when did God say...

[Rudolph Hucker]

sigh! always to the absurd

...

Is not the internet based on science?

In your words, is that science "secular"?

I still do not understand what you mean by "secular science" and have oft asked you whether that means "non-Christian science".

 

[Assyrian]

This is Newspeak for "I surrender".

Sounds like it to me alright.

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

Sounds like it to me alright.

You got in just before my post was deleted.

 

[Assyrian]

"when did God say to follow science over Him?

assyrian, this is your chance to start fresh and carry on a decent dialogue...

A decent dialog when you start with a 'have you stopped beating your wife' question? You question presupposes a conflict between understanding the world God created and following God. Do you accept that the world is spherical and DNA is a helix? Is this following science over God?

 

[archaeologist]

A decent dialog when you start with a 'have you stopped beating your wife' question?

i will disagree. the question is worded in such a way as to get people who say they believe God to look at the words that He spoke and go from there.

one needs to follow God first but the problem is that someone once said, hey , if we add God to evolution, we can follow the world and feel good about it.

You question presupposes a conflict between understanding the world God created and following God

not at all, that is a gross assumption and manipulation. the question proposes that there is a conflict between God and those who do not believe in Him or believe His words.

TE's like to say what you say because they want to justify ignoring direct commands of God about following the world and listening to those who do not believe.

Do you accept that the world is spherical and DNA is a helix? Is this following science over God?

again fishing for an answer you can exploit to justify your present direction and thinking but i will say it depends, if you attribute it to evolution then you are wrong and following the world.

the evidence is the evidence, the world is round/spherical and that doesn't change but at no time does it allow for the claim that evolution was created by God or that evolution, or the big bang were the methods used by God becaused they are in direct opposition to what God said He did.

there are too many people who look for any reason to squeeze in what is not of God and look for any reason to support their alternative belief/

in other words yes and no.

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

....

the evidence is the evidence, the world is round/spherical and that doesn't change but at no time does it allow for the claim that evolution was created by God or that evolution, .... .
...

This is progress indeed.

Many will recall that only a few centuries ago many religious people believed that the world was flat, and later that if it was a sphere, then the sun orbited the earth until both were proven false by scientific observation.

There is hope.

 

[archaeologist]

as i was saying, whendidGod say to follow the world over Him? here are a coupl eo fpassages of scripture which clearly states how believers are tobe:

3For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete

2 cor. 10:3-6

{bold mine - that iincludes evolution on the against God side}

1As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath

eph. 2:1-3

one does not follow the world when they join Christ thus the question begs an answer: why do 'christians' still follow the world (secular science, evolution, etc. ) once they have redeemed by Christ?

 

[Nooj]

why do 'christians' still follow the world (secular science, evolution, etc. ) once they have redeemed by Christ?

Maybe because Jesus never said anything about shutting yourself away from the rest of the world. If he did, you might want to turn off your computer and throwaway the TV.

Did Christ ever say that the secular world has nothing to offer for the Christian? When did he say that with his coming, the pursuit of knowledge could be ignored?

And why do you still follow the world in believing that germs cause diseases? Or that the Sun is a thermonuclear ball of gas? Secular science everywhere you go...

 

[Assyrian]

i will disagree. the question is worded in such a way as to get people who say they believe God to look at the words that He spoke and go from there.

one needs to follow God first but the problem is that someone once said, hey , if we add God to evolution, we can follow the world and feel good about it.

Your question assumes your conclusion, a conclusion we do not agree with.

not at all, that is a gross assumption and manipulation. the question proposes that there is a conflict between God and those who do not believe in Him or believe His words.

TE's like to say what you say because they want to justify ignoring direct commands of God about following the world and listening to those who do not believe.

There is a difference between scientist and their science. This is the mistake you kept making with Darwin, thinking his religious belief said anything about the validity of his science. And yet the DNA double helix is perfectly valid in spite of Watson and Crick being atheists, and there is not conflict between accepting the fact that DNA is a double helix, and following God.

again fishing for an answer you can exploit to justify your present direction and thinking but i will say it depends, if you attribute it to evolution then you are wrong and following the world.

There is nothing to exploit. Your attitude to science does not make sense. Watson and Crick show us clearly that the scientists relationship with God has nothing to do with the validity of the science or whether accepting the science is 'following the world'.

the evidence is the evidence, the world is round/spherical and that doesn't change but at no time does it allow for the claim that evolution was created by God or that evolution, or the big bang were the methods used by God becaused they are in direct opposition to what God said He did.

People made the same claim that a round earth and heliocentrism was in direct opposition to what God said. They were wrong too. Why shouldn't we accept that science is right about evolution the way the church has accepted science was right about round earth and heliocentrism? It is all based on evidence and the evidence tells us some old interpretation were wrong.

there are too many people who look for any reason to squeeze in what is not of God and look for any reason to support their alternative belief/

in other words yes and no.

Like you look for reason to believe in a round earth and DNA?

There is really very little point in continuing this, you just can't come up with a reason why some sciences are 'following the world', but that doesn't apply to the sciences you accept. Either your whole theory is flat wrong, or you can't support it because you are completely compromised by follow worldly science of your own.

 

[The Lady Kate]

as i was saying, whendidGod say to follow the world over Him?

When did God say to follow you over the world?

one does not follow the world when they join Christ thus the question begs an answer: why do 'christians' still follow the world (secular science, evolution, etc. ) once they have redeemed by Christ?

When you get sick, do you take an aspirin?

 

[archaeologist]

When did God say to follow you over the world?

i am not asking you to follow me.

When you get sick, do you take an aspirin?

i have at present 2 diseases, one i know for sure does not have a cure, the other i am not totally sure about as i haven't investigated it thoroughly enough.

i do not take medication for either. to be clear, neither are life threatening but can cause me great pain if i am not careful.

**the other 2 posters i will answer later.

 

[Dannager]

i am not asking you to follow me.



i have at present 2 diseases, one i know for sure does not have a cure, the other i am not totally sure about as i haven't investigated it thoroughly enough.

i do not take medication for either. to be clear, neither are life threatening but can cause me great pain if i am not careful.

**the other 2 posters i will answer later.

So you don't take an aspirin (or, presumably, any other medication) when you get sick?

Would you mind explaining why?

 

[The Lady Kate]

i do not take medication for either. to be clear, neither are life threatening but can cause me great pain if i am not careful.

How exactly are you "careful"?

 

[archaeologist]

How exactly are you "careful

i have certain limitations and if i stay within them, then i experience little pain.

So you don't take an aspirin (or, presumably, any other medication) when you get sick?

Would you mind explaining why

i do not believe in taking a lot of medication or any drug for that matter. the reasons are personal and spiritual. though when it comes to colds, i break down because my job is speaking and i need to be clearly heard.

we don't get too many sick days here and though our contracts state we cantake some, it is not wise to do so.

 

[Dannager]

i do not believe in taking a lot of medication or any drug for that matter. the reasons are personal and spiritual.

Are those reasons related to the reasons you reject other aspects of what you consider secular achievement?

 

[pgp_protector]

i have certain limitations and if i stay within them, then i experience little pain.



i do not believe in taking a lot of medication or any drug for that matter. the reasons are personal and spiritual. though when it comes to colds, i break down because my job is speaking and i need to be clearly heard.

we don't get too many sick days here and though our contracts state we cantake some, it is not wise to do so.

So no processed foods, Fortified milk, or anything either ?

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

.... i break down because my job is speaking and i need to be clearly heard.

we don't get too many sick days here and though our contracts state we cantake some, it is not wise to do so.

What is your job that demands so much speaking?

Where is "here"? Is it outside US?

 

[KerrMetric]

I thought he was in Korea.

 

[archaeologist]

Are those reasons related to the reasons you reject other aspects of what you consider secular achievement?

partially

So no processed foods, Fortified milk, or anything either ?

i have a special diet yes

be forewarned, i will only answer personal questions to a point as i limit what i place on the internet concerning my personal life.

what i said earlier was used as an example to show that i do practice what i preach.

 

[KokoTheGorilla2]

though our contracts state we cantake some, it is not wise to do so.

If it's in the contract it's in the contract.

I know some bosses don't like sticking to the contract here, but they should be put in their place and not placated.

Koko once threatening to quiting when bad boss not wanting to pay Koko for the one sick day in year Koko is taking because Koko so sick!