Why Evolution is True

[TLK Valentine]

OK. But I daresay it is more than free will, it is sin, and free will. Free will used right, (like in heaven) and in the right place is fine.

If Free will is used by anyone's standards of "right" or "wrong" except the user, then it's no longer free will.

As long as people have free will, they have the choice to sin... or not. Heaven is going to have to take that choice out of the equation, and the only way to do it is to take away free will.

No, it was to show we needed salvation! It showed we could not do it ourselves.

Like I said -- engender feelings of helplessness and dependency.

That was the point. Glad you caught it.

Indeed -- Even Israel can't be like Israel without screwing it up. Cue the helplessness and dependency.

His word actually is a great tool to measure wicked men and nations. When they overtly have a platform that is opposite of His word, that tells us a lot.

Having two such platforms tells us a lot more.

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't you mean, Okay with you if people tell us that God inspired them to put it in writing that murder is wrong?

We don't talk that way.

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.

That may be the way you hear it; but it is not the way we talk.

It's a strange thing, before we can believe what the Bible says we must first believe in God, but before we can believe in God we must first read and believe what it says in the Bible, how does that work?

Like this:

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Do you think people must first convince us that God is real so that we can then read and believe the Bible?

We do our part and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

 

[AV1611VET]

There was not a lot left to do once men had finished.

Au contraire.

That's when the work began.

Ever heard of the Great Commission?

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

I can not imagine what must have happened to you to make you think that there is a spirit entering and leaving people,

In the OT, the Spirit did enter and leave; but in the NT, He enters and stays.

Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

I say leaving but you wouldn't agree that it ever leaves once it has entered,

He will never leave us, nor forsake us.

anyone who leaves Christianity were never true Christians in the first place,

That may be the case with most ... yes.

There are exceptions, such as if a person dabbles in evolution, gets caught up in Linnaeus' classification system, and ends up professing atheism.

you would say that no holy spirit ever entered them even though they may have been as convinced as you are that they were Christians.

With most ... yes.

 

[Dizredux]

yes it is a vendetta. and it was derailing the thread.

(I do the best to keep on track, when it gets mean and stuffy, best to get back to the op)

talking about morality is nicer than picking and poking at other posters so I rerouted the conversations.

you pick.

As you wish but pointing out that you don't read what you respond to is not a vendetta, it is just simple fact. I gave you a perfect example and you just blew it off.

If you can recognize that, it would be good.

Dizredux

 

[Dizredux]

Dizredux

Murder is usually considered as a unlawful killing so it is a legal term, not a moral one. If a killing is not unlawful then it is not murder.

I have seen several times attempts to find a universal law, something that all societies or cultures would follow.

So far this search has been unsuccessful. No behavior could be found that was not approved of or at least not condemned by some culture somewhere at some time.

Interesting subject,

Grady

so basically your morality is voted in.

And thats it huh?

pretty shallow indeed.

No further questions your honor

Sigh, did you read what I wrote? Your response had nothing to do with what I said. You responded to something very different to what I posted. This illustrates the point I am trying to make.

Dizredux

 

[bhsmte]

As you wish but pointing out that you don't read what you respond to is not a vendetta, it is just simple fact. I gave you a perfect example and you just blew it off.

If you can recognize that, it would be good.

Dizredux

Good luck with that.

With some, when in doubt, play the victim.

 

[Loudmouth]

a slight mistake

A slight mistake? Understatement of the century.

Your entire argument was that great discoveries, even Nobel Prize winning discoveries, were not published in peer review journals for one reason or another.

As usual, the first place you go is lying creationist sites. The honest thing would have been to check Yalow's publication record . . . but no. You just forge ahead spreading lies.

When I showed you that Yalow was publisehd 17 years before winning the Nobel your response is to pretend that publication only came after the Nobel.

Slight mistake? Your entire argument is shown to be without merit. I asked you for a scientific discovery that was not peer reviewed. You gave me Yalow as an example. Yalow's discovery of the RIA assay was peer reviewed.

What is your response now?

 

[Loudmouth]

quote mines don't exist, eccept in the mind of the evolutionist.

"There is no God"--Psalm 14:1

Even the Bible says that there is no God, don't you agree?

 

[Loudmouth]

I think it's about time to stop derailing the thread on your personal vendettas and get back to the OP. That would be the honest thing to do. Thanks for the comment.

You are lecturing people about the "honest thing to do"? Really?

 

[Loudmouth]

so basically your morality is voted in.

And thats it huh?

pretty shallow indeed.

No further questions your honor.

Says the person who will not admit to lying about Yalow's publication record.

 

[Loudmouth]

yes it is a vendetta. and it was derailing the thread.

(I do the best to keep on track, when it gets mean and stuffy, best to get back to the op)

talking about morality is nicer than picking and poking at other posters so I rerouted the conversations.

you pick.

You lied about Yalow's publication record. You were called out on it. What do you do? Act as if you are the victim.

How pathetic.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Okay with you if God puts it in writing that murder is wrong?

I don't know what country you're from, but here in America, we have it on what we call our "law books" that murder is wrong.

Maybe one day you scientists will be able to teach those in jurisprudence that we don't need documentation; but until then ...

My point is that people can figure out murder is wrong independently of books. It is the nature of social species, our survival depends on working together, so obviously it was an evolutionary advantage not to kill people just because you could.

You can easily see the difference in how non social species react to the deaths of their own versus social species. Alligators, for example, couldn't give less of a crap, heck they will eat their own babies if they stick around for too long. Compare that to, say, chimpanzees who will cry over the deceased and mourn.

 

[AV1611VET]

My point is that people can figure out murder is wrong independently of books.

I, for one, don't want to stand around waiting to see if the guy next to me in line has figured out if murder is wrong or not.

If he murders someone in the meantime ... thanks to it being documented, we can say to him:

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I, for one, don't want to stand around waiting to see if the guy next to me in line has figured out if murder is wrong or not.

If he murders someone in the meantime ... thanks to it being documented, we can say to him:

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

point flew right over your head. If people needed to be told murder was wrong not to commit murder, we would have gone extinct ages ago.

 

[AV1611VET]

point flew right over your head. If people needed to be told murder was wrong not to commit murder, we would have gone extinct ages ago.

I'm talking about putting it in writing ... not "being told."

And for the record, the big issue is "sin," not "crime."

Telling me that murder doesn't need to be made taboo in writing because murder is a crime against society that goes against nature is one thing.

Telling me that murder doesn't need to be made taboo in writing because murder is a sin is another.

Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

 

[dad]

"There is no God"--Psalm 14:1

Even the Bible says that there is no God, don't you agree?

The approach of science is similar to what you demo--select part of the truth, and reach insane conclusions.

 

[bhsmte]

The approach of science is similar to what you demo--select part of the truth, and reach insane conclusions.

Speaking of insane conclusions..............................

 

[PsychoSarah]

The approach of science is similar to what you demo--select part of the truth, and reach insane conclusions.

That moment when someone just says something that is strait up 100% not true but you know they will never realize it

 

[dad]

If Free will is used by anyone's standards of "right" or "wrong" except the user, then it's no longer free will.

Says you. However, I suspect free will can work with God's will quite nicely. For example, let's say we are in heaven...you want to go either to pluto, or to Russia and in both places there is something wonderful to do. You chose one place. Seems to me that is free will. Now if you had no will, you might just go whervever your programmer wanted.

As long as people have free will, they have the choice to sin... or not.

Only where there is sin, and where we are under it, I would propose.


If sin is no more, but we are free indeed, then the last thing we would ever want would be to be under it again.

Like I said -- engender feelings of helplessness and dependency.

If you think man is independant, I have news for you. It is more a choice of what to be dependant on.

Indeed -- Even Israel can't be like Israel without screwing it up. Cue the helplessness and dependency.

Israel is a work in progress. God is not finished with it yet. He has plans to take Christians out of the world, and really finish up business with Israel. He is Faithful.

Having two such platforms tells us a lot more.

Right, it tells us all parties oppose God in the nation in a very direct way.

 

[dad]

That moment when someone just says something that is strait up 100% not true but you know they will never realize it

Context. If someone quotes part of the verse that says 'the fool hath said in his heart, there is no God' and renders it 'there is no God' then we have one party deliberatly deceiving. To try and show a more full and honest knowledge is not claiming to be some 100% know it all. It is respecting fact and truth. So called science does not do that.