution and electronics are all manmade ideas. They are all the work of secular man describing how the world works. None of them are mentioned in the bible. You only have the word of the secular scientists who came up with the ideas. How do you know which are true? Because evolution contradicts your interpretation of the bible? They all contradict some interpetation of scripture, even microelectronics unless you can show it was around in Solomon's day.no, they are not secular man's ideas. these things were created by God not invented by a man like evolution. big diference between discovering what God did and inventing something that omits Him from the process.
asked and answered. move on.
Generally TEs only use that with people who don't understand the science but think they do. You probably get it a lot though.that is another non-believer's favorite tricks--hide under the 'you do not understand' argument. please, i thought you could do better than this.
I will take that as a withdrawal of you argument that you are able to test and observe creation.you can't test creation, it is done and gone. at best all you can do is test the results. oh wait, we don't even need to do that as we can see it in action every day, every season,, every pregnancy and so on.
there is very little to test. do ou want God to do it all over again just so you can continue in your scientific games and quest?
But you have just claimed that gravitation and heliocentrism do not have their source in secular science but in the world God created. The age of the earth and evolution are just as true because that is the way God created the world. The source is in God.consider the source. ifit is not of God why do you accept it and then modify it or scriptures so the two will seem in synch with each other?
You mean you didn't realise 'the blind leading the blind' was a metaphor? And you claim to be able to tell us what passages are literal?then the scripture 'the blind leading the blind' means nothing to you and is solely another one of your mirale metaphors?
or the verses found in 1 Timothy which state that 'men are being deceived'
herein lies your problem, you equate non-christian with christian when it comes to science and that is wrong. they are not the same and they do not have compatible purposes.
But I would not trust a natural man to tell me about spiritual truth. I would expect a secular scientist to be able to tell me about the natural world.
Your claim was both wrong and irrelevant, you do our own research.yet you don't post it for all to see.
Look at the context. When James talked about 'friendship with the world' he was talking about greed, desire and pandering to our own passions James 4:1-3. John defined loving the things of the word as the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and the pride of life 1John 2:16.then you call God a liar as he said 'friendship with the word is enmity with God' or when he had the whole book of 1 John written.
On the other hand, understanding the universe around us is learning about God's handiwork. Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. 2 Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. You think that studying this is wrong?
Phil 4:8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.
And Jesus said he was bread. It doesn't mean the literal interpretation is right or that Jesus was a liar.there is conflict between secular , non-christian science and God. they state God did not create the earth, while God said He did it in 6 days. christianizing secular science is not harmonizing the field with God but just a waste of time and another deception.
Some times it comes up when there are serious doctrinal issues at stake. But usually, such as here, it crops up when Christians cannot tolerant fellow believers who disagee with their intepretations.and you wonder why the word 'heresy' crops up in the discussion.
There are loads of beginnings. Every time something new starts it is a new beginning. Never mind, I thought you were making a different point.part 2:
wasn't the beginnings i had in mind--- i was talking about creation and the post-flood renewal.
I am glad you admit AiG were being deceitful with Barr's letter.the former: not sure what you mean there
the latter: goes both ways as all people do it. i try not to but i may not always succeed.
No I am saying Christians today have a lot of interpretations the church did not have in the past. Very few believe the sun goes round the earth. At one time everyone believed bread was literally changed into meat. In the first century nobody had even heard of the Trinity. Interpretations and doctrines change and develop. Good interpretations improve, some bad ones get dropped.not at all. are you saying the true church died out with jesus and the disciple's deaths? are you saying that all we have is denominational interpretation? sounds like an excuse to believe whatever you want to and avoid the truth.
Scientist and different scientific disciplines are independent.the former: i am only asking the same criteria that is often asked of me in other discussions. prove it independently.
The people who find out these things are scientists. How are non scientists supposed to make scientific discoveries without doing science?the latter: i didn't say that. isaid you were being elitest by saying thatonly scientists cna know these things.
So Pythagoras and the Babylonians and mathematicians in India understood about right angled triangles? The could build towers and pyramids? Remarkable achievements for people with their limited knowledge and technology. But our technology and knowledge vastly outstrips theirs. Could they put a satellite in space? Could they send a probe to Jupiter? Build a microscope to examine atoms? Split atoms? Build a suspension bridge? Do calculus? Understand complex numbers? Understand the structure of DNA? There is loads of stuff they did not understand or know about.you are under the illusion that people invented things only after the dark ages. as i showed in my previous post, technology was alive and well 2000 years ago.
also, the ancient babylonians were teaching the pythagorian theory long before pythagorus (sp) 'discovered' it.
the ancient eyptians obviously had a superior form of engineering as well as science to accomplish building the pyramids and practice mummification.
the ancient people of nimrod's time must have had top notch scientific knowledge as the attempted to build the tower of babel.
only arrogant people think that the modern people have intelligenceor any other attribute. the ancients were not neanderthals (using the secular science's idea of being a brute with no brains)
Where does the verse say it is literal? And what has translation got to do with it?the former: there is a verse but somehow you miraculously decided it was metaphorical. (i will refrain from asking for your credentials as a translator or an expert in english language)
You did a word search for 'follow', how is that supposed to be a synonym for created?the latter: so you do not believe in synonyms either i see. do they ruin your theory by equalling the word 'created'??
I wasn't quoting a verse, though I did have the commandment in mind. It is dishonouring to God's name to swear falsely in his name. It is dishonouring to God's word to paste a list of verses that have nothing to do with the topic and claim they support you. It is not a commandment, but I think the children of God should treat his word with more respect.please quote chapter and verse on that idea. i know of the one about 'taking God's name in vain' but not sure what you are referrencing when you say 'words'.
I agree totally that we are to follow the Lord. It is because all of us on this forum seek to follow the Lord that the verses are irrelevant to this debate. And follow is not a synonym for create.actually, the verses were quite germane to the point and your response reflects your attempt to ignore what God says about whom to follow. i see you are very afraid of the truth that God says and look to minimalize them so you can continue to pursue theories that have no foundation in scripture.
you certainly squirm a lot.
Your claim was both wrong and irrelevant, you do our own research
You want to preach on the snake but are afraid to tell us who who the seed is???
That's why I think it is a metaphor
No matter how many passages you find about the creation where God does not mention evolution, it is not the same as God saying evolution does not happen.
Your other argument is that evolution did not happen. Well God not mentioning evolution, and then not using evolution isn't lying either
Meanwhile Genesis 1 never says the world was created in six days,
now you are desperate and reaching.it never says the days are consecutive
if you read it as six days, the days don't match biblical calendar days
But it really should be enough for us that Moses did not take God's days literally.
You call is pure rhetoric, you are asking for non scientists to provide evidence about science and seem to believe that only people who disagree with the age of the universe are independant enough to corroborate it.
Science has shown your six day interpetation is just a bad.
Jesus taught interpretation
No one here changes God's word
We left clockwork behind long ago.
If our science was wrong the computers, cell phones and satellites would not work.
You are not suggesting Solomon had mobile phones, television, stealth fighters and microwave ovens??? Of course the things Solomon had been talking about are still the same.
Your claim you can prove creation while science cannot prove evolution is without foundation.
How do you know?
Generally TEs only use that with people who don't understand the science but think they do
I will take that as a withdrawal of you argument that you are able to test and observe creation.
The age of the earth and evolution are just as true because that is the way God created the world. The source is in God.
And you claim to be able to tell us what passages are literal?
I would expect a secular scientist to be able to tell me about the natural world.
You think that studying this is wrong?
So, what are your degrees in Arch?part 1--assyrian:
[you do not think that studying this is wrong?]
if you do it the secular way--yes.
I am glad you admit AiG were being deceitful with Barr's letter.
No I am saying Christians today have a lot of interpretations the church did not have in the past
Scientist and different scientific disciplines are independent
How are non scientists supposed to make scientific discoveries without doing science?
Build a suspension bridge
yes. they also built a computer.Do calculus
yes.Understand complex numbers
Understand the structure of DNA? There is loads of stuff they did not understand or know about.
But only YECs think anybody is saying the people in the ancient world were stupid, or equate intelligence with the level of science and technology.
And what has translation got to do with it?
You did a word search for 'follow', how is that supposed to be a synonym for created
It is dishonouring to God's name to swear falsely in his name. It is dishonouring to God's word to paste a list of verses that have nothing to do with the topic and claim they support you. It is not a commandment, but I think the children of God should treat his word with more respect
You can't just do a word search for create and claim without basis it shows Jesus and Paul taking Genesis literally, or paste a word search for 'follow' and pretend to have provided synonyms for create
It is because all of us on this forum seek to follow the Lord that the verses are irrelevant to this debate
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?