• 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.

Status
Not open for further replies.

xTx

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2010
2,005
326
✟26,241.00
Faith
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Even if they did you would still not trust them unless they confirmed what you wanted them to confirm.
If you are religious you will only ever see one side, yours.

Other than having a beer, please learn to give people the benefit of the doubt before jumping to conclusions based on presumptions ...

there is nothing wrong to ask for peered reviewed statistics ...
 
Upvote 0

Queller

I'm where?
May 25, 2012
6,446
681
✟52,592.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Politics
US-Others
So if there was no connection between the Son of God and Adam, whence comes the efficacy of the crucifixion and resurrection with respect to human redemption?
You question is based on the false premise in bold above. I made no such claim.
 
Upvote 0

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
5,014
1,015
America
Visit site
✟325,848.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single


I understand many who give testimony of coming to Christ will still believe and have argument for the ages that uniformitarian thinking allows for the process of evolution of all the species, though it would not be learned from just reading scriptures. Unbelievers will argue against that belief of what there is of the biblical account. Seeing Yahweh God as all-powerful with being Creator is basis for saying that in the perfect creation that reflects God's perfect character there is not the suffering and death that we see in our world the way it is now. God has the power to accommodate all so that there would not be uncontrollable growth of populations that would be too much for God's provision. Though some don't see there isn't such limit to what God, who will even raise the dead, can and will do. Death is death even in what the Bible says, it does not define death the way interpretation of it might, to be only that of humans, or only spiritual death and never physical death. Other scripture passages show that animals are involved, both in the curse although it was really from human responsibility, and in the relief with redemption and restoration being worked out, to include the redeemed of humanity. The vegetarian diet was permitted from Yahweh for all the centuries until the global flood happened, and in those extreme conditions then meat from animals was permitted, with specific conditions for all having it that does not have all observing those now, also with various individual passages indicating God's care for animals, and visions of the restored world of God's perfect will, without suffering and death for any. This is not available to those who will not come to relationship with God the way it is made available, with persisting in unbelief going their own way.

When Adam, with Eve too, was cursed for turning to sin in rebellion to Yahweh, he with her was with the curse doomed to die, and as all their offspring were, plainly shown in scripture passages after the account of Adam and Eve, and it was shown that animals then had to die, too. All creation was affected.

Of course then God is not pleased with all our use of animals now.

Interesting comment. On what do you base that statement?

As seen in what is posted above, God's perfect will with creation is shown. Creation started with it, and the restoration is foreseen with that, and though it is not seen widely in the Christian churches, it is in the perfect will of God such as we who believe so as to seek God's will could come to. A good number more among unbelievers turn from dependence on animals, but believers might do that as animals are used now in extreme numbers with horrible conditions for them that were never a situation for them in Bible times, that being easily documented, one honestly looking will easily find out about it. I think just those prayerfully seeking the truth about it will.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Queller

I'm where?
May 25, 2012
6,446
681
✟52,592.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Politics
US-Others
I'm having trouble seeing the connection between this and my post that you quoted.

Let me ask again because I don't see an answer in this.

What specifically makes you think that God is displeased with our use of animals?
 
Upvote 0

Non sequitur

Wokest Bae Of The Forum
Jul 2, 2011
4,532
541
Oklahoma City, OK
✟53,280.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution

You ever get an answer to your strawman questions?
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
God has the power to accommodate all so that there would not be uncontrollable growth of populations that would be too much for God's provision.

Is there going to be suffering and death in Heaven? If not, how is God going to control the population in Heaven?

How would you know if God's Will was not followed, being that you will claim it to be God's Will no matter what happens?
 
Upvote 0

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
5,014
1,015
America
Visit site
✟325,848.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single

I'm having trouble seeing the connection between this and my post that you quoted.

You said:
God's creation had to include physical death from the beginning. Had it not, animal lifeforms would have overrun the earth in short order.
My argument is that it was not like that as it is shown in the Bible. What is shown, with no suffering and no death, is not the problem with God's creation that you say it would be. God is greater than that, and can keep a population from being overwhelming, even with no suffering and no death. All reproduction is from God. So what is said with saying "had it not" is wrong, as is that God's creation had to include physical death.


Let me ask again because I don't see an answer in this.
What specifically makes you think that God is displeased with our use of animals?

Here is a perspective with a sequence of some scripture passages that relate to animals and our position.

[FONT=&quot]God said, "I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed, to you it shall be for food."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Yahweh God said "It is not good that man should live alone."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Out of the ground Yahweh God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Then Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. So Yahweh said, "I will destroy man who I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air." But Noah found grace in the eyes of Yahweh.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Then God spoke to Noah, saying, "Go out of the ark, you, your wife, your sons and their wives. Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you, that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Then Noah built an altar to Yahweh, and offered burnt offerings.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]God blessed Noah and his sons, and said, "The fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and all the fish of the sea. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you, I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. But you shall not eat flesh with its blood. For your lifeblood I will require a reckoning."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It pleased the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They wrote this letter: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things, that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from what was strangled, and from sexual immorality. Keep yourselves from these, you will do well."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it in hope, because the creation itself will also be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]"The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, the calf and the young lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them. The cow and the bear shall graze, their young ones shall lie down together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. The nursing child shall play by the cobra's hole, and the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper's den. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]"God will wipe away every tear, there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away."[/FONT]

There are many statements about God's perfection, and his compassion. For the Creator it would necessarily be unlimited. The use of animals today go far beyond what there was in Bible times.

http://www.animalvisuals.org/projects/data/slaughter
http://www.humanesociety.org/news/resources/research/stats_slaughter_totals.html
http://www.adaptt.org/killcounter.html
http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.ph...commentary/34640-this-is-worse-than-that.html

Compassion alone, which would be had with godliness, does not lead us to take part in that, and it should speak to us to look into alternatives. But animals raised and slaughtered for us, instead of plants that could provide for us without anything close to as much demand on resources, has a tremendous impact on the world with its environments, and having meat the way most of us do is not even better for our health, there may be serious health issues from it. Using just a good variety of vegetable food is better for some things health-wise, including prevention of cancers, avoiding cardiovascular problems, and even reversing type 2 diabetes.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Queller

I'm where?
May 25, 2012
6,446
681
✟52,592.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Politics
US-Others
You seem to be claiming that God would have had to constantly tinker with and micromanage the world he created. Is that the case?

OK, I get it, you're a Vegan. However, none of what you have posted above supports your claim that God would be displeased by our use of animals. Was man not given dominion over the world to do with as he sees fit?
 
Upvote 0

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
5,014
1,015
America
Visit site
✟325,848.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm having trouble seeing the connection.
Let me ask again because I don't see an answer in this.
What specifically makes you think that God is displeased with our use of animals?


I understand that God is really God. There is no suffering from diminishing of God's power or God tiring from it. God is good, God is perfect, God lacks nothing. From God's perfection there was God's creation that when God rested from it was very good. Death didn't belong in that. But we are told in scriptures why there is death.

What a way to be dismissive. Whether or not the answer was from a vegan, you asked, and you were answered very thoroughly. This was a valid answer to why God is not satisfied with use of animals among our society. It stands even if you want to dismiss it with labeling a poster as a basis, rather than dealing with the merit of what is posted.

No it is not from scriptures that humanity is given the world to do whatever is desired with it, though many like that interpretation. Revelation 11:18 shows otherwise. It belongs to God, in the perfection of creation humanity was placed here and given a role to be stewards of God's world. Yet there are failures in this among humanity that is all fallen into sin, in rebellion against God.
 
Upvote 0

lewiscalledhimmaster

georgemacdonald.info
Nov 8, 2012
2,499
56
67
Scotland
Visit site
✟60,423.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Greens

Of course we could just as well say that science is God trying to play man. i.e. Jesus?
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
Of course we could just as well say that science is God trying to play man. i.e. Jesus?

Whenever we see a reference to "God's Word", it is the words of men. When you have a recording of God saying something about Man's Word, let us know.
 
Upvote 0

lewiscalledhimmaster

georgemacdonald.info
Nov 8, 2012
2,499
56
67
Scotland
Visit site
✟60,423.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Greens
Whenever we see a reference to "God's Word", it is the words of men. When you have a recording of God saying something about Man's Word, let us know.

That very funny -- haha! Have you ever heard Christians singing in the Spirit? It's truly wonderful.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,031
52,627
Guam
✟5,145,175.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Whenever we see a reference to "God's Word", it is the words of men.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Tell me this, people that believe in evolution, if you disagree with creationists so much, why is Christianity the only religion that's hated?

Non spiritual people are very lazy. Christianity is easy to access and based on historical facts.

Other religions have much less history to get a handle on.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,624
29,201
Pacific Northwest
✟816,577.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Whenever we see a reference to "God's Word", it is the words of men. When you have a recording of God saying something about Man's Word, let us know.

More precise: What most Christians have meant by "God's Word" or "Word of God" is actually Jesus. In Christianity the Word became flesh, not text. We do refer to other things as "the word" in the New Testament "the word of God" often is used to refer to the Gospel message. And Christians have also referred to our Scriptures as God's word, but not quite the way modern Fundamentalists seem to mean it. A good way of understand it might how St. Augustine refers to Scripture having a "single utterance", that utterance is Jesus; the Word which Scripture proclaims--as Christians receive it--is Christ Himself.

The idea that the Bible is some sort of magical tome written by the divine hand of God and set aloft down to earth on pillowy clouds is what one usually seems to imagine if one only hears what modern Fundamentalism says; but it's certainly not what most Christians mean. Indeed, in Christianity the Bible isn't God's Revelation to man, Jesus is. The Bible is a collection of texts received and compiled in the Church for use in the liturgy--that is, to be read out loud as part of gathered Christian worship--so as to hear Christ being preached to us both in the promises of God through His Gospel, that our sins are forgiven, as well as to hear God's commandments that we ought to love our neighbor and live just and upright lives before our fellow man. But the Bible's object is not self-referential, the object is Christ. The Bible came into existence to be heard--read aloud--it is only in modern times that cheap and fast book publishing has permitted the easy access of owning a Bible is possible, and higher literacy rates allowing Sally and Joe Christian to own and read a Bible on their own.

Which is certainly a very, very good thing. But that's a modern convenience and it is highly anachronistic when modern Christians imagine as though though Bibles were floating around in antiquity and individual Maximus and Felicitas Christian were able to sit around doing Bible study. Instead they were gathering together around the Sacrament of Holy Communion and Scriptures were read out loud as part of the liturgical process. That and there simply didn't exist "the Bible" in antiquity, as the debate over what was and wasn't canonical was a process that went on for centuries, right up and throughout the middle ages and into the period of the Protestant Reformation.

As just a small example, when John Wycliffe translated the Vulgate into Middle English, it included a book that had largely been regarded as spurious since antiquity--the letter of St. Paul to the Laodiceans which somehow had managed to make it into editions of the medieval Vulgate and thus into the first ever complete English translation of the Bible.

Another obvious example would be the way that Martin Luther opined that the Deuterocanonicals weren't quite on the same level as the rest of the Old Testament, and thus sequestered them into their own appendix in his German translation--and he very nearly threw out Hebrews, James, Jude, and the Apocalypse from the New Testament but was counseled against it, but nevertheless placed them all at the end, regarding them largely as less important than the rest of the New Testament; Luther's German Bible becoming the template for Protestant Bibles for the next three hundred years until 19th century Bible publishers finally excised the Deuterocanonicals completely from the King James Version and future English translations (such as the RSV, NRSV, NIV, NAB, ESV, etc).

Yes, up until around the 1870s most American family Bibles (which were almost always KJV) had "the Apocrypha" printed in them. But sometime within the decade or so following American Bible publishers stopped, and that is the only reason why when you buy a KJV or modern English Bible translation at your local book store it doesn't contain books like 1 & 2 Maccabees, Tobit, or chapters 13 and 14 of Daniel.

So if we want to be really technical, that whole concept of exactly what belongs in the Bible seems isn't a discussion and debate that has ever ended; and remains a continued open discussion in the Christian Church. One need only take a look at the existence of Protestant Bibles with the Deuterocanonicals printed in their own appendix and Protestant Bibles without, as well as Roman Catholic Bibles which follow the Tridentine ruling on the Canon, and then Eastern Orthodox Bibles which differ from both Protestant and Roman Catholic Bibles in canonical specifics.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.