The Stumbling Block

[Fineous_Reese]

Well, how would you feel about the Hindu who believes that the earth really is sitting on the back of an elephant, which is standing upon a turtle which is swimming in a sea of clarified butter? If you showed him pictures of the earth from the moon showing no elephant, no turtle and no clarified butter and he said, " I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. I put my faith in God and what He has revealed in His Written Word as Truth and I need to look no farther to know God's Word is Truthful. "

would you not think the man a wee bit stupid and a wee bit intellectually challenged? Come on, answer truthfully.

are you honestly saying Christianity is equal to Hinduism? Come on, answer truthfully.

 

[Biliskner]

It is sad how irrelevant and unresponsive your posts are. Why must Christianity affect people like this?

the Sciences will never explain the miracles of God; that includes Philip's teleportation, Noah's Flood, and even Jesus' Resurrection.
That point is not irrelevant to this thread.

possibly because of my undergrad, i've become an easy target.

anyway, moving right along...

 

[SBG]

Don't the two bolded statements seem just a wee bit contradictory and in, well, perhaps some wee bit of conflict?

"That is correct, I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. It doesn't even discuss God as possibility."

"Your statement of saying I don't care about the world God created is really based on nothing."

Those were my two statements you call contradictory. I would suppose in your view they are. You seem to be equating science with the natural world we see. I don't.

Science is study, it is not the world. I don't concern myself with the science has to say about what it sees. I don't see the need to. Especially when many say there is no possible way God could be real.

Now, I can care what God created, because I can see it. I look to the world and see God's creative hand, where science says 'no..no..no.. it is evolution.' I don't have to subscribe to science to care about what God does. Are you suggesting that the only way I can glorify God for what He has created is to honor what all scientists say about this world? Shall I honor God by saying what many scientists have said about God not being real and if He is, He is sadistic?

You are starting to make me wonder if we worship the same God.

Well, how would you feel about the Hindu who believes that the earth really is sitting on the back of an elephant, which is standing upon a turtle which is swimming in a sea of clarified butter? If you showed him pictures of the earth from the moon showing no elephant, no turtle and no clarified butter and he said, " I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. I put my faith in God and what He has revealed in His Written Word as Truth and I need to look no farther to know God's Word is Truthful. "

would you not think the man a wee bit stupid and a wee bit intellectually challenged? Come on, answer truthfully.

Do I think it is intellectually stupid to believe God over all other Authorities? No.

Do I think it is intellectually stupid to look no farther for answers when God already gives them?
No.

I am being very honest.

But, let me ask you grmorton. When Jesus comes and He judges you, will He judge you according to your intellect or faith?

No, it is not because of your faith that the charge is being made.

Contrary to your belief and popular opinion, God creating in six days is based on faith, my faith in God revealing Truth in His Written Word. And when you or another calls me stupid and an embarrassment to God, you are going after my faith.

Are you looking to destroy my faith or anothers? It won't happen. I already gave myself completely to God. He protects and keeps me, and in Him I trust.

It is because you don't care what your eyes can see(what science says) and you are going to beleive that there is a turtle, an elephant and a sea of clarified butter regardless of what picture of the earth from the moon one shows you (don't get too literal here, you are doing the same thing as the Hindu fundamentalist even though the details are different).

I don't know how the Hindu beliefs got into this, but whatever. Let's make this clear grmorton. I have not gone to the labs and done the experiments myself and I have not seen the evidence for myself. So this evidence you claim I see, I haven't seen it. I don't investigate it. I am not a scientists.

You are very much concerned with why I won't believe what science tells me. Even when it contradicts what I have been lead, by God, to believe. God has given me sight, and I am not blind to who is at work here.

Is it your desire for me to abandon what God has taught me, and pick up your beliefs and follow what science says?

I am sorry. This is not going to ever happen. And neither will I sit idly by, being complacent, allowing science to have the only voice.

I suggest you be more aware of what you are following. There is coming a time, when people such as yourself will be swept into a great deception.

Don't get that martyrdom complex when it is not suffering for Jesus that is causing your problem. This is a case of you behaving in an illogical fashion--e.g. not caring what you can see with your eyes.

Who said I have a martyrdom complex? You don't think that Cheifs statements, and your agreeing, of calling me stupid, an embarrassment to God, intellectually ignorant aren't persecution to some degree? Many YECs here receive this on a daily basis, all because they stand up for what God teaches.

We stand for what Jesus Christ taught, and you and other TE's try very hard to knock us down. It won't happen, it is a losing battle for you, for Jesus Christ Himself is the one who keeps us.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Are you looking to destroy my faith or anothers? It won't happen. I already gave myself completely to God. He protects and keeps me, and in Him I trust.



But, let me ask you grmorton. When Jesus comes and He judges you, will He judge you according to your intellect or faith?

this opposition of faith to either reason or to science is a hallmark of modern American Fundamentalism. The traditional understanding of faith is:
knowledge, assent, trust

to oppose faith and reason is not just foolish, unScriptural, demonstrating a lack of historical theology knowledge etc.
but is typically YECist.
unreasonable faith vs the faithless reason of atheism
the great false dichomotomy.
(the truth is that the faith is reasonable and extrarational without being irrational a point made by two other ancient aphorisms:
faith has its reasons that reason can not know
and i believe that i might know)


for an interesting read, check out the first few google hits:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=faith+knowledge+assent+trust+&btnG=Search

 

[grmorton]

are you honestly saying Christianity is equal to Hinduism? Come on, answer truthfully.

Why is it that you are totally unable to follow a simple argument by analogy? What do they teach you in that Christian High School you must have attended?

 

[Fineous_Reese]

Why is it that you are totally unable to follow a simple argument by analogy? What do they teach you in that Christian High School you must have attended?

lol, see, it IS your presumptions that get you into trouble how many other presumptions do you have that alter your thinking on more important matters? please understand the thing is that if you don't think Christianity and Hinduism are equal then the analogy doesn't work because just having faith in something is not as important as the truthfulness of what you have faith in. if you do think they're equal then i'm not sure what you believe about Christianity.

here's a verse that has nothing to do with floods or evolution that you might meditate on tonight before you lash out at someone else:

[bible]ephesians 4:26[/bible]

 

[grmorton]

"That is correct, I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. It doesn't even discuss God as possibility."

"Your statement of saying I don't care about the world God created is really based on nothing."

Those were my two statements you call contradictory. I would suppose in your view they are. You seem to be equating science with the natural world we see. I don't.

Science is study, it is not the world. I don't concern myself with the science has to say about what it sees. I don't see the need to. Especially when many say there is no possible way God could be real.

No, science is logic applied to the observations of the natural world. It isn't 'study'. If Study is science then an English major is a scientist.

You are starting to make me wonder if we worship the same God.

I am really pretty sure we don't. YOu have a god who likes to decieve. With your god if we see it we can't apply logic to it and understand what the Deity did. The deity made everything look like something else happened. In other words, your god arranged the evidence to make it tell a different story than what he says happened.

Do I think it is intellectually stupid to believe God over all other Authorities? No.

Do I think it is intellectually stupid to look no farther for answers when God already gives them?
No.

I am being very honest.

No you are not being honest. You didn't answer the simple question I asked. To refresh your memory I asked "would you not think the man a wee bit stupid and a wee bit intellectually challenged?"

In this very thread, you asked me to answer a question directly. I did it. Now it is your turn to answer a question directly. Here it is again. YES or NO,

You haven't answered that question. Well, how would you feel about the Hindu who believes that the earth really is sitting on the back of an elephant, which is standing upon a turtle which is swimming in a sea of clarified butter? If you showed him pictures of the earth from the moon showing no elephant, no turtle and no clarified butter and he said, " I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. I put my faith in God and what He has revealed in His Written Word as Truth and I need to look no farther to know God's Word is Truthful. "

would you not think the man a wee bit stupid and a wee bit intellectually challenged?"

But, let me ask you grmorton. When Jesus comes and He judges you, will He judge you according to your intellect or faith?

Both. He will judge us on whether we tried to be truthful in all we do. We are saved by faith, but rewards beyond that are on works.

Contrary to your belief and popular opinion, God creating in six days is based on faith, my faith in God revealing Truth in His Written Word. And when you or another calls me stupid and an embarrassment to God, you are going after my faith.

Your faith is supposed to be in Jesus Christ not in 6-day creationism. This is what is seriously flawed with YECism. It places YECism above Christ.

Are you looking to destroy my faith or anothers? It won't happen. I already gave myself completely to God. He protects and keeps me, and in Him I trust.

I used to say such things, but then my faith was misplaced--it was in yecism not in Jesus.

It is because you don't care what your eyes can see(what science says) and you are going to beleive that there is a turtle, an elephant and a sea of clarified butter regardless of what picture of the earth from the moon one shows you (don't get too literal here, you are doing the same thing as the Hindu fundamentalist even though the details are different).

I don't know how the Hindu beliefs got into this,

Hinduism got into this because you are doing the same thing the Hindu does if he holds literally to his scripture. YOu are too cowardly to answer the question I asked you. If the Hindu said the very same thing to you when you questioned his elephant, turtle and clarified butter sea that you do when I question your YEC views, would you consider the Hindu a wee bit stupid or a wee bit intellectually challenged? That is a simple question. What is your answer (none forthcoming so far)

but whatever. Let's make this clear grmorton. I have not gone to the labs and done the experiments myself and I have not seen the evidence for myself. So this evidence you claim I see, I haven't seen it. I don't investigate it. I am not a scientists.

I have shown picture after picture here. Go to my web page http://home.entouch.net/dmd/geology.htm and you can SEE the data. Of course, I doubt that you will do it because you don't really want to know.

You are very much concerned with why I won't believe what science tells me. Even when it contradicts what I have been lead, by God, to believe. God has given me sight, and I am not blind to who is at work here. [/qote]


But you have chosen your biblical interpretation BEFORE you have ever seen what the other side has to say. Doesn't that sound a wee bit self-deceptive to you?

Is it your desire for me to abandon what God has taught me, and pick up your beliefs and follow what science says?

No, I don't care if you pick up my beliefs. I do care that you say nonsensical things about the world and the things in it at the same time as you are tying these false and nonsensical things to the Holy Writ.

I am sorry. This is not going to ever happen. And neither will I sit idly by, being complacent, allowing science to have the only voice.

That isn't your plan. Your plan is to never allow science to have ANY voice. Why? because you haven't gone looking for the data which might challenge your interpretation.

I suggest you be more aware of what you are following. There is coming a time, when people such as yourself will be swept into a great deception.

It seems to me that you are already swept up in a great deception. It is called YEC.

Who said I have a martyrdom complex?

If you had been paying attention you would have known that I said this based upon your last response.

You don't think that Cheifs statements, and your agreeing, of calling me stupid, an embarrassment to God, intellectually ignorant aren't persecution to some degree? Many YECs here receive this on a daily basis, all because they stand up for what God teaches.

I didn't call you stupid or an embarassement. I asked you what you would call a Hindu who did this:

Well, how would you feel about the Hindu who believes that the earth really is sitting on the back of an elephant, which is standing upon a turtle which is swimming in a sea of clarified butter? If you showed him pictures of the earth from the moon showing no elephant, no turtle and no clarified butter and he said, " I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. I put my faith in God and what He has revealed in His Written Word as Truth and I need to look no farther to know God's Word is Truthful. "

I didn't call you anything. I asked a question which you don't want to answer.

We stand for what Jesus Christ taught, and you and other TE's try very hard to knock us down. It won't happen, it is a losing battle for you, for Jesus Christ Himself is the one who keeps us.

Jesus never said how old the earth was. Tell me where he says earth was created 4000 years ago! You are putting many words in the mouth of Jesus.

 

[grmorton]

lol, see, it IS your presumptions that get you into trouble how many other presumptions do you have that alter your thinking on more important matters?

I see that you do not deal in the finer points of insult. Given your illogic, I figured you must have come from one of those schools that doesn't let the students think for themselves. I see from your response that apparently the modern public educational system is in worse shape than I thought.

please understand the thing is that if you don't think Christianity and Hinduism are equal then the analogy doesn't work because just having faith in something is not as important as the truthfulness of what you have faith in. if you do think they're equal then i'm not sure what you believe about Christianity.

The truth is that scientific data does not support YEC any more than modern astronomy supports Hindu cosmology. My argument makes no demand on the theology of the two religions, nor does it require that they be on an epistemological level playing field. All my argument requires is that two false faiths say equally silly things.

here's a verse that has nothing to do with floods or evolution that you might meditate on tonight before you lash out at someone else:

Ephesians 4:26Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:

Seems to me that you are the angry one. I certainly am not. I am just observing that YECs say wrong things. It doesn't take an angry man to notice that.

 

[Fineous_Reese]

I see that you do not deal in the finer points of insult. Given your illogic, I figured you must have come from one of those schools that doesn't let the students think for themselves. I see from your response that apparently the modern public educational system is in worse shape than I thought.

would learning your techniques on insults make me a better christian?

The truth is that scientific data does not support YEC any more than modern astronomy supports Hindu cosmology. My argument makes no demand on the theology of the two religions, nor does it require that they be on an epistemological level playing field. All my argument requires is that two false faiths say equally silly things.

the truth is that science is not the be all end all of truth. those that make science their idol are still idolaters.

Seems to me that you are the angry one. I certainly am not. I am just observing that YECs say wrong things. It doesn't take an angry man to notice that.

well that's another matter of observation isn't it? from your insults it seems to me that you're the angry one. i'm just observing that TE's are putting science ahead of God.

 

[artybloke]

those that make the Bible their idol are still idolaters.

 

[SBG]

No, science is logic applied to the observations of the natural world. It isn't 'study'. If Study is science then an English major is a scientist.

I meant to have an "a" so it would read 'science is a study.' But, I am sure you disagree with that as well.

So, with your statement of what science is above, science is logic. Logic is based on world views. So it is still flawed. Unless you are claiming science is infallible?

I am really pretty sure we don't. YOu have a god who likes to decieve. With your god if we see it we can't apply logic to it and understand what the Deity did. The deity made everything look like something else happened. In other words, your god arranged the evidence to make it tell a different story than what he says happened.

I am sad to here we don't serve the same God. My God does not deceive, men just don't understand Him, whether by ignorance, or because they don't want to.

God gives us things to see, so that we know He is God. Satan takes these things God gives and perverts them - through temptation - in the heart of man. You seem to disagree with this. That man can tell complete 100% truth on all occasions, that man is not inheritantly evil. That our hearts aren't evil, and our flesh isn't at war with God.

God made this world look as He choose to. It was destroyed by a global flood - something you will not accept - and as it supernaturally came, it supernaturally left. And yet, you and so many expect there to be evidence of this, and when there is some, you reject it.

Jesus came and did miracles, and then the Pharisees asked, show us a great sign and we will believe. Jesus said He would not because they already missed the greatest sign, Jesus Christ. Even upon seeing the miracles done by Christ, they explained them away. And yet, so many think non-Christians today won't do this.

God tells you what happened. You turn and demand for evidence. He already gave the evidence that you reject, His Word.

No you are not being honest. You didn't answer the simple question I asked. To refresh your memory I asked "would you not think the man a wee bit stupid and a wee bit intellectually challenged?"

I was being honest with my answers. You don't have to believe me.

In this very thread, you asked me to answer a question directly. I did it. Now it is your turn to answer a question directly. Here it is again. YES or NO,

You haven't answered that question. Well, how would you feel about the Hindu who believes that the earth really is sitting on the back of an elephant, which is standing upon a turtle which is swimming in a sea of clarified butter? If you showed him pictures of the earth from the moon showing no elephant, no turtle and no clarified butter and he said, " I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. I put my faith in God and what He has revealed in His Written Word as Truth and I need to look no farther to know God's Word is Truthful. "

would you not think the man a wee bit stupid and a wee bit intellectually challenged?"

My apologies. I thought I was answering your question, by what you meant. I guess I was wrong. So to answer your question above, I would say no, the Hindu is not stupid or intellectually challenged. I don't believe high intellect is required to have faith. And I don't believe having faith in something others don't believe, is stupid. Nor do I think that calling someone stupid is the best approach to speaking with them about Jesus Christ.

I wouldn't try to explain to the Hindu about the earth. The earth will burn one day, but God's Word will always remain. And with His Word is where I would begin, Jesus Christ.

Both. He will judge us on whether we tried to be truthful in all we do. We are saved by faith, but rewards beyond that are on works.

You are aware that works not derived from intelligence, but by faith. When a mentally handicapped human being with an I.Q. of 5, has complete faith in Jesus Christ and goes before Him on judgement day, shall this person be kept out of the Kingdom because his intelligence wasn't high enough?

Will I be kept out of the Kingdom of God because I don't believe in your science?

Do I need to know science in order to preach Jesus Christ crucified and risen? Will I be kept out of heaven because I spent my time teaching Jesus Christ instead of geology or evolution?

Your faith is supposed to be in Jesus Christ not in 6-day creationism. This is what is seriously flawed with YECism. It places YECism above Christ.

My faith is in Jesus Christ and it is this faith that convinces me He speaks 100% Truth in all aspects. Jesus Christ is God and by God the Scriptures were written. Jesus is the Creator and Him I trust, in Him I believe, in Him I am kept. I trust His Word when He said, I created the heavens and the earth, I created man from dust on the sixth day, I created by the Words of My mouth and it was so.

I have never met 1 YEC that says creation is above Jesus Christ.

I used to say such things, but then my faith was misplaced--it was in yecism not in Jesus.

Are you going to now say I don't have faith in Jesus Christ? You are free to say as you wish, and I will not be swayed by them.

We each can say all we want to say here, but God knows the hearts of us all and where we stand with Him. So I don't worry about what you think of my relationship with Jesus Christ is like.

Jesus knows my heart and He knows my dedication to Him.

Hinduism got into this because you are doing the same thing the Hindu does if he holds literally to his scripture. YOu are too cowardly to answer the question I asked you. If the Hindu said the very same thing to you when you questioned his elephant, turtle and clarified butter sea that you do when I question your YEC views, would you consider the Hindu a wee bit stupid or a wee bit intellectually challenged? That is a simple question. What is your answer (none forthcoming so far)

Hindu does not hold to the Bible.

Why to you resort to personal attacks? I answered your question. What other question would you like me to answer?

I have shown picture after picture here. Go to my web page http://home.entouch.net/dmd/geology.htm and you can SEE the data. Of course, I doubt that you will do it because you don't really want to know.

Again, by looking at your pictures I am trusting and following you. I didn't do the research myself, or the studies, or the lab work. You did them and told me what you believe they are saying according to your world view.

Are you more correct than God's Word concerning the global flood?

But you have chosen your biblical interpretation BEFORE you have ever seen what the other side has to say. Doesn't that sound a wee bit self-deceptive to you?

I have chosen to follow what God has said, and you call this deceptive? All because I feel when God tells us something there is no need to and make sure God is telling the truth. I Trust Him, completely.

Thank you, you have revealed yourself.

No, I don't care if you pick up my beliefs. I do care that you say nonsensical things about the world and the things in it at the same time as you are tying these false and nonsensical things to the Holy Writ.

What I have said that is false against God's Word? Please provide Scriptural support.

That isn't your plan. Your plan is to never allow science to have ANY voice. Why? because you haven't gone looking for the data which might challenge your interpretation.

How do know what I am thinking or feeling? How could I ever silence science? You cannot. And it is a waste of time to try, and I don't really mind what science has to say. I will though speak what God's Word has to say. Science is not going to be the sole voice telling the kids of the next generation that we got here by accident and God really had nothing to do with it.

Have you read the current science books lately used in middle school and high school? Have you read the statements of many evolutionists that say God cannot exist? Are you aware that secular humanism and marxism are based on the thoughts and science of evolution? Secular humanism is springing up everywhere in America.

It seems to me that you are already swept up in a great deception. It is called YEC.

Well that wasn't what I was referring to, but ok. I know that you see me following what God teachings and by this you say I am swept up in the great deception.

You are very forthcoming in your writings, and I appreciate that. I can see clearly where you are coming from.

If you had been paying attention you would have known that I said this based upon your last response.

My apologies.

I didn't call you stupid or an embarassement.

You seem to have been agreeing with what he said, by backing him up. Notice though, I never said you said it, I said you agreed.

I asked you what you would call a Hindu who did this:

Well, how would you feel about the Hindu who believes that the earth really is sitting on the back of an elephant, which is standing upon a turtle which is swimming in a sea of clarified butter? If you showed him pictures of the earth from the moon showing no elephant, no turtle and no clarified butter and he said, " I don't care what science has to say, for it does not bring glory to God. I put my faith in God and what He has revealed in His Written Word as Truth and I need to look no farther to know God's Word is Truthful. "

I didn't call you anything. I asked a question which you don't want to answer.

I answered. Any others?

Jesus never said how old the earth was. Tell me where he says earth was created 4000 years ago! You are putting many words in the mouth of Jesus.

No, Jesus didn't say how old the earth was. Jesus did talk about Noah, He did talk about Adam and Eve being the first human beings.

I cannot seem to find where you claim I said Jesus said the earth was created 4000 years ago. Where did you see me saying that?

I don't think I put words in Jesus' mouth, I am just relaying what He said in the Gospels.

 

[grmorton]

would learning your techniques on insults make me a better christian?



the truth is that science is not the be all end all of truth. those that make science their idol are still idolaters.



well that's another matter of observation isn't it? from your insults it seems to me that you're the angry one. i'm just observing that TE's are putting science ahead of God.

You know fineous, the problem is that you won't deal with the data. You want to talk about everything except the actual data and observations. INdeed that is what is wrong with YEC in general. Avoiding discussion of the data doesn't make the data go away.

 

[grmorton]

I meant to have an "a" so it would read 'science is a study.' But, I am sure you disagree with that as well.

So, with your statement of what science is above, science is logic. Logic is based on world views. So it is still flawed. Unless you are claiming science is infallible?

No, science is not infallible. Are you claiming that your personal ability to interpret the Bible is infallible? You know, to state that your interpretation is the only interpretation means that you think YOU are infallible in understanding God's word.

I am sad to here we don't serve the same God. My God does not deceive, men just don't understand Him, whether by ignorance, or because they don't want to.

If you believe in a global flood and that evolution didn't happen, then God was deceptive. The observational evidence is there to show that there was no global flood and that evolution does happen.

God gives us things to see, so that we know He is God. Satan takes these things God gives and perverts them - through temptation - in the heart of man. You seem to disagree with this. That man can tell complete 100% truth on all occasions, that man is not inheritantly evil. That our hearts aren't evil, and our flesh isn't at war with God.

What you are saying is that observatoin is not to be trusted. If that is the case, how can we trust the observation of those men standing before an empty tomb? Maybe their observation isn't right? The problem with doing away with the trustworthiness of observational science is that Christianity is BASED upon the observation of an empty tomb. YEC undercuts the resurrection.

God made this world look as He choose to. It was destroyed by a global flood - something you will not accept - and as it supernaturally came, it supernaturally left. And yet, you and so many expect there to be evidence of this, and when there is some, you reject it.

Then you believe God is deceptive. God made the world look like something that didn't happen. Why would you trust a god like that? What if he makes the path of salvation look like something it isn't? Afterall, if God can fool us on what happened in the past, couldn't he fool us for what will happen in the future? Once God starts making things look in ways other than the way it should, one has to lose trust in that God and what he says about salvation.

God tells you what happened. You turn and demand for evidence. He already gave the evidence that you reject, His Word.

No, I reject your word about what His word says.

My apologies. I thought I was answering your question, by what you meant. I guess I was wrong. So to answer your question above, I would say no, the Hindu is not stupid or intellectually challenged. I don't believe high intellect is required to have faith. And I don't believe having faith in something others don't believe, is stupid. Nor do I think that calling someone stupid is the best approach to speaking with them about Jesus Christ.

So then as long as the Hindu has faith, he can believe any nonsense he wants and we shouldn't consider him intellectually challenged.

Why do you rail against what you view as the false faith of the atheist? AFterall, they are, in your eyes, just merely beleiving nonsense. They have faith in their nonsense, you have faith in your nonsense (course you don't think it is nonsense) and the Hindu has faith in his nonsense. No one is intellctually challenged. What a post modern view of the world! What a morally relativistic position your statement leads to. There is no truth in the world at all is what you are saying.

I wouldn't try to explain to the Hindu about the earth.

As I said, how post-modern of you. You don't care that the poor deluded man believes nonsense about turtles, elephants and clarified butter.

You are aware that works not derived from intelligence, but by faith. When a mentally handicapped human being with an I.Q. of 5, has complete faith in Jesus Christ and goes before Him on judgement day, shall this person be kept out of the Kingdom because his intelligence wasn't high enough?

You are aware that the Jesus says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

Truth does not exclude truth about the world we see.

Will I be kept out of the Kingdom of God because I don't believe in your science?

no

Do I need to know science in order to preach Jesus Christ crucified and risen? Will I be kept out of heaven because I spent my time teaching Jesus Christ instead of geology or evolution?

No, but if you want to preach to the scientist, you can't tell the scientist to shut his eyes tight and compartmentalize what he sees and what he beleives.

My faith is in Jesus Christ and it is this faith that convinces me He speaks 100% Truth in all aspects. Jesus Christ is God and by God the Scriptures were written. Jesus is the Creator and Him I trust, in Him I believe, in Him I am kept. I trust His Word when He said, I created the heavens and the earth, I created man from dust on the sixth day, I created by the Words of My mouth and it was so.

I have never met 1 YEC that says creation is above Jesus Christ.

They don't say it, they live it.

Are you going to now say I don't have faith in Jesus Christ? You are free to say as you wish, and I will not be swayed by them.

We each can say all we want to say here, but God knows the hearts of us all and where we stand with Him. So I don't worry about what you think of my relationship with Jesus Christ is like.

Jesus knows my heart and He knows my dedication to Him.

Sounds like the pharisee who stated on the public square(which an internet forum is) "I am glad I am not like other men!"

Again, by looking at your pictures I am trusting and following you. I didn't do the research myself, or the studies, or the lab work. You did them and told me what you believe they are saying according to your world view.

Quit using that cop out that you didn't do the work. You don't do the research and study when you go to a doctor to get healed yet you believe and do what he says. You don't do the research and study when you call an airconditioning repairman to your house. You trust him. The only part of your life you behave in this fashion is when it comes to science. You are inconsistent in the way you live.

Are you more correct than God's Word concerning the global flood?

No where does the bible say the flood was global. It says it killed all the people, it flooded the 'eretz' but 'eretz' is what Abraham was told to leave and go to an 'eretz' god would show him. If 'eretz' is planet earth, then Abraham was disobedient.

I have chosen to follow what God has said, and you call this deceptive? All because I feel when God tells us something there is no need to and make sure God is telling the truth. I Trust Him, completely.

Maybe you misunderstood what God was telling you? [sarcasm on] of course that can't be true, you are an infallible interpretor of what God says [sarcasm off]

What I have said that is false against God's Word? Please provide Scriptural support.

see above with the word eretz. Eretz doesn't mean planet earth. It means land or country.

How do know what I am thinking or feeling? How could I ever silence science? You cannot. And it is a waste of time to try, and I don't really mind what science has to say.

Oh please. If you didn't mind what science said you wouldn't ignore it. If science said what you wanted it to say you would be screaming it from the rooftops.

Have you read the current science books lately used in middle school and high school? Have you read the statements of many evolutionists that say God cannot exist? Are you aware that secular humanism and marxism are based on the thoughts and science of evolution? Secular humanism is springing up everywhere in America.

And it is springing up because Christians are doing what that Hindu is doing. If you want to stop it, you have to cease making the Bible imaginary. That is what YEC does to the bible, it makes it an imaginary myth. You YECs fall right into the arms of the secular huminists by saying that the Bible is not true.

You are very forthcoming in your writings, and I appreciate that. I can see clearly where you are coming from.

I prefer direct straight communication

You seem to have been agreeing with what he said, by backing him up. Notice though, I never said you said it, I said you agreed.

I am trying to get you to see how your actions look. You won't condemn a Hindu who ignores pictures from the moon showing no elephants, because if you do, you would condemn yourself for ignoring pictures of geology which show your theology to be false.

No, Jesus didn't say how old the earth was. Jesus did talk about Noah, He did talk about Adam and Eve being the first human beings.

So? ONe can believe in all those without believing the world is 6000 years old. That is my main point. You said that you were beleiving what Jesus said about the world, but you are not. He didn't say the world was 6000 years old, yet you won't change your view.

I cannot seem to find where you claim I said Jesus said the earth was created 4000 years ago. Where did you see me saying that?

When you take a YEC stance and then justify it by saying that that is what Jesus believed.

I don't think I put words in Jesus' mouth, I am just relaying what He said in the Gospels.

Well he didn't give the age of the earth.

 

[Fineous_Reese]

You know fineous, the problem is that you won't deal with the data. You want to talk about everything except the actual data and observations. INdeed that is what is wrong with YEC in general. Avoiding discussion of the data doesn't make the data go away.

actually grmorton, the problem is deeper than that. if your foundation isn't true then all the data, true or not, that you pile on it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. hark back to the story of the man building his house on the sand. you see me building on sand, i see you as the beach builder. you may have a nice house, with good solid structures and strong timbers, but your presumptions are wrong. you seem to like logic so i'm sure you realize that it's possible to have a perfectly logical argument come to the absolutely wrong conclusion if it starts with the wrong propositions.

also, you've said quite a few times that if there was a global flood and six day creation then god must be a deciever. i'm sorry you feel that way, allow me though to remind you that there is a deceiver out in the world. he's very adept at blinding folks to the truth so be careful out there when you find things "in the world" that don't mesh with what's "in the word". now does this mean the resurrection didn't take place either? tell me please, what do you believe?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

if your foundation isn't true then all the data, true or not, that you pile on it doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

what explicitly is this 'foundation' and where in Scripture do you see it?
are you saying that i can not get my car fixed by a Moslem? or buy my TV's if they are made by an atheist Chinese person? since their foundation is explicitly not Christian how can i trust that my TV will work or my car is fixed properly?

i would propose that you follow your thinking to it's logical conclusion and live in and dwell exclusively in a community of Christians only. No outside inputs etc etc. otherwise i propose that you are fundamentally wrong and that in fact, general revelation is sufficient for all kinds of community activities.

....

 

[SBG]

No, science is not infallible. Are you claiming that your personal ability to interpret the Bible is infallible? You know, to state that your interpretation is the only interpretation means that you think YOU are infallible in understanding God's word.

I believe I commented on this accusation before. Again, can you find where I said I was infallible or that my interpretation is infallible?

If you believe in a global flood and that evolution didn't happen, then God was deceptive. The observational evidence is there to show that there was no global flood and that evolution does happen.

The clear difference between you and I, is that if my interpretation is wrong, it is not God who is a deceiver, but rather me that is wrong. You seem to think that there is no way your interpretation of the evidence can be wrong, nor any other scientists. Therefore if God did create in six days and there was a global flood, you will conclude God is a deceiver instead of you being wrong.

What you are saying is that observatoin is not to be trusted. If that is the case, how can we trust the observation of those men standing before an empty tomb? Maybe their observation isn't right? The problem with doing away with the trustworthiness of observational science is that Christianity is BASED upon the observation of an empty tomb. YEC undercuts the resurrection.

Is science only based on observation alone or are there assumptions to go with those observations? If you are suggesting that it is only observations, where you there when God created to observe it....or course not. So you *must* make some assumptions. And these assumptions, which you like to say are based on logic, are also based on your world view.

YEC does not undercut the resurrection. Christianity is based on Jesus Christ's redeeming gift. These writings were not just mere observations and assumptions as you want everyone to believe. The Apostles talked, walked and ate with Jesus after He rose from the dead. This was first hand experience, based on facts, not just observations with assumptions.

I don't understand why you have turned to attack the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Then you believe God is deceptive. God made the world look like something that didn't happen. Why would you trust a god like that? What if he makes the path of salvation look like something it isn't? Afterall, if God can fool us on what happened in the past, couldn't he fool us for what will happen in the future? Once God starts making things look in ways other than the way it should, one has to lose trust in that God and what he says about salvation.

I DO NOT believe God is EVER deceptive. I believe God is beyond the human mind. I do not believe God *must* be understood completely by man, as some here do think.

I am having a hard time understanding why you ask why I follow God, who does what pleases Him. I don't understand why you question the fact of God making the path of salvation a lie.

No, I reject your word about what His word says.

You also reject where the Bible says He created the heavens and the earth and all that are in them in six days.

So then as long as the Hindu has faith, he can believe any nonsense he wants and we shouldn't consider him intellectually challenged.

I don't think you understood what I said. Because a hindu has faith in something I don't agree with, doesn't make him stupid or intellectually challenged.

Can an intelligent person be wrong and still be intelligent?

Why do you rail against what you view as the false faith of the atheist? AFterall, they are, in your eyes, just merely beleiving nonsense. They have faith in their nonsense, you have faith in your nonsense (course you don't think it is nonsense) and the Hindu has faith in his nonsense. No one is intellctually challenged. What a post modern view of the world! What a morally relativistic position your statement leads to. There is no truth in the world at all is what you are saying.

So you honestly believe that intellect is based on what one believes, not how smart one is?

There are scientists out there that are incredibly smart and talented and they will deny the existence of God to no end. Are they also stupid?

I don't agree with this argument you hold to that if someone has faith in something you don't believe, it makes them stupid or intellectually challenged.

I would never tell an atheists he/she is stupid because they don't believe there is God. I wouldn't because it would be untrue. I do believe they are wrong, but being wrong isn't the same as being stupid. Obviously, you disagree.

As I said, how post-modern of you. You don't care that the poor deluded man believes nonsense about turtles, elephants and clarified butter.

Where did I say I don't care? I said I wouldn't waste my time talking about the earth first. I would talk about Jesus Christ instead.

Is focusing on discussing Jesus Christ with one who doesn't believe in Him, instead of the earth, stupid in your eyes?

You are aware that the Jesus says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

Truth does not exclude truth about the world we see.

Would you mind posting the verse so we are on the same page?

I have not argued against what we see. I have agrued against what scientists tell us to believe.

Tell me, was there truth in the 30 year lie about the dating of a human fossil? And why was this hidden so long? Did all these scientists know this and keep it hidden, or is science really that bad that it doesn't check up on other peoples work for 30 years??

No, but if you want to preach to the scientist, you can't tell the scientist to shut his eyes tight and compartmentalize what he sees and what he beleives.

I can too tell a scientist that they need to change what they believe. That Jesus Christ is not a figment of someones imagination. He is real, He is True, and He is the Only Way to the Father.

They don't say it, they live it.

So you know me well enough from our brief conversations here to say how I live?

Sounds like the pharisee who stated on the public square(which an internet forum is) "I am glad I am not like other men!"

Where did I say that? I said nothing even like that. I said Jesus Christ knows the hearts of all men. He knows my heart and if I am or not right with Him. Just as He knows yours.

Never did I say I am glad I am not like you. Can you show me otherwise?

Quit using that cop out that you didn't do the work. You don't do the research and study when you go to a doctor to get healed yet you believe and do what he says. You don't do the research and study when you call an airconditioning repairman to your house. You trust him. The only part of your life you behave in this fashion is when it comes to science. You are inconsistent in the way you live.

Why should I believe what you tell me, when it is in direct contradiction with God's Word? And if I believe you and all the other scientists, am I suppose to also believe them when they say God does not exist?

Let me ask you a series of questions:

How do you know I don't do research before I go to the doctors?
How do you know I don't do research before I call in a repairman?

You are making some very big assumptions about my life, in which you have never seen.

In answer to your assumptions, I do do research before I go to a doctor to get a clue about what may be the trouble. I hardly ever call the repairman, because I do most fixes myself, and if I did, I would research it first. I like to save money.

And I don't trust scientists when they keep 30 year lies in order to spread their doctrines that DO come in conflict with God's Teachings.

What you apparently do not understand is why I believe God above scientists. That is because He was there. Scientists cannot say this.

No where does the bible say the flood was global. It says it killed all the people, it flooded the 'eretz' but 'eretz' is what Abraham was told to leave and go to an 'eretz' god would show him. If 'eretz' is planet earth, then Abraham was disobedient.

Are you suggesting that 'erets must mean the same thing every time? I can only assume by your comments here that you don't have an understanding of the hebrew language. Most words have various meanings and are used accordingly. But if we read in context, we can understand what the author means.

'Erets is not the only word you must be concerned with. There are other passages as well that support a global flood. Statements such as all mountains under the heavens were covered. I would be more than happy to move to this discussion if you would like. We can look at the hebrew indepth.

Maybe you misunderstood what God was telling you? [sarcasm on] of course that can't be true, you are an infallible interpretor of what God says [sarcasm off]

And maybe you have misinterepted the evidence.

see above with the word eretz. Eretz doesn't mean planet earth. It means land or country.

PLease show me where 'erets can never mean earth. Shall we look to Genesis 1:1 and conclude that God created the heavens and the country? Or how about God created the heavens and sheol?

Oh please. If you didn't mind what science said you wouldn't ignore it. If science said what you wanted it to say you would be screaming it from the rooftops.

I guess you haven't understood my points. I am not concerned about the science, I am concerned about the theology. I don't ignore what science says, I just don't trust those who interpret what they find and see when it conflicts with God's Word.

If science did support creationism, and there is much to be found that does, I still wouldn't be talking about it. Have I brought up science that supports creationism? I have only brought up the 30 year lie held by the evolutionists community.

And it is springing up because Christians are doing what that Hindu is doing. If you want to stop it, you have to cease making the Bible imaginary. That is what YEC does to the bible, it makes it an imaginary myth. You YECs fall right into the arms of the secular huminists by saying that the Bible is not true.

Christians are doing what Hindu's are doing....? TE's make the Bible a myth, not YECs. When has a YEC come out and said the Bible is not true, for no reason?

I prefer direct straight communication

I can tell. You don't hide where you come from.

I am trying to get you to see how your actions look. You won't condemn a Hindu who ignores pictures from the moon showing no elephants, because if you do, you would condemn yourself for ignoring pictures of geology which show your theology to be false.

And neither would I condemn an atheist.

Your geology is just that, yours. It is your interpretation. You have spent all this time telling me how false my interpretation is, while holding up yours as if it cannot be wrong.

I'm sorry, I will just have to go with what God says.

So? ONe can believe in all those without believing the world is 6000 years old. That is my main point. You said that you were beleiving what Jesus said about the world, but you are not. He didn't say the world was 6000 years old, yet you won't change your view.

Uhm, I was never talking about the earth being a certain age. You assumed I was. I am talking about actually events that did happen. (i.e. global flood and six day creation) Jesus gave validity to what is written by refering to it in the Gospels.

The earth can be however old God wants it to be. But age of the earth doesn't make evolution true nor does it discount a global flood. I personally think the earth was cursed by God as Adam sinned, just like it is written in Genesis 3, and the earth has been in bondage since. (as Paul talks about in Romans) I believe this has caused the earth to look older than it may be.

When you take a YEC stance and then justify it by saying that that is what Jesus believed.

Again, I wasn't talking about the age of the earth. I was talking about creation in six days and a global flood.

Well he didn't give the age of the earth.

I have said twice now that I never claimed Jesus did.

 

[Fineous_Reese]

what explicitly is this 'foundation' and where in Scripture do you see it?

we're past 130 posts on a thread concerning evolution vs creation. i'll take "Creation in Genesis" for 500, Alex.

are you saying that i can not get my car fixed by a Moslem? or buy my TV's if they are made by an atheist Chinese person? since their foundation is explicitly not Christian how can i trust that my TV will work or my car is fixed properly?

i would propose that you follow your thinking to it's logical conclusion and live in and dwell exclusively in a community of Christians only. No outside inputs etc etc.

yep, case in point for starting off on the wrong foot and using logic to get to a wrong conclusion.

otherwise i propose that you are fundamentally wrong and that in fact, general revelation is sufficient for all kinds of community activities.

....

i propose my point was misconstrued and a rabbit trail was followed

 

[grmorton]

actually grmorton, the problem is deeper than that. if your foundation isn't true then all the data, true or not, that you pile on it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. hark back to the story of the man building his house on the sand. you see me building on sand, i see you as the beach builder. you may have a nice house, with good solid structures and strong timbers, but your presumptions are wrong. you seem to like logic so i'm sure you realize that it's possible to have a perfectly logical argument come to the absolutely wrong conclusion if it starts with the wrong propositions.

As I said, you YECs talk about everything EXCEPT what we can see in this world. You talk about everything EXCEPT the data. You want to talk about my attitude; you want to talk about my spiritual state; you want to talk about houses on sand, but you don't want to talk about observational data. By doing this, you know, you are making the Word of God into an imaginary tale. You are doing damage to the believability of the scripture.

also, you've said quite a few times that if there was a global flood and six day creation then god must be a deciever. i'm sorry you feel that way, allow me though to remind you that there is a deceiver out in the world. he's very adept at blinding folks to the truth so be careful out there when you find things "in the world" that don't mesh with what's "in the word". now does this mean the resurrection didn't take place either? tell me please, what do you believe?

So, you say that the devil arranged all the data to make it appear as if there was no global flood? Really? Doesn't that make the devil more powerful than God? Who after all is more powerful--God or the devil? I guess you think it is the devil.

And it isn't that the things in the world don't mesh with the word, it is that they don't mesh with what YOU SAY THE WORD SAYS. There is a big big big difference there.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

we're past 130 posts on a thread concerning evolution vs creation. i'll take "Creation in Genesis" for 500, Alex.

rather than engage with the issues and talk specifics you play word games. i am sorry, but that is unedifying as well as uninteresting. i'll take a study on hermeneutics and epistemology to trying to engage in thoughtful debate with this type of behavior.

you do not talk specifics, but these generalities that appear to be convincing only to the choir. Like Glenn M, i would desire that you engage in discussion of the details not these word games.

not that it doesn't happen, but i don't see YECists discussing the specifics of their philosophic, epistemological, hermeneutical principles, these foundations and presuppositions that get mentioned but never specified.

we may very well be 130 messages into a thread, but i have yet to see you engage in the conversation, but rather you play games.

...

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

This was a hard teaching, eating His flesh, drinking His blood, while He was alive? They didn't understand this, so should Jesus have changed His Message to suit those so that they could better understand? Was Jesus wrong to hold and teach such a hard teaching?

No.

We are told that if we didn't preach God creating as Genesis says, many many people would be Christians today.

As you interpret Genesis to be saying

I present this in the origins forum because yecs are constantly accused of bring a teaching that is too hard for atheists to understand,

If you believe this then you are confused.

I am defining Young Earth Creation (YEC) as the universe being created in 6 days between 6000 and 10,000 years ago

If you want to believe YEC, I have no problem with that.

If you want to preach YEC to atheists, I have no problem with that.

If you want to preach that only those who believe in YEC are "true Christians", then I, as a Christian, have a serious problem with that.

If you want to preach that the physical evidence supports YEC, then I, both as a Christian and as a person with substantial background in science have a really serious problem with that.

Lake varves from Poland, Japan and the United States, tree ring sequences for pine, oak and bristle cone pine, in Europe and the United States, ice core layers in Greenland and Antartica, all independently provide evidence of business as usual back well past 10,000 years. Carbon 14 dating demonstrates that the tree ring and varve sequences are in sync (getting C14 dates off ice cores is difficult though it is being worked on and looks reasonable, I haven't seen the actual results). Comparison between C14 and Uranium/Thorium ratios in a stalagmite from the Bahamas agrees with the C14 calibration done via varves and dendrochronology (tree rings).

Various other tests, including the star light you see every night, spectral analysis of supernova SN1987A, the natural uranium reactor at Oklo, Gabon, spectral analysis of quasars all demonstrate that physical constants have not changed within the limits of the tests (which are on the order of 1 part in 100,000).

Then we have standard radioactive dating techniques, the lack of "short" lived isotopes (unless they, like C14, are being continuously produced) and other demonstrations of truely ancient age.

With respect to Evolution we have the fossil record which minimally demonstrates that over time some species died off and some came into being. The nested hierarchies of life, both the one based on morphology (physical shape) and the one based on DNA (esp. considering changes in the DNA which do not effect function) are strongly suggestive to say the least, and the fact that they match ...

If you want to ignor this evidence or simply to state you don't understand what God is doing with it, fine. But don't go around claiming that it supports YECism.