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.
No.So here is the question - have you seen even ONE T.E. posting here with concern for anything faced by that poor T.E. who started his own thread in that example -- other than much-predicted atheist POV "trash the Bible and add more praise for evolutionism"???
I agree, if we immerse ourselves in the contentions and confusion of the world, we risk being overcome by it and losing our focus on Christ and His Righteousness. Stay strong in faith.When i speak of separation, i dont mean that we dont love unbelievers, i just mean that we separate ourselves from things that divide us believers.
I agree, if we immerse ourselves in the contentions and confusion of the world, we risk being overcome by it and losing our focus on Christ and His Righteousness. Stay strong in faith.
Convincing evolutionists of the folly of their theory does not bring them to Christ, which should be our goal. I know it may be a step towards that goal but we need to know when to step out of the way and allow the Spirit to do His work on men's hearts.
Yes, but it seems they prefer to be deceived, or at least, they choose to subscribe to ear tickling teachings.Don't forget the big monopolistic media, the provide the platform to spread ideas.
But as the Bible says, less and less people even want to hear it...
This hurts me.
Weŕe not gonna win this.
I agree. I dont think however that we can convince people that the Gospel is true. I believe that God must draw them into truth. That however does require preaching the Word.
I wasn't talking about the TERM "Big Bang", I explicitly said "postulated the theory".No catholic priest first proposed "the big bang" rather it was Fred Hoyle's Steady State theory opponents of the "Big Bang" that proposed that term -- because they thought it the theory sounded too much like Genesis 1:1 and they never wanted to miss the opportunity to denegrade the Bible at the same time they were opposing the "expanding universe" model for the cosmology.
Oh goody! Another prediction! I wonder if you can keep up your flawless record?You'll have your evidence soon enough...
Science actually disproves evolution.I let scientific minds argue science, but i will cite their opinions sometimes.
Not true, God can preserve His Word regardless of man's input... as Jesus said, even the rocks would cry out the glory of God.Without Christians who existed prior to you you would not have a Bible to read.
-CryptoLutheran
Do you not believe in the coming of Christ to redeem His people and to destroy the wicked? Most Christians can see the signs of the times and that His appearing is soon to come...Oh goody! Another prediction! I wonder if you can keep up your flawless record?
There is no doubt that evolutionism has not only a zillion exposed, frauds and hoaxes - but it has a zillion+1 "stories" -- a rich pile of source material from which will come "tomorrows list of confirmed frauds and hoaxes" - plus tomorrows "list of bad ideas that were accepted at first". It is an endless game "Chasing down EVERY story" -
So then - better to step back and look at the BIG picture -- contrast real SCIENCE to the exposed junk-science "Tells" in evolutionism's "wall of stories" (Wall of weird).
Notice that every time a discussion about blind faith evolutionism is started up - evolutionists blast out a bevy of 'stories' -- "proof by puzzle" where "extreme quesswork and inference" is used to "imagine strained conclusion" for observations "they do not have".
The LAST thing they want to do is learn from the evidence - the confirmed findings -- contrasting the Bible doctrine to their own doctrine on origins -- or contrasting real science to their exposed confirmed junk-science methods lamented by their OWN atheist evolutionist professors like Patterson.
We can be thankful for two evolutionist contributors here - Hogshead and stephen583 ...
They both fully demonstrate the logical end-point for belief in evolutionism.
Just when the other T.E.s want to claim 'no such thing is possible' -- these two posters are present to remind us that this is exactly where evolutionism leads as compared to accepting the Bible, the Gospel, Christianity.
They prove Darwin's own statement on the subject - over and over again.
Notice that the other T.E.s will not touch this subject -- even though it comes up on page 1 of this thread and on almost every other page of it.
Yes sadly our kids are being force fed this bile and accepting it as irrevocable truth...Evolution is a non scientific religion forced upon the young and demanded adherrance to by their older generation of gutless materialists that have succumbed to indocrination. Simple study and facts and true science proves design and a DESIGNER, straight forward and simple but it takes study, and a God given brain to decipher these truths
Again, the problem I have with your post, KW, is that it in not an ob3jctive exegesis of Scripture. You are not just presenting Scripture and that's it. You are presenting Scripture as understood and interpreted by right-wing Christianity. OK, fine. Nothing wrong with that. Right-wing Christianity is a very traditional dimension of Christianity. Only thing is, right-wing Christianity is not the only Christian church and not the only possible interpretation of Scripture. I wish to explore these other possibilities. Now, if some of you on this forum have trouble accepting the plurality of Christianity, then that's your problem, your failure to come to grips with your intolerance and narrow-mindedness.
He was responding to me. He has a problem with the fact that I represent the Scriptures with the actual Scriptures, and not with modernized interpretations of those who twist the Scriptures to try and make them conform to the lie of evolution. I'm narrow minded because I believe in the word of God as written, not as interpreted by those who do not believe it to be true.No one knows who you are responding to.
Perhaps hit the quote or reply button.
Not true, God can preserve His Word regardless of man's input... as Jesus said, even the rocks would cry out the glory of God.
That isn't accurate, Extraneous. He is simply failing to give your image or model of God glory. So, too, do I. It comes from Hellenic philosophy and rests on the dubious assumption that God cannot change. Also, it rests on the unchecked imaginations of fundamentalist Christians, who believe they can read the mind of God and so know that he intended Scripture to be an accurate geophysical witness. Now, the fundies cannot read God's mind and neither can anyone else either. However, it is equally plausible that God did not intend Scripture to be a scientific witness.
"In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity"
NoThat's true, and there's evidence of us being in (or near) the centre of the universe.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?