Let's Talk About Hell (7)

[Lisa*Lisa]

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "Let's Talk About Hell (6)"

 

[P1LGR1M]

You don't understand how science works.

That is a bit of an assumtion on your part, don't you think?

Not to mention a pat answer I get from atheists all the time. Since scripture is rejected an appeal to the only basis of belief that remains is a common issue in debates like this.

But that's okay. Perhaps I can mention a few things your rose colored glasses hide from you.

Consider that the discovery of bacteria was the result of a scientific process already in progress. No-one said, "I think there might be millionns of little squiggly things inside me." Automobiles and aircraft were the result of the progress of travel methods. No-one dreamed up the wheel. Harnessing electricity was accomplished by investigating a known phenomena which was known to hold power.

Yet we are supposed to ignore the fact that evolution was and is a theory that has itself evolved to conform to research?

We are supposed to believe global warming despite not only insufficient data, but data withheld? Such as the earth's temperature cooling between 1940-1970 despite drastically rising CO2 emissions?

C'mon, Soulgazer...who is it that lives in a fantasy world and ignores historical scientific progress?

Now, it just so happens today is your lucky day: I lost a post which I was adding links to, and this was just going to be a short reply as I need to rest for a very busy week, so this will be much shorter than it could be...lol.

Theories must be submitted for peer review. This is a rather lengthy space of time where scholars do their level best to punch holes in them. This is how scientist earn their money--- If something is submitted and can be overturned by facts, it is. If it makes the cut, it can still be challenged as more facts come in. There is no room for conspiracy, religious, or political. Biases influence data streams, producing false results which are easy meat. This goes all the way down to grad student level. When something comes in it is worried over by a pack of hungry students like a dogs over a bone.

Take off the glaases, rid yourself of bias...just not a scientific approach to the topic at hand...lol.

So you hold the scientific community inhigh regards, eh? So do I, but I do not kid myself that there are those, just as in religious communities, that seek to profit from ignorant people like myself.

Here is a link just to give you an idea what I am talking about, as I have been making you guess too much it seems, and I would rather we are both on the same page. Understand that I do not condemn the whole of the scientific community, as there are godly men and women in that community, and even among the atheists in that community I believe there are more that are sincere in their efforts than those that cannot be trusted. I will say that both sides are biased in their work to a cerrtain extent, and just like the exegete that seeks to proof-text his own beliefs, there are those that do the same in the scientific community.

Now, to point out one glaring hypocrisy in this debate, consider that there was a majority belief when religion held the reins, but, now that the world has by and large become a secular society, despite the many claims of "religion, salvation," and..."God talks to me," it is not considered that a world led in large part by atheistic God rejecting people...would indoctrinate against beliefs such as these.

In a discussion with a geologist not long ago, he cited as geological proof that there was no global flood that if this were so, all marine life would have died, as saltwater fish could not survive in freshwater, and vice-versa. Asked if science could identify or deny osmoregulators such as the salmon and shark, who can survive in both types of water, he had no answer. Will an answer be forthcoming from the fossil record? I wouldn't hold my breath, lol.

Here is an article that points to what I am suggesting which is that fish have "evolved" to accomodate their current environments. Because I believe the world is "devolving," which accounts for the decreased life of man (though it has increased due to scientific research in recent years does not meet the lifespans recorded even in times which most would agree are fairly recent, such as the time of Abraham), and I believe animals that do not near the size and ferocity of those found in the fossil record, and, I believe a decreasing nutrient value to food which might account for the impressive life-spans recorded in scripture. Of course there are the habits of man which also contribute to his decreased lifespan and health, such as boiling, baking, and barbequeing the nutrients needed to survive from their food, adding poisonous chemicals to preserve their food, and other "pleasures," it is no wonder we live in a cancer plagued world.

Another claim of the geological community is that if there were a flood, global, that is, there would be fossil evidence to support this. This a weak argument at best, built on assumption that for those of us that see in scripture the great deeps broken up, and believe that in a cataclysmic restructuring of the earth which may be evidenced by such phenomena like the Grand Canyon, which, depending on who you ask, you will get a different answer as to where the dirt went.

But that is how it is with all questions such as these. Talk to an atheist, he will tell you one thing. alk to a creationist, he will tell you another. Is it important? Perhaps. Does it change the fact that both have to have faith?

No. And both have a basis for their belief. One believes what he has been told by scientific research, another believes the word of God to be an accurate account of events.

Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

If there was one shred of scientific evidence that could not be overturned concerning the age of the earth being any less than 4.54 billion years of age, it would soon be in the light.

Right.

Because God can do all things, except leave unbelievers in their delusion...lol. My oh my.

It is a matter of examining the evidence, and the conclusions that arise from that research. Of course those scientists that reject the notion that scripture accurately records historical events are always right...right?

No one is hiding the age of the earth, free energy, alien spaceships or any other of the popular urban legends.

Who said anything about hiding anything. It is denial and faith in processes that in my opinion are not as trustworthy as the word of God.

Here is a problem for the scientific community, primarily for atheists: science presents man as a machine, run by electro-chemical process which, when life ends, man is dead. He does not go to heaven, he ceases to exist. There are thousands of documented "dead people" who by science's best capability were pronounced to no longer have life. Not just a minute or two, but many minutes.

Then...these people come back to life, and profess to have been conscious after this.

So, Soulgazer, where do you stand on this? Does man have an immaterial aspect? Or is just a scientific process that causes him to function?

Science just does not work like that.

Your science does, my friend. It is fact that evolution is a conclusion seeking proof. Deny that and you deny the history of evolution.

Remember the James Ossuary? Even as the public was wondering if they would have to update their bibles, scientists were all over it. It was Dr. Robert Eisenman who caught the forgery, though it is still being argued over whom the forger is.

And the word of God...still stands.

That is an assumption on the part of the right based in fear.

No, Soulgazer, that is a fact that only those that believe only what they want to believe cannot see.

There is no fear on my part, as I expect things to digress and see prophecy ripe for fulfillment. You cannot fear that which holds no power over you, and who is president will be determined by God. If this is the time for Antichrist to emerge, there is nothing I can do about it.

And if you do not feel this administration has been sympathetic to radical Islamists, there is not much I can say about that. If you do not see that it is odd that "God has to be voted back in" at the DNC, and despite the fact that the administration proved that what "the people" wants will not determine thier course, then again, I am very sorry for you. If you do not feel that this administration has been less than cordial to our allies, not sure what could be said.

If you do not feel that this current president has been sympathetic to Islam...you just have not been paying attention, my friend.

All I can say, is that if homosexuality threatens you so much, stop having homosexual children.

Didn't you say God speaks to you? Were you not told...I have no children?

lol

Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

Osmoregulation is the process of osmosis. This is where a dry particle will absorb the moisture of an adjoining wet particle, seemingly to cause water to ignore gravity. It doesn't have much bearing on Glacier seasonal layers, which are currently studied by climatologist.

Okay, to example the relevance of osmoregulation (like the def, by the way...wikipedia? lol), in regards to the flood, it is proposed that if there was a great eruption from the earth of water, then all aquatic life would have died. However, we some extraordinary examples in nature which example that it is just as reasonable to suggest that aquatic life in the past had on a more consistent basis the ability to adapt to both extreme and different habitats. Salmon and shark, for instance, which can adapt to freshwater. We have fish that can survive in brackish water, which would in large part been the conditions during the upheavel of the flood.

At this point, they have gone back aprox 250,000 seasons with each season corresponding to a year, more or less. A layer is caused by the accumulation of ice and snow when it's cold, and bounded by a layer of melted ice when it's warm. Not much different than tree rings.

That may be, but it may also be that such conditions could have been brought about by natural phenomena as well. So it os foolproof that layers cannot be found to accumulate in a single season?

The biggest danger here is that an accidental power loss could precipitate a plague by reintroducing an organism that we no longer have defenses against.

You mean like...Black Oil? lol

Think "bird flu, 1918".

Why? Are you suggesting it originated in the polar caps?

Worthy of a south sea native! Now, if they will just provide the hut, the beach and the Hula girls!

Why would they provide it? They are the ones looking for provision.

This came from the history channel, when they were studying ancient battles; I don't have a written source for it, but if you go through their program guide you should be able to pull up a you tube version

Sorry, I gave up on the History Channel long ago. Not much for the revisions that are so popular these days.

Well, I am glad you are not offended or insulted.

Not at all. Though I must say that discussions of science are far less interesting than scriptural discussions. Still, some of it is very interesting.

But, it will not save, nor is it the "proof" that many believe it is. It is just as religious a group as the many other religions around the world. Their god is knowledge, and rejection of God, though some claim to believe in Him, is a characteristic of this group. And that is in reference to those that worship a god of their own creation, that is, again, I do not condemn all scientists.

We just got to get you through the mythology to get to the good stuff.

Right. Funny, but what I believe has been around for Millennia, whereas your belief system has to continuosly change that which they offer up as truth, and this because true scientific process has a way of disproving theories, which in turn causes the need to change the statement of "faith."

It must be difficult that simple questions like "If evolution is true, why are there still monkees?" creates a need for science to admit that adaptation is a natural process.

But hey, if one wants to believe their relatives are animals, whether they are distant cousins or invited for Thanksgiving, so be it. I will take the position that man is the crowning achievement of creation, and that we can trust that it was accomplished in six days.

Continued...

 

[Soulgazer]

Oh come on---Come out of the land of candy canes, unicorns and dragons. Evolution is a proven theory, it has been tested every way imaginable and still stands. Will other evidence change the theory? Certainly. New numbers always change the outcome. But to stand on a bronze age myth does not show your devotion to God----Just the opposite.

God gave us scientist so that we would have a better understanding of the Universe. Are they perfect human beings? Not anymore than pedophile priests or evangelist preachers caught with their drawers down.

We weren't ready for the truth three thousand years ago---we are barely ready for it now, as you have so ably demonstrated.

I had just as soon "God" be kept out of politics. It has been tried before---remember prohibition? It just creates a new criminal class, as morality cannot be legislated. Moses tried, and Jesus died.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M

Freedom from religion and religious oppression is a good thing, but I still cannot figure out how one can read scripture (or, as admitted, some of scripture, or much of scripture, but not all of scripture) and conclude that the Lord taught a denial of the very word He fulfilled, quoted, preached, corrected the doctrine of the religious rulers.
​

It's fairly easy, especially knowing which sect the various text came out of, and what they believed. They didn't all believe the same things. John is a Naasene text; They did not consider the Supreme God to be the same as the god of Genesis, or even the god of the pharisee, or at the very least they didn't believe the pharisee to know what they were talking about.

Well, you skirt the heart of the issue, but that is expected.

Am I supposed to marvel that you have information that denies the authorship of John? lol

If the Naasenes did not believe the God of Genesis to be the Supreme God, what makes you think that anything concerning them should be considered reliable?

Because if they were the originators of this Gospel, they sure did a terrible job of making sure they put their theological slant into it...lol.

The Naasene believed that no one knew the father but the son---so the history of God begins and ends with Jesus Christ. They did not accept Moses as having spoken with God face to face.

I would say that during the time of the Lord's ministry that the former statement can be seen quite readily in scripture, and not just in John.

And as far as no man having seen God, this also is true, in my view. I believe that scripture is clear that man could not enter into God's presence in his state of not having yet had his sin atoned for. THis is what the doctrine of perfection, or completion speaks about. Was the writer of Hebrews also a Naasene? Perhaps this conspiracy theory you speak of may have included him/them (Hebrews 5:11) as well.

You never did comment on my response to your interpretation of that incident.

Hence there are verses referring to the "True" God. This would be in opposition to the false god of the Pharisee.

Could you provide some examples of this?

Rather than simply making a statement? This would make it far easier to examine the basis of your statement.

They also relied Heavily on Enoch-- the appellation "Son of man" is an honorific first used in a titular fashion in Enoch, as well as the parable of the sheep being started in Enoch and finished in John; In Enoch God calls His "hirelings", the various kings, judges and prophets, but then in an aside asks His "scribe" to record all of their "excesses".

There are those that recognize the bok of Enoch to be scripture, I do not. If being quoted in scripture made something inspired, then we can include the works of Cretan poets, right? Each man has to make this decision, and he willbe, when the "books" are opened, judged according to that which he understood. I do not think that there will be much room for mercy because I believe the Lord leads man to His word, and I believe that the collective canon I use to be, of course, the right one.

As to what point you seek to make with this, it is beyond me. What I can see is a continual effort to avoid the word of God, as well as that which is taught in scripture concerning eternal punishment.

Which is no wonder to me, really, because when you do speak of that which you claim to have studied so vigorously, you betray a very limited and somewhat childlike understanding of it.

So it is a necessity for one to seek to teach people to reject the word of God to first take the word of God out of the discussion, and in place shift to topics that are unrelated.

The Naasene felt that all those before Jesus had attempted to steal the flock from the God of Love, and give them to the gods of violence. The books of the kings and prophets are the record of the attempt to steal the flock.

Did you learn all of this on the History Channel? Sounds like the garbage they teach.

You seem to have a great deal of interest in the Naasenes, the Marcionites, pseudepigrapha, and science. That is not surprising, because these are all aspects which those that reject the God of the Bible have in common.

Discuss anything but scripture, because your understanding of it becomes painfully obvious.

Anything else I can help you with? Don't hesitate to ask.

Actually, yes. You could return to the many posts already dealing with the OP, for one. While I do enjoy rabbit trails, I prefer that they eventually have to do with scripture.

Denial of my YEC beliefs, presentations of godless men that reject scripture...none of this, even if it had any bearing on faith, can be proven by either of us. You present your scientific facts, I present my own beliefs. Much time is wasted and the discussion at hand is abandoned. I am sorry that the little time I have has been taken up with so much of that, and if necessary, I will continue to respond to it. But, just understand that just as with a faith in scientists which is itself biased and unrealistic, even so faith in scripture as well as the God of scripture Who has above all historical documents preserved His word, the bottom line is faith.

And I think there may be another response or two, so...

Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M

And the fact that this tale is found in nearly every culture does not seem ironic? Cultures separated by distance as well as the ocean, lol.

If the historical record were more complete, we would probably find hundreds, if not thousands of such events, as I am sure tsunamis are not anew phenomena, nor cataclysmic floods, for that matter.
​

This is from the Palestine area; It may actually be the "true" Noah story. Or "Gilgamesh". Or maybe representative of a whole host of "noah's " as people struggled for their lives.

Does not answer the question why so many from such diverse cultures have a similar tale.


It "could be this, could be that."


Very scientific.


(sorry for the italics)

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M And...?

Has science ever figured out exactly what happened to the earth displaced from the Grand Canyon yet? lol

Yes. It's sitting in the bottom of the sea....you can't tell me you didn't know that?

Nope, didn't know that. I thought this was a point of contention in the scientific community, or was, at one time.

You can check out this link, if it the one that I think it is, there is a standing invitation for anyone, scientists included, to challenge his articles.

If nothing else, you might get a laugh.

Here is a description of the Author:


Walt Brown received a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow. He has taught college courses in physics, mathematics, and computer science. Brown is a retired Air Force full colonel, West Point graduate, and former Army Ranger and paratrooper. Assignments during his 21 years of military service included: Director of Benét Laboratories (a major research, development, and engineering facility); tenured associate professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy; and Chief of Science and Technology Studies at the Air War College. For much of his life Walt Brown was an evolutionist, but after years of study, he became convinced of the scientific validity of creation and a global flood. Since retiring from the military, Dr. Brown has been the Director of the Center for Scientific Creation and has worked full time in research, writing, and teaching on creation and the flood.


Continued...

 

[Soulgazer]

You asked me to go this rabbit trail, and I did. Now I have demonstrated why I know the bible is not the word of God, and stand by my original assertion that the word of God is inward, that which finds the morally useful. Yes, the word of God can speak through the bible, just as it(metaphorically!) spoke through the mouth of a mule, and can speak through the very rocks of the ground.(it has---geology!) It has a harder time getting through the latest Hollywood blockbuster. But even teeny pieces of it are there too.

 

[Soulgazer]

Does not answer the question why so many from such diverse cultures have a similar tale.


It "could be this, could be that."


Very scientific.


(sorry for the italics)



Nope, didn't know that. I thought this was a point of contention in the scientific community, or was, at one time.

You can check out this link, if it the one that I think it is, there is a standing invitation for anyone, scientists included, to challenge his articles.

If nothing else, you might get a laugh.

Here is a description of the Author:


Walt Brown received a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow. He has taught college courses in physics, mathematics, and computer science. Brown is a retired Air Force full colonel, West Point graduate, and former Army Ranger and paratrooper. Assignments during his 21 years of military service included: Director of Benét Laboratories (a major research, development, and engineering facility); tenured associate professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy; and Chief of Science and Technology Studies at the Air War College. For much of his life Walt Brown was an evolutionist, but after years of study, he became convinced of the scientific validity of creation and a global flood. Since retiring from the military, Dr. Brown has been the Director of the Center for Scientific Creation and has worked full time in research, writing, and teaching on creation and the flood.


Continued...

Walter Brown? You are kidding? Please tell me you are kidding?

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M now explain how cultures so separated could have done so. For that matter, explainN why we have people so different yet so similar all across the world? Did man evolve in one place, then spread out, then adapt, creating the different races?

Similar, but exact. I'm not an anthropologist but Europeans have an ancestral line different than aboriginal Australians by about 5%. "Homo Sapien" is a homogenization of several previous species. The old darwinian chart is being replaced with a new paradigm, thanks to the ability to read the genome sequencing.

So your faith in geologists should be accepted by me a valid source of faith...lol.

Can you not see you yourself illustrate the ever changing "truths" of your basis of faith?

Whereas mine...is ancient and unchanging. I have those before me for thousands of years that when we meet in Heaven, will have something in common.

Whatwill be discussed between you and those you have in common? lol

And do you think there will be apes in Heaven, Soulgazer?

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M But I can see where one people could do that. If the evolution process was involved, I think we would have lizard people and planet of the apes cultures and so forth. But man is distinct and a higher order than animals.

Let me ask you this: atheists and those that are primarily evolutionistic in their beliefs place man as simply another animal. Do you take that position? Or do you view man as above animals, or better, that man is not an animal?

From my religious standpoint the god of nature tried to create an animal image as a slave.

Hooboy...some good stuff here...lol.

So you admit to being a polytheist. My but those you have common beliefs with is increasing by the post.

What happened to "God can do whatever He pleases (except create a world in six days)?"

The True God, (the creator god thought there was no one above him, due to his massive ego)

Which would fit the character of the demons worshipped by many. Yet scripture is clear from Genesis to Revelation there is One God, not many, and they which be called gods are no gods.

intervened, and gave the man-animal a higher nature. (cf On the origin of the world, Sophia of Jesus, Apocryphon of John, Hypostasis of the Archons, Gospel of Philip)

So here is where evolution ties into your religion...alrighty then, connection made. Statement of faith, there are many gods with a superior god who punished an arrogant god by over-riding what the little hotshot tried to do so he could show his superiority and keep them in line.

Basis of belief: "scripture accepted as scripture only by a small number, and probably not a bible scholar among them."

Or am I wrong, does the scientific majority conclude them to be inspired scriptures?

From a scientific standpoint, Darwin was wrong;

Easy there, he was the one that pointed you guys in this direction. I would think a little reverence would be in order.

So tell me, Soulgazer, from what standpoint was he right on?

He did not want to admit what was staring him in the face. Man did not descend from an ape. Man is an ape.

Funny, but I am not aware of any apes that build cities, write books, compose music.

In fact, I am not aware of any animal that even comes close to mankind concerning intelligence, though I would admit there are those among man that closely resemble animals in theirs.

And this is something that is troubling about religions such as these: life, though supposedly very important to them, really becomes unimportant. The rights and welfare of animals matters more than that of humanity.

It is said of America, "They are the only Nation that saves whales and trees and kills their own children."


Continued...

 

[Soulgazer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pmuu8UEi2ko



If you want to see an Ape which approaches the lower end of human intelligence

 

[P1LGR1M]

Walter Brown? You are kidding? Please tell me you are kidding?

Yeah, I know...pseudoscience. Typical retort of atheists, too.

Read it. Deny the science. But you cannot, and if you are honest with yourself you would admit that.

You will be forced to rely on others to tell you why he is wrong.

There were other intelligent species of apes also. We wiped them out, either through interbreeding or warfare

Yeah, saw that movie (or did I read the book?).

Mark Wahlberg was great.

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M Prove I am wrong. As I said, I have no problem with this theory, and it may be I am wrong. Yet I no more believe the earth millions of years old than I believe the Gap Restoration Theory. Men I greatly respect do so, but that does not mean I have to.

As far as living in a fantasy world, it is not I that needs a reality check. Take off the rose-colored glasses my friend, when you examine the scientific world. Just as you mention, and rightly so, that people are ruled by fear, lets not forget the lies that are part of that process. If you think that the scientific community is beyond reproach, my deepest sympathies are with you.

How can I prove anything to someone who denies science? (while typing over the internet on a computer ) Science is just math. The numbers add up to 4.54 billion years.

For your information, my friend, science is how I feed my family.

Care to know more?

Do scientists have varying opinions about how future research will turn out? Yes they do.

Better yet, will they admit that they are about as blind at this point as they were 50 years ago, and the possibilities of this amazing universe God created holds mysteries that I personally believe they will never breach before this creation is destroyed?

It is like bible study, Soulgazer...the more you learn the more you realize how ignorant you are.

Physics will, I believe, be the field which will convince many scientists that there is a God Who reigns in Heaven.

But once the answer to a particular problem spits out, they move on.

​

​

Right. Science in large part is development of known facts. Once in a while we stumble over a new facet of information held by this world.

I myself would love to see deep sea exploration given more attention. I think that we would be far more advanced now if we had taken the money spent in space and had funded this type of research.


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pmuu8UEi2ko



If you want to see an Ape which approaches the lower end of human intelligence

While there are a number of examples that I think would be better, I will restrain myself...lol.

I have seen dogs trained to talk in limited ways, but the difference between animals, my friend, and man, is that animals simply parrot what they are taught.

And while many men do the same, at the least we can say that there is a difference.

So why didn't this amazing animal himself evolve? Why is he still here? THat is just another example of evolution's weakness. In several thousands of years we have no examples of humans evolving at all. Thus the need for an extensive history, why, we would need tens of thousands of years to see just a little change.

Right.

Again, take of the rose colored glasses. I would, if I were a betting man, palce money on a guess that you have a problem with big oil. Am I right about that?

Well, have you ever considered that if evolution and an extremely ancient earth were ever "proven" to be false, there would be a lot of people out of jobs? Have you considered the amount of money scams like these generate?

Have you ever given any thought to the fact that many people are involved with creating, producing, and profiting on drugs that are supposed to help people? THen they profit again on the drugs that counteract the results of the drugs that are helping them? Have you considered the fact that there are people that are smarter than men that ruled by fear, as they have taken captive millions by bringing them under control through drug dependancy?

Conspiracy theory? Not hardly...fact.

But, you can post talking animals and whistle the X-files theme, my friend, that's okay.

Continued...

 

[Soulgazer]

Ok...I'm seriously starting to hear twilight zone music now. I just hope you are yanking my chain and are intelligent not to send that charleton money.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Oh come on---Come out of the land of candy canes, unicorns and dragons.

Care to take this a little further, O great scolar of ancient texts? lol

Yep, unicorns and dragons can be found in scripture.

We might even mention legends of the origin of candy canes and it's ties to scripture, but then, the stories might seem to have evolved.

Evolution is a proven theory, it has been tested every way imaginable and still stands.

Indoctrination does not result in proof, my friend. Even those that are given truth, except God make it known to the hearts, are no better than your talking ape. They simply repeat what they are told, and usually, they get a treat if they are obedient.

But I think animals, like human parrots, can come to appreciate the attention their antics supply them. So maybe they do have some human quality.

Will other evidence change the theory? Certainly. New numbers always change the outcome.

Can't wait to see the new proof. The new expalnation of why they now believe this or that.

But to stand on a bronze age myth does not show your devotion to God----Just the opposite.

My faith precedes the bronze age, Soulgazer. It goes back to the time when man did not need to till the ground in order to survive. Adam believed in the God of the Bible, yet he was not obedient.

God gave us scientist so that we would have a better understanding of the Universe.

I believe that, really. Science has helped in many areas, one such example would be the ability to reach a vast audience with the Gospel.

And it is no surprise to me that mauch knowledge has been kept from man, and I see the explosion in technology as a sign that the Lord will return soon. For I believe that man will progress only so far, and I think physics will be the field where, though knowledge has increased, will be the last great field of study.

Are they perfect human beings? Not anymore than pedophile priests or evangelist preachers caught with their drawers down.

At least you will admit the possibility that there are scientists that will not hesitate to make merchandise of men's souls.

THat is a step in the right direction.

We weren't ready for the truth three thousand years ago---

When God makes something known...then man is ready.

Three thousand years ago man was not ready for the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

But, there are those that today have believed that which God has revealed, and have been obedient to His word, and have turned to Jesus Christ for remission of sins and reconciliation.

we are barely ready for it now, as you have so ably demonstrated.

If that is supposed to hurt my feelings, Soulgazer, you will have to do better than that.

You claim scientific proof for your beliefs...yet the only one engaging in pseudo-science is you.

You claim great knowledge of ancient manuscripts, yet your understanding is childlike, and, I fear...natural.

You claim polytheistic belief, despite the fact that Polytheism is decried in scripture.

You claim kinship with talking apes, yet...well, I am going to let that one go.

I had just as soon "God" be kept out of politics.

Yes you and a large part of the world, Soulgazer.

Well, you know what they say: "You made your bed, and it is you that have to lie in it."

Me, I wish politics would be kept out of the things of God. But that is the nature of the beast, isn't it? If men are involved, there are going to be problems. He might devolve a little and learn something from the apes.

It has been tried before---remember prohibition?

What of it?

Has nothing to do with Christianity.

That is the problem with religion, my friend, as opposed to Christianity: Religion tells man what it is he must do, Christianity has man doing what is right of his own volition. It is because of the indwelling of God.

And that was made possible by the event you mock at the end of this post...Jesus died. What you have missed is that He died for you...too. And even now, He is willing to forgive.

Amazing, isn't He?

It just creates a new criminal class, as morality cannot be legislated.

So legalize marijuana, lower the age for a number of things, and trust man to do the right thing. Is that it?

Again, when people have to be forced to do what is right, then, Christianity is not in view.

What you have is religion.

Moses tried, and Jesus died.

Moses, like Christ, was willing to die for his brethren. The difference between the two was that Christ was God manifest in the flesh. It is an ancient witness and testimony of the consistency of scripture concerning God's plan of redemption. Immanuel...

...go and learn what that meaneth.

And I will check to see if there are any more responses, I hope not, as it is late and unless the storm keeps me indoors tomorrow, I have a busy week. I tend at times to neglect my business due to the forums, but like I said, I am here just to talk to you,my friend.

God bless.

 

[Soulgazer]

I've heard that argument before...."Never mind the man behind the curtain!"
Someone who trust in Walter Brown calls someone else engaging in pseudo science? Really, want to tell me how the Easter bunny is a weal wive wabbit now? LOL.

Seriously, don't send that dude any money. Nobody debates him, just like nobody debates the flat earth society. I know you don't believe what I believe, but I can't stand to see people cheated, so trust me enough for that, ok?? Please??

 

[P1LGR1M]

Ok...I'm seriously starting to hear twilight zone music now. I just hope you are yanking my chain and are intelligent not to send that charleton money.

While I understand that tithing is part of the First Covenant and not commanded of Christians, I also understand that we are to support those that minister the word of God. I wish more, like manyof the missionaries we send out, take after Paul's example and supported themselves, but, this is an issue among Christians. Each fellowship will corporately and individually decide on how they teach this.

As far as sending money to anyone, I do occasionally send money to charities, but my financial support is directly to my fellowship, not just the upkeep of the building and staff fees, but also concerning missionaries.

This man seems to have struck a nerve. I already responded to your heckling, if you haveought you would like to say about him, go ahead.

And while I am at it, how about telling me how animals supposedly from prehistoric times can be found still having flesh on them, yet no man has?

Sigh...and again, I encourage you to return to the topic of Hell. Link pong is a neverending waste of time. My faith rejects the basis of your faith, and vice versa. What I am more interested in is your rejection of the God of the Bible and the likely reasons for them, which, as I have said, is of far more interest to me.

If I want to talk to scientists, I know where to go. And if I want to talk to theological parrots, likewise, I know where to go.

But I would like to talk to you about your rejection of scripture. Perhaps not tonight, lol, as I had no intention of even coming on today, but what can I say...it is either a sickness or a calling, lol.

So bring that well paid for education you boasted of earlier, and lets dig into your basis, Soulgazer. Starting with your rejection of scripture. You see, one might boast of theor prowess in critical thinking, but in order to critique, one must have a knowledge of that which is in view. And so far, I see little better than a low-level sunday school examination and conclusion of scripture, coupled with arguments shared by those with an atheistic worldview. Just how I see it.

God bless.

 

[Soulgazer]

I only got off the subject at your urging. You sought to convince me that your mythology was the word of God and therefor the definitive word on the matter, remember?

Let's tie it up.

Look, if you believed with all of your heart, the God was an airplane....you could not be convinced otherwise. We've been over that with the Cargo Cult.

Because you have that same unwavering belief towards the bible as your God---and I know you will deny it and say "the word of God"--but in practical terms for this argument it means the same---Even if you were shown time machine film of someone forging the Pastorals you would seriously believe you were being deceived. I have presented evidence, out of my field of study for the age of the earth, that one does not even need to be a scientist to appreciate....ice core samples. They go back a quarter million years. While not proving the earth is 4.54 Billion years old, and not even definitively proving it 250,000 years old, it does prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that it is far older than 6000 years.

We also talked about the flood. It is demonstrated that the world has had just about every area flooded at one time or another, but not all at once.

We talked about a couple of the early christian sects.


What we came to a conclusion about, is that just about the entire world is conspiring against your belief system, is that correct? That everybody else has it wrong but you? Do I have that right?

 

[P1LGR1M]

I've heard that argument before...."Never mind the man behind the curtain!"
Someone who trust in Walter Brown calls someone else engaging in pseudo science? Really, want to tell me how the Easter bunny is a weal wive wabbit now? LOL.

Seriously, don't send that dude any money. Nobody debates him, just like nobody debates the flat earth society. I know you don't believe what I believe, but I can't stand to see people cheated, so trust me enough for that, ok?? Please??

No rest for the weary, eh? lol

Again you mock and ridicule, yet fail to present critical analysis of what he suggests.

In my work which deals with pressures and gases, temperatures, state changes, and similarly related issues, it does not surprise me how little attention is given to our ability to create events which are achieved in nature.

If we look at the possibilities that could arise in natural events and consider the energy that could in a day be unleashed and destroy not just large areas of the earth, but the earth itself in totality, we would not hesitate to think that God could not arrange just such an event and leave no evidence. Instantly frozen animals? No problem. Vast amounts of water? No pronblem.

If God wished for man to believe in Him because He gave them empirical evidence to remove all doubt and the need for faith, don't you think He would just hang a big sign over each city which said something like, "That's right...I'm real."

But that, my friend, is religion. Faith is found in the child, who trusts dad is going to keep him safe. God wants to be our Father, and while He could just cause man to love and obey, God desires that we, of our own volition, turn to Him with that childlike faith. A faith that is real, not coerced.

But, laugh it up. Just make sure you give an answer to this fellow you mock. That makes the mocking a little easier to accept.

God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

I only got off the subject at your urging. You sought to convince me that your mythology was the word of God and therefor the definitive word on the matter, remember?

Let's tie it up.

Look, if you believed with all of your heart, the God was an airplane....you could not be convinced otherwise. We've been over that with the Cargo Cult.

Because you have that same unwavering belief towards the bible as your God---and I know you will deny it and say "the word of God"--but in practical terms for this argument it means the same---Even if you were shown time machine film of someone forging the Pastorals you would seriously believe you were being deceived. I have presented evidence, out of my field of study for the age of the earth, that one does not even need to be a scientist to appreciate....ice core samples. They go back a quarter million years. While not proving the earth is 4.54 Billion years old, and not even definitively proving it 250,000 years old, it does prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that it is far older than 6000 years.

We also talked about the flood. It is demonstrated that the world has had just about every area flooded at one time or another, but not all at once.

We talked about a couple of the early christian sects.


What we came to a conclusion about, is that just about the entire world is conspiring against your belief system, is that correct? That everybody else has it wrong but you? Do I have that right?

And again the conclusions I have reached have been unchanging for millennia, whereas yours are reliant on the newest scientific discovery.

There is a difference between worshipping the Bible and worshipping the God of the Bible. Your deflection and unwillingness to examine your own arguments is sad. 250,000years? Perhaps. But unlikely, in my view. It is illogical that man could be around as long as he has and yet leave only the trace amount of evidence for his existance. Another glaring void in the "records" your religion seeks to find evidence for, though it has taught it as fact for years.

What is most sad, my friend, is that even in a religion such as yours, it would seem to me that the principle of sin would be an evident fact, obvious to most. Yet you cling to the truths of those that rule this world, though you might deny demonic influence. That is just another facet of religion, which is to downplay the wickedness of man.

"Scientists would never say anything unterue, they must be right."

"Scientists would never conspire to make money, even if the data isn't exactly right."

Right.

I will say this, I think you have far more faith than I do, lol.

Oh, and concering getting off topic, I don't even think I have to look back to see how that started.

Nevertheless, again, was there anything else concering Hell you wished to discuss? Anything from the scriptures that superstitious people like me have believed for, what, about 3,500 years now?

God bless.