Former Vice President Al Gore found a responsive crowd among thousands of Baptists when he brought his green message to Atlanta Thursday.
-
(Photo: New Baptist Covenant)Former Vice President Al Gore challenges Baptists to care for God's creation during a luncheon Thursday at the Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant.
Speaking to nearly 2,500 Baptists at a luncheon during a wider Baptist gathering, Gore, a Baptist, challenged them to face the very real moral crisis of global warming and appealed to save God's creation.
"When did people of faith get so locked into an ideological coalition, that they have got to go along with the wealthiest and most powerful who don't want to see change of the kind that is aimed at helping people and protecting God's green earth?" Gore asked.
He decried religious leaders who rejected global warming as a real crisis and urged the Baptist crowd to spread the message of the dangers of climate change.
"We who are Baptists are not going to tolerate heaping contempt on God's creation," said Gore, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work on climate change. "It's up to us to send that message, as Christians, as Baptists, as Americans."
His green message came in the middle of a broad Baptist meeting which has drawn Baptists from over 30 organizations representing 20 million Baptists throughout North America. The "Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant" is spearheaded by former President Jimmy Carter and aims at ending internal divisions and creating cooperation among Baptists around social causes.
The Rev. Jimmy Allen, an organizer of the Baptist meeting and a former Southern Baptist president, said Gore's presentation was key for the conference.
"This (climate change) is an issue that has found its day," Allen said, according to Cox News Service. "It is one of the major moral issues of our time."
Evangelicals are increasingly speaking out against greenhouse gas emissions and signing up to make environment protection a priority. They argue that "creation care" is a biblical mandate and some, like the Rev. Richard Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals, equate the issue with the sanctity of life in importance and urgency.
But not all Christian groups agree with the assessments of the threat of global warming and say it's diverting attention away from more important issues like protecting traditional families and the unborn.
Gore's green message, however, seemed to resonate with Baptists at the Atlanta conference who showed their support by giving him several standing ovations.
"The environment is the No. 1 issue in terms of how we are putting hands and feet to the call of Christ - not just saying but doing," said Bailey Edwards Nelson, a 24-year-old divinity school student at Mercer University's McAfee School of Theology in Atlanta, as reported by The News & Observer.
Calling creation care a Christian responsibility, Jan Moore of Venice, Fla., said she will apply evangelical witnessing to the issue.
"For the ones who choose to ignore it, it is our job to bug them until they get on board," Moore told Cox News Service.
Gore challenged Baptists to make a difference by not only using environmental-friendly products but by challenging political leaders to pass legislation that would reduce carbon emissions.
"The purpose of life is to glorify God," he said. "And if we continue to heap contempt on God's creation, that is inconsistent with glorifying God.
"In every crisis there is an opportunity for a reawakening and for a reassessment and for a change of course and an opportunity to do things better, and that's what the climate crisis is really all about."
RSS
It's not easy being green, just ask Kermit.
Wow, that will be cool. The Baptists are now going to live like John the Baptist, wearing camel skin and eating locusts and honey. Get your cave now, before the big rush. Hey guys, how about a little discernment here?
One way we honor God is by being good stewards of what He has placed in our command, which includes taking care of the earth. It doesn't mean we worship creation. I'm not sure where you got that from, but no one ever said that or implied that.
Perhaps each true FOLLOWER of Jesus Christ should first ask if we are worshipping the Creator or the creation. Let us each examine ouselves to be sure that we are not violating the Lord's commandments regarding idolatry before we simply pay mindless homage to modern notions of enviornmental stewardship.
Will the real Christian please stand up!
Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Al Gore might be sincere but they are not Christians.
Christians know that GOD condemns homosexuality (Sodom & Gommorrah) and that the scripture teaches in 8 (eight) different places against homosexuality.
Come on my American brothers & sisters your history as a Christian nation is a proud one, with some mistakes yes, but you have been a light shining on a hill, Salt among the nations, please take right ground, we are praying for you.
100% South African
JC,
What does that have to do with taking care of our planet?
"As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease." (Genesis 8:22).
Enough said.
kc:
1: Do you believe, that as stewards of this earth (which is what God asked us to be) that we should take care of it?
2: Do you believe that we are being good stewards of our earth?
Yes , we are to pray to God for wisdom in how to treat his creation. We are to have faith that things can change...but faith without works is dead. Which I think is what you are saying too (I hope). On our own, we cannot change. But God also gave us commn sense. If carbon emissions and coal power plants are polluting our air (which they are), we don't need to ask God if we should explore alternative energy. If I see a man dying on the side of the road, I'm not going to ask God if I should stop and help him. Common sense says something needs to be done., and I'm gonna do it. Common sense is God whispering in our ear. People need to listen more often.
wilderness and seedplanter thank you for the good links.
Prophet- How does a Christian talk?
What I do not believe in is Al Gore I believe he is a charlatan. My Faith is in the God of our Holy Bible. This planet has gone through many changes when God has wanted change and or he lets it happen. We humans are lost without God, fervent prayer is what is needed, not scare tactics by a bunch of socialist non-believers. When I said keep your eyes on Jesus, and have faith, that is so you don't follow the un-Godly. I don't believe humans will fix climate changes
unless we do it through prayer and God decides just like Noah and the Ark.
Ask Jesus to be Lord of your life not Al Gore.
And it is good to be green just not stupid.......Prophet
Wow, kc, are you even a Chrisitan? Because you don't talk like one.
I came to the conclusion that you did not believe in global warming by your two posts from Saturday. The first one says:
"jammieholland said
"Hear me O America, There is no Global Warming, look at the so-called evidence, there is no Global Warming. WAKE UP BAPTIST! Its ok to be green, just not stupid. "
THANK YOU and Amen.!"
And the second says:
"Al Gore... he says he invented the internet. Now he is inventing global warming ad will get richer from carbon credits."
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/pointlss.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy#Existence_of_a_scientific_consensus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/links_page/links.php
http://www.globalwarminghysteria.com/ten-myths-of-global-warming/
Prophet i mean
Hahaha there you go again, you said "I merely stated an opinion. I just find it odd that you don't believe in the possibility of global warming"
How could you know that I don't believe in the possibility of global warming?
Where is your faith "Profet"
kc
You said "Prophet- Because I don't worship Al Gore you have decided I want to trash the earth?" Show me where I said that.
You also said "What was it that made you so mad about my post was it that I said we need to keep our eye on Jesus?"
Show me where I got mad.
I merely stated an opinion. I just find it odd that you don't believe in the possibility of global warming. We all have our opinions. I would like to know your take on why the polar caps are shrinking. Why climates are changing. Why weather patterns are changing. I'm sure that your views on that are nothing that I haven't heard already, but it would be refreshing to hear it from you.
I have never heard Gore speak on anything at all, much less his views of global warming. My opinions come from facts stated by a number of different sources that I have come across over the years.
I've heard it said that there is no concrete proof of global warming. But, then again, there is no concrete proof that it isn't. I choose to err on the side of caution, and the earth...instead of laziness and mankind's selfish ambitions.
The Money and Connections Behind Al Gore’s Carbon Crusade
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22663
Prophet- Because I don't worship Al Gore you have decided I want to trash the earth?
What was it that made you so mad about my post was it that I said we need to keep our eye on Jesus?
Are you aware (since you stated you are not political) that many, many scientists that disagree with Al Gore's political movement have been threatened for publicly disagreeing with the socialist/democrat political machine?
Prophet,
I don’t think that’s what you posted there. Both of the posts in which you said that against me are still there further down.
Somebody flagged me, so let me repost.
If the Bible says that "God said", and someone doesn't believe it...then they don't believe God. Period.
No one has attempted to manipulate the world no more than, those who used their Bibles, to do so To use Gore's internet verbal stumble to suggest he is intentionally misleading on climate change, must have no other logic to use. Man has already polluted the vast oceans to the point that is dangerous for some to consume food from the ocean. Foods they have relied on for many generations. The arrogance of those who say man can't cause climate change. I'll refuse to allow anyone to use the tenants of their faith to adversely affect my life and the lives of those that will follow us.
Boy.... this is a very interesting picture! The New Baptist voice seems to be a voice riddled with compromise. Besides how can Al Gore speak of "glorifying GOD'S creation" while supporting all of the anti JESUS CHRIST and GOD the FATHER policies that he and his cronies create? Glorifying GOD'S creation starts with valuing human life! This entire ordeal is "Hogwash!" How can anyone take any of this seriously? For further comment on global warming among other things check out zadokrev.blogspot.com thanks!
C'mon, folks. THIS IS PURE DRIVEL...GOBBLE, BOBBLE, NONSENSE!!!! Al Gore is no more of a prophet than the tree in my backyard, and that tree is far more credible than Al Gore, anyday.
The fact is, GORE is a Democratic Socialist!! Pure and simple. What's the matter with the Baptists. Have they lost their minds!!!
REPENT, FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS AT HAND!!!
Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Hillary, Barbara Boxer, and Bill Clinton all need to be deported to the South Sandwich Islands.
1 Timothy 4:1
[ The Great Apostasy ] Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 4:1-3 (in Context) 1 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers;
2 Timothy 4:2-4 (in Context) 2 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Peter 2:1
[ Destructive Doctrines ] But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.
2 Peter 2:1-3 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter
Why won't Al Gore debate?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59470
Global warming: Fact or fable?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59909
Global warming or climate change?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59697
Kc: “I do see that we are destroying our earth. If you want to justify your reason to continue trashing our earth, then feel free. I (as well as all Christians) was told by God that we are to be in charge of this earth. I don't think He intended for us to trash it the way that we have and are.
1. Do people act reckless with nature? –Yes
2. Has God given us a mandate to care for the earth? –Yes
3. Does this mean that global warming is true? –No
4. Does this imply that global warming is manmade? –No
5. Does this mean that man can reverse global warming? –No
6. Does this imply that GW skeptics want to destroy the environment? –No
“I don't believe we are exploring alternative, clean energy sources to their fullest extent. That, we can thank the oil cartel and investors for. And I don't believe we are faithful stewards in all that God has given us responsibility for. It's time to take responsibility for our own arrogance, lust, and selfishness.”
Speaking of investors, most people who have a 401K are actually investing in oil. Even big oil critic Michael Moore has invested in Halliburton. Nevertheless, what’s wrong with nuclear power plants? Most liberals don’t like them, even though France (which is not known for being conservative) has the biggest one in the world. Taking responsibility may include shutting off your computer, selling it and giving the proceeds to Al Gore’s carbon tax; if you really do think he is on to something. When Gore ran for office he wanted to institute a world tax to save the rain forest, now he wants the taxes to go to the UN to fight global warming. This guy is a real winner, if you believe in big government rhetoric.
I have to appreciate a question that I heard Dr Hugh Ross ask, do you thank God for the fossil fuels when you fill up your car with gas?
I'm glad that the religious and the non-religious can stand together on this important issue. I think it's really despicable that some people have actually managed to rationalize destroying our only home.
Well stated Prophet!
kc,
I'm not much of a political person. But I have taken a look at the facts. I do see that we are destroying our earth. If you want to justify your reason to continue trashing our earth, then feel free. I (as well as all Christians) was told by God that we are to be in charge of this earth. I don't think He intended for us to trash it the way that we have and are.
I don't believe we are exploring alternative, clean energy sources to their fullest extent. That, we can thank the oil cartel and investors for. And I don't believe we are faithful stewards in all that God has given us responsibility for. It's time to take responsibility for our own arrogance, lust, and selfishness.
If the Bible says that "God said", and someone doesn't believe it...then they don't believe God. Period.
Al Gore... he says he invented the internet. Now he is inventing global warming ad will get richer from carbon credits.
If we would keep our eyes on Jesus we would not fall for the latest scheme to manipulate the world. Clinton, Gore and Carter, why would anyone listen to them when we have the Bible? Does anyone think the Lord can't fix the worlds problems? but, Clinton, Gore and Carter can?
jammieholland said
"Hear me O America, There is no Global Warming, look at the so-called evidence, there is no Global Warming. WAKE UP BAPTIST! Its ok to be green, just not stupid. "
THANK YOU and Amen.!
tgender,
You said, “I think it is dangerous to interpret a passage where “God says” as not being what God actually said. This is what the Jesus Seminar did with Christ’s sayings in the Gospels.”
Let me first say that I altogether disagree with the Jesus Seminar. What they do is tantamount to applying scissors to the Bible, and that I think is wrong. Now I think that to “interpret a passage where “God says” as not being what God actually said” can be dangerous, but then I’ve found that all the different ways people interpret the Bible can be dangerous.
You ask, “Do you take verses you consider to be “mythical” as being true and having real meaning and application for us?”
Yes, very much so.
Amen, tgender.
If the Bible says that "God said", and someone doesn't believe it...then they don't believe God. Period.
didymus-
Thanks for your response. You said “I don’t think God literally said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him’”. I think it is dangerous to interpret a passage where “God says” as not being what God actually said. This is what the Jesus Seminar did with Christ’s sayings in the Gospels. What was left was nothing like the Jesus we worship. Do you take verses you consider to be “mythical” as being true and having real meaning and application for us?
didymus,
How do you know that the Gospels aren't metaphorical?
Prophet,
You said, “I have a feeling that didymus also takes the Gospels as mythical too. He's afraid to face the truth, because it doesn't fit his agenda...it doesn't fit his small view of God. His god is impontent and fallible. He can't believe that God could be powerful enough to create a universe.” (as well as the rest of your post)
You’re wrong.
And, yes, Genesis 1 and 2 are literal.
tgender,
I have a feeling that didymus also takes the Gospels as mythical too. He's afraid to face the truth, because it doesn't fit his agenda...it doesn't fit his small view of God. His god is impontent and fallible. He can't believe that God could be powerful enough to create a universe. So, he tells us how his god did it. He now controls god. He has placed his wisdom above God's.
There is a difference between interpreting scriptures, and twisting them so far beyond common sense.
But I do like his MO. If you don't agree with something, just take it metaphorically. I think I'll do that with Galatians 5:19-21. Those scriptures aren't to be taken literal. Yeah, that frees me up to do and believe whatever I want. I like that idea.
The sad thing is, God's truth doesn't change...regardless of what we believe. And though it may make us feel warm and fuzzy on the inside, the day will come when we will answer to God for what we taught and how we lived.
"Instead of changing ourselves to conform to the image of Christ, we change the image of Christ to conform to us."
tgender,
Well, I mostly agree with you concerning your view on Genesis 2:18. But since I don’t view the story this verse is in as having literally happened I disagree with the part where you say, “This verse relates a sort of divine pause in God’s creation of mankind. He had created Adam, but not yet Eve”, and I wouldn’t say that God was literally “ordaining His first social institution” right here, since this is a story, and not literal history. But the rest of your view I’d agree with.
So, in other words, I don’t think God literally said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him”, I don’t think God literal brought all the animals to see Adam, I don’t think he literally took one of Adam’s ribs and literally made a woman out of it. But this story does relay what God thinks. Animals are not suitable partners for a man (nor a woman for that matter), a woman is a suitable partner for a man and divinely ordained to be so. (Of course I get more out of this story than what I’ve mentioned here, but since you asked how it relates to my view of theistic evolution.)
Incidentally, evolution would basically say the same thing concerning the whole suitability thing, only not quite so poetically. Animals are not suitable partners for mankind, a man and a woman are suitable partners, they were in a sense made for each other, otherwise they could not reproduce.
didymus-
The Bible should be interpreted like we interpret any other kind of literature. We should seek to understand what the author’s meaning and intent were. Ordinarily, we take statements in their plain literal sense unless the meaning would be absurd, in which case we seek to discover the symbolic meaning. When I say I have heartburn or watched the sun set, you understand me not to be literal, but symbolic.
Your response seemed to try to get me to believe that there is such a thing as symbolic or metaphorical literature, but I already agree with you on that. But how are we to interpret Gen 2:18 specifically? You didn’t give me any reasons to take this passage non-literally nor did you explain what the meaning is. Here is my explanation: This verse relates a sort of divine pause in God’s creation of mankind. He had created Adam, but not yet Eve. God is a social Being in His very nature of being triune. He created mankind for relationship, not only with Him, but also with each other. God is teaching us that it is good and right for a man to be with a woman and they will become one (Gen 2:24). God is ordaining His first social institution—marriage—based on the very pattern of His internal nature. Just as Jesus said that He and the Father were one, Gen 2:24 says that husband and wife will be one. So, God is saying literally that it is not good for man to be alone.
I'm still hung up on the notion that there are two kinds of Christians, conservative and liberal.
Hear me O America, There is no Global Warming, look at the so-called evidence, there is no Global Warming. WAKE UP BAPTIST! Its ok to be green, just not stupid.
You can watch the 1-minute Gore video here: http://americansfortruth.com/news/al-gore-embraces-homosexual-marriage.html
ifeelfine72: “If you take a look at the evidence and don't believe the facts of evolution, you are calling God a liar. Why would God set up some elaborate hoax on all of us? He wouldn't.”
This does kind of beg the question though doesn’t it? I’m mean presupposing natural selection is true, that modern science has figured it all out and all. I’m not so sure that the evidence is strong enough to test God with it. But I guess if that’s what you want to do…
“Evidence for structural difference/ descent does not constitute evidence for the mechanism by which structural transformation took place.” -David L. Wilcox
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/fte/darwinism/chapter13.html
Romans 1:16-32 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
The Just Live by Faith
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,[a] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith.”[b]
God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
Footnotes:
Romans 1:16 NU-Text omits of Christ.
Romans 1:17 Habakkuk 2:4
Romans 1:29 NU-Text omits sexual immorality.
Romans 1:31 NU-Text omits unforgiving.
John 14:6 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Acts 4:11-12 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’[a] 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
Footnotes:
Acts 4:11 Psalm 118:22
1 Timothy 4:1
[ The Great Apostasy ] Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 4:1-3 (in Context) 1 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers;
2 Timothy 4:2-4 (in Context) 2 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Peter 2:1
[ Destructive Doctrines ] But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.
2 Peter 2:1-3 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 1:18
[ Christ the Power and Wisdom of God ] For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1:17-19 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 1 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 1:21
For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.
1 Corinthians 1:20-22 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 1 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 1:25
Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1 Corinthians 1:24-26 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 1 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Corinthians 2:13-15 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 2 (Whole Chapter)
1 Corinthians 3:19
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”;
1 Corinthians 3:18-20 (in Context) 1 Corinthians 3 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
didymus-
How would you explain Gen 2:18--The Lord God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him"? I don't see how you can square this verse from a theistic evolutionary perspective. Did only a man evolve and then God evolved a woman? Of course, that couldn't have happened because man couldn't reproduce without women.
John 14:6 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Acts 4:7-12 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
7 And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, “By what power or by what name have you done this?”
8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’[a] 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
Footnotes:
Acts 4:11 Psalm 118:22
Acts 3:19 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,
1 Timothy 4:1
[ The Great Apostasy ] Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 4:1-3 (in Context) 1 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers;
2 Timothy 4:2-4 (in Context) 2 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Peter 2:1
[ Destructive Doctrines ] But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.
2 Peter 2:1-3 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:4
[ Doom of False Teachers ] For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment;
2 Peter 2:3-5 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:12
[ Depravity of False Teachers ] But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption,
2 Peter 2:11-13 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:18
[ Deceptions of False Teachers ] For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live in error.
2 Peter 2:17-19 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
It's obvious global warming is a fact. Just look at the disappearing glaciers in Greenland and disappearing ice near the north pole. It's not unreasonable to say almost 7 billion humans have a lot to do with it. In any case protecting the planet from pollution has to be a good thing.
I have noticed it's the scientists who are most interesting in protecting earth from pollution. The Christians have a long history of getting in the way. If Christians are now changing their ways and becoming environmentalists, that's good. Even if they think they're protecting their planet to please their mythical god, it's good they are joining the environmentalists instead of fighting them.
I noticed this thread got a bit off topic, which is fine with me. I was interested in something Prophet said.
Prophet: "To believe that man evolved from something is totally and 100% against scripture and a false doctrine."
I wouldn't call evolution a false doctrine, since all the evidence that has been growing for the past 150 years completely supports the idea all life evolved. However I agree with Prophet when he says evolution is 100% against scripture. I know many Christians translate Genesis to accommodate the idea the first humans developed from other animals, but I wonder how they do it. How do they make "God created man in his own image" not conflict with our development from ancient apes? I suggest the most honest thing to say about Genesis is it's a beautiful fairy tale, written by a person not inspired by God, but was inspired by his own wishful thinking. Genesis is a wild guess that has been proven to be completely wrong. The God hypothesis is not required to explain the diversity of life, and humans couldn't possibly be God's chosen species, since science has shown humans to be just one animal on a vast tree of life.
Even though we are just animals, our species does have the good luck to have enough intelligence to either save or destroy our only home. I suggest no matter what our differences are about the existence of gods, we should unite to save our planet instead of destroying it.
ifeelfine72: “If you take a look at the evidence and don't believe the facts of evolution, you are calling God a liar. Why would God set up some elaborate hoax on all of us? He wouldn't.”
This does kind of beg the question though doesn’t it? I’m mean presupposing natural selection is true, that modern science has figured it all out and all. I’m not so sure that the evidence is strong enough to test God with it. But I guess if that’s what you want to do…
“Evidence for structural difference/ descent does not constitute evidence for the mechanism by which structural transformation took place.” -David L. Wilcox
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/fte/darwinism/chapter13.html
Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Scripture is the best answer for all.
2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
2 Timothy 3:15-17 (in Context) 2 Timothy 3 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
I am sorry. Maybe "shying away from scripture" is too strong. I mean, he does have an opinion about the creation of the earth and man, attributes it to God, but yet gives no scriptural support for his opinion. Thus, that's all it is...an opinion.
I give my opinion on the creation of the earth and man by using scripture, and he says "I can see no intelligent conversation can be had with you," To me, that sounds like a person who doesn't want to hear the Word of God. I've encountered a Catholic who constantly tries to defend his religious system, without using the Word of God. To people like that, Christianity is nothing more than a religion.
And you are right. I did give my opinion earlier. We were discussing politics, and gave my opinion. But then again, we were only discussing politics...not God, Bible, theology, or scripture. There is a difference.
If I chose not to believe Genesis 2, then I would be calling God a liar.
I've taken a good look at the facts. And I choose not to call God a liar either. His Word says "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Genesis 2:7, and so I choose to believe it.
Prophet - I'm surprised that you're dodging the question with a false statement. You share your opinion on this site all the time, you just did it earlier. You can share it now. Personally I believe that the creation story in the Bible is allegorical. Could man 2000+ years ago understand the working of evolution? Probably not.
If you take a look at the evidence and don't believe the facts of evolution, you are calling God a liar. Why would God set up some elaborate hoax on all of us? He wouldn't. And I'm not going to call God a liar!
BTW: If you've read Didymus' post before or read his blog you would find that he does not shy away from the Word of God! At least he is honest in his Christian faith. Didymus doesn't pick and choose which verses to follow literally but claim to follow them all literally.
People are more interested in promoting their humanistic views/opinions than what the Word of God actually says. And they claim to be Christians. Even though they're not. There is no such thing as a humanistic Christian. They may be religious, but they are not Christians.
Prophet,
I understand to.
I get that response a lot from people who shy away from the Word of God. I understand.
Prophet,
Rereading over your previous posts I can see no intelligent conversation can be had with you, so anyway…
My opinion is not important. What is, is the Word of God
"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Genesis 2:7
I’m not worrying; I’m just asking your opinion?
Didymus: “The reason why it’s important, and the divinity school student would be right, is that the environmental issue of global warming has a whole host of negative effects. Global warming will strain resources in dynamic ways that will stress societies into conflict. There will be more Sudans in the future because there are too many people living in areas that have too few resources.”
This assumes that global warming is:
1. An actual problem and not a natural cycle.
2. Caused by man.
3. That we can change it.
If scientists are split right down the middle on the issue, how can you be so sure?
Didy: “What do you think God means when he says that man is made in His image? Speaking just for myself, I don’t really know. I mean, when I look at myself, does God have hands, feet, a head? – No, he’s spirit. [I agree up to this point - SP] The randomness of evolution could have taken a different route than it did, maybe we would be dolphins today, would fins and a tail mean we wouldn’t be in the image of God?”
Your conclusion takes a lot for granted however. Nature is hard presses to discover the origin of life, the preprogrammed information, their functions, their God-given abilities, purposefulness and all of the variables that are presupposed in ‘natural evolution.’ Methodological naturalistic evolution completely makes God irrelevant as an unemployed deity, wanna-be. This is what separates naturalists from Christian theists. Michael Behe for example is a theistic-evolutionist whose agenda is to express how ‘natural evolution’ cannot account for the purposeful arrangements of the parts, that indeed a Designer is evident in this. If the Designer is evident, He is not irrelevant and evolution is not so random.
If you're not afraid of going to hell, then why worry about what I think?
Prophet,
You ask, “Why? You afraid of going to hell?”
Ahh, No.
Are you afraid to answer that question?
Or are you just wanting me to justify your misled opinion?
didymus,
Why? You afraid of going to hell?
Prophet,
>To believe that man evolved from something is totally and 100% against scripture and a false doctrine. And to attribute evolution to God is even worse.
So are you saying that belief in evolution condemns one to Hell?
didymus,
You said "I understand, but I hope you don’t mind if I disagree."
No, I don't mind. And I hope you don't mind that the creator of the universe disagrees with you.
The idea of "deified evolution" or "intelligent design evolution" or whatever you wish to call it, is just man's attempt to justify his opinion. We tell God how He did it, and then expect Him to back us on it. Its that same with our relationship with Him. They say they are going to do something, and just expect God to be there. They don't ask Him what He wants them to do. They tell Him what He wants them to do. Those people have made God in their image. Since when did they have the right to tell God what He wants or did? That's just sick! And the judgement that they face....well, I don't want to think about.
tgender,
You mention, “I think theistic evolution seriously damages the idea of man being God’s image bearers, which minimizes the significant gap that God created between man and the animals.”
I understand, but I hope you don’t mind if I disagree.
We were created in His image because we are the only creatures with a spirit. It's our spirit (which is who we truly are) that is in His image. We were created thus, in order to have a relationship with Him. If we came from a single-cell organism, what kind of relationship could God have with that? A cell cannont glorify God. It cannot talk to and fellowship with it's creator. It has no spirit, no free will to choose the course it's life will take.
And how does ID evolution fit in with the scripture that says that God created MAN and WOMAN in His image? It doesn't say that He created amoeba in His image. The Bible says that He CREATED, not that He evolved man into His image. The Bible says that He took the dust of the earth. Genesis 2:7 says "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." It doesn't say anything about evolution. It is cut and dried. There is no argument. He created Adam from dust and brought life where there was none. It was not a million year process.
To believe that man evolved from something is totally and 100% against scripture and a false doctrine. And to attribute evolution to God is even worse. God created man in an instant,or a matter of seconds. Either way, it is no where near the millions of years of evolution that you claim it is.
Agent: “It seems Seedplanter can at least recognize how lacking young earth and sin relationship is. It’s a metaphor Crc get a clue. Just b/c the bible says the universe is 6000 years old doesn’t make it true…”
The Bible does not say that the earth is 6,000 years old or 1,000,000 years old. I did not mean that Genesis 1 is a metaphor, but I would not presume to condemn the notion as a heresy. When I said “The argument that is used against old earth creationism is the problem of sin and death,” what I intended to mean was that their interpretation is wrong, not that the Bible is wrong. I think that Adam and Eve were literal people. If they are not, it doesn’t change the facts of sin and death. Also whether it is to be taken to mean spiritual or physical does not change the message. There is good evidence that has been accumulated by Hugh Ross that shows that mankind can be traced back to one man and one woman. Whether this means that they were specially created or that God used an evolution within nature that he personally programmed to produce them makes little difference. It does not render the Bible unhistorical or unreliable in regards to matters of science and philosophy.
Prophet-
The theory you described is called the Gap Theory. Most versions of the Gap Theory place millions of years of geologic time (including billions of fossil animals) in between the two first verses of Genesis. This is sometimes also called the ruin/reconstruction theory because it is speculated that a whole race of people lived before Genesis 1:2 that fell into sin following Satan’s rebellion from God. This caused God to judge the world, which resulted in a flood indicated by the water of Genesis 1:2. God then reconstructed the earth in the remainder of Genesis 1. This is worse than wild speculation. There is no way one can get all that from the text.
There’s no way I can go into it in detail, but I think most Christians misread Genesis 1:1-2. Genesis 1:1 says “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” This records the singular, momentous, and glorious act of God creating the entire cosmos ex nihilo (out of nothing). It is the account of the creation of the galaxies, stars, planets, moons, and all other objects in the universe. Genesis 1:2 describes the state of the planet earth following its creation: “Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.”
Each “day” of Genesis 1 begins with the expression “And God said…” or “Then God said…”, beginning at verse 3. Therefore, verses 1 and 2 are not part of day one, but precede it. Up to and including verse 2, the earth is covered with total darkness; days and evenings cannot occur until light penetrates the planetary shroud, even though abundant light filled the universe elsewhere. Therefore, Genesis 1:1-2 must precede the first day chronologically. At some undefined time following the creation of the universe, God moved specially upon planet earth to make it habitable and to populate it with biological life.
The Bible does not mention how long the cosmological creation took, nor how much time elapsed before God began his secondary creation of the earth’s biosphere, which is recounted in the six days. Consequently, we have no biblical grounds to be dogmatic about the age of the universe or the earth—it could be 20 billion years or several thousand years. Because the Bible doesn't specify the age, we can use our God-given abilities to infer it through scientific discovery. Let the best evidence (old-earth or young-earth) prevail on this specific point. I’ve written a paper on this if you are interested.
didymus-
I agree with you that being made in God’s image does not have to do with physical appearance. I would answer this question by saying that man has rational, creative, moral, relational, and spiritual capacities—and we were born with these capacities. We were designed to be able to relate to God on a personal level. To carry God’s image also means that we are made to mirror and reflect His character. We were created to shine forth to the world the holiness of God. This is the chief end of man, the very reason for our existence, to exalt His glory. Mankind was the very pinnacle of God’s creation—that’s why we came last in His creative work as the magnificent climax.
If man evolved from a single cell in a warm little pond, I think it seriously diminishes this idea that we were specially made in His image. There seems to be nothing in Genesis 1-2 that indicates there was an evolution of animals and man. The text simply says God created them. If we evolved, then we would have to acquire the above mentioned capacities in gradual stages. Obviously, most of the earlier stages would not even have these capacities in any sense whatsoever. Ephesians 2:10 says that “we are God's workmanship”. For these reasons, I think theistic evolution seriously damages the idea of man being God’s image bearers, which minimizes the significant gap that God created between man and the animals. That’s my take on it.
Where is the ACLU and why is it not screaming about a wall between church and state?? Its ok if socialist/Democrats are stars I guess?
crc: “On the length of days, I have heard your argument…”
I’m not sure exactly what you were referring to, but if you mean the way I have been debating with Agent and Bob; my argument was specifically designed in such a way as to show that their attack on Christian theism is without warrant from the their own standpoint, which is natural evolution.
“…the creation account is repeated plenty of times throughout the old testament as well as the new testament almost always specifically mentioning 6 days for creation, God is not out to trick us.”
First of all crc, I have met plenty of creationists personally, including Kent Hovind (right before he was arrested for tax invasion), Ken Ham (who condemns Norman Geisler, C.S. Lewis, Hugh Ross, etc. as heretics for not siding with the 6 - 24 hour day hypothesis, which I think is seriously lacking in balance) and many others that I deeply respect and appreciate. I was asked to host the local creation science study group by the director of the regional creation science association. I opted out because I did not wish to limit myself to scientific apologetics. My respect and appreciation for them and their work cannot be overestimated. I think they’re great. I do have to wonder in retrospect, if the whole 6 – 24 hour day/10,000 yr old universe creation hypothesis has become the Christian’s Hamburger Hill, swallowing up unsuspecting fellow conservative Christians in a battle that is resulting in numerous spiritual casualties while struggling to reconcile the apparently conflicting claims of science and Scripture.
I agree that God is not out to trick us. I think that the young earth hypothesis of God making things look older is quite trick. While the actual hypothesis is not something that can be disproved, it makes Christians seem gullible unfortunately discrediting the faith.
Professor Ronald Numbers has an mp3 available (link below), Myths and Truths in Science and Religion: A Historical Perspective in which he alleges that the 6 – 24 hour day hypothesis was lead by virtually two men in the 60s; prior to that born-again Christians refrained from bulking at an old earth. The Scofield Reference Bible actually laid out the framework for the pre-Adamic theory, suggesting an old earth hypothesis, according to Ham, he is damned.
http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/faraday/Multimedia.php#History%20of%20Science%20and%20Religion
tgender,
You asked, “What do you think God means when he says that man is made in His image? How does evolving from a bacterial cell qualify to be His image bearer?”
Those are really interesting questions.
What do you think God means when he says that man is made in His image? Speaking just for myself, I don’t really know. I mean, when I look at myself, does God have hands, feet, a head? – No, he’s spirit. The randomness of evolution could have taken a different route than it did, maybe we would be dolphins today, would fins and a tail mean we wouldn’t be in the image of God? If God is infinite (and I believe he is) how can anyone who is finite be an image of the infinite? If God has always been, is now, and always will be, and I have a beginning, then I am at most only a cheap imitation image of his omniscience, a kind of “made in China” knockoff. But either way, he obviously thought that this image was very good… so, I’m happy.
How does evolving from a bacterial cell qualify to be His image bearer? Why not. Jesus was a man, a mere carpenter, not even an earthly king, how does that qualify to be the incarnation of the Almighty God? How can the infinite almighty God, become a man, and be 100% man and 100% God? Beats me, but I believe it. I may not understand all the mysteries of how God works, but he still works.
Anyway, how would you answer those questions?
Prophet,
You asked, “Where does it say we must interpret them mythically?”
It doesn’t say anywhere in the Bible that we must interpret Genesis mythically. I admit I’m assuming things based on circumstances. Evolution has a lot of evidence backing it up, and the theory has I think even a certain beauty to it, to say that God in his immensity would do it this way (it’s not like it didn’t have the time on his hands to work with).
You mention the theory, “They believe that God had created an earth before this one(with dinasaurs, neanderthals, etc, etc) and then basically started over again. Somewhat like a potter who makes a bowl on the spinning wheel..and then mushes it down to start over. It's the same clay and everything, it's just been re-formed. So, the evidence from the previous earth would still be present in the crust of our modern earth.”
It’s an interesting theory, I’ve heard it before myself. I personally don’t agree with it. It seems to say that God made something of a mistake with dinosaurs, etc., and I don’t think that reflects correctly on who God is, I don’t think he makes mistakes. He does I know “grieve” over what he creates and destroys everything on occasion (Genesis 6:5-7), but that was because of sin, and there where no sinners in the Jurassic era.
Some parts of the Bible are to be interpreted literal, whil others are metaphors. It's up to the Holy Spirit to give us discernment.
didymus-
First of all, I want to say that I don’t think anyone is damned for being an evolutionist or for believing in a certain theory of creation. Quecat was right that eternal life depends solely on trust in Jesus Christ to rescue us from our sin. However, as disciples of Christ, we are obligated to read and understand His word, as well as His creation, and to make as much sense of these difficult issues as we can.
I have two questions for you since you said you were a theistic evolutionist. What do you think God means when he says that man is made in His image? How does evolving from a bacterial cell qualify to be His image bearer? Thanks.
didymus,
You said "You are the one who is requiring that we read the Genesis creation stories literally. That’s great! So what are your biblical reasons for requiring this? Where does it say in the Bible that we must interpret these stories literally, or else? Why not interpret them mythically?"
Where does it say we must interpret them mythically?
It is the same way we can look at the life of Christ. Do we intepret what the Bible says He did literally? Or mythically? Did He really heal the blind man, or is that a metaphor?
Well, of course, I take the stories of His life literally. But you can see how your argument can be used elsewhere. Was Elijah literally taken up in a fiery chariot? Hmmm.
But I'm gonna throw another kink into this creation/evolution arena. There are some theologians that believe that there is a gap between Genesis 1 verse 1 and 2. They believe that God had created an earth before this one(with dinasaurs, neanderthals, etc, etc) and then basically started over again. Somewhat like a potter who makes a bowl on the spinning wheel..and then mushes it down to start over. It's the same clay and everything, it's just been re-formed. So, the evidence from the previous earth would still be present in the crust of our modern earth. It's a theory that I heard like 20 years ago. I'm not sure if it is still in circulation or what it's official title is. But it is something that I've mulled over periodically. I'm not sure if I would totally subscribe to that belief, but it does hold some merit, and could explain some, or most, questions.
crc wrote:
"Heb 4:12
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Scripture is the best answer for all. "
Yes sir, I agree completely. This is why I quoted the Scriptures about false prophets and teachers. we're living in the end times brother, and the time is rapidly approaching when people are twisting the Word of God to their own "interpretations" and meanings. It's Satan's same lie he deceived Eve in the Garden of Eden with being repeated all over again. He whispers in people's ears: "did God really say........"
crc,
You yourself said, “Scripture is the best answer for all.”
So, fork them over. What scriptures say that we must interpret the Bible the way you’re saying we must do so? I read the Bible with many different ways in mind. Psalms are psalms, poetry is poetry, proverbs are proverbs, there is colorful hyperbolic language in many of the prophets, and there are anthropomorphic descriptions of God in others. We don’t take those things literally; God doesn’t have disembodied hands, or a set of wings. So, why not understand the creation stories mythically?
didymus
Where else in the Bible do we interpret it mythically. Why is Genesis different than the entire rest of the Bible? It is not different.
What I believe doesn't matter at all, it's what God Word says that matters, check it out and do what it says. Genesis account of creation is repeated numerous times all the way into the new testament, if it were a myth this would not be true.
believer,
No, it’s not sad. You should rejoice that the church is pursuing both.
crc,
>The Bible is the inspired Word of God right?
Well, I believe that.
>If so then you should believe it all right?
I do believe in it all.
>If you don't you are doubting God right?
Since I believe in it all, and I’m not doubting, I’m cool, I’m with you.
>If you doubt God then I question your relationship with him.
Then why are you questioning my relationship with God if I’m a theistic evolutionist?
This is not complicated, and I’m not asking a complicated question. I’m asking you, where does it say in the Bible that we must interpret it literally, or else?
You are the one who is requiring that we read the Genesis creation stories literally. That’s great! So what are your biblical reasons for requiring this? Where does it say in the Bible that we must interpret these stories literally, or else? Why not interpret them mythically? What verse says that that would be wrong?
agentorange
Your only exposing your own ignorance.
jesus4me
Heb 4:12
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Scripture is the best answer for all.
”More than anything you just like to argue.
No, I like to expose your ignorance in science.
“According to the law of entropy we would not even be here because our genes and DNA would not have progressed at all in fact they wouldn't even have formed. You believe what you want to.”
No, you’re wrong Crc. A true state of Entropy ONLY occurs for things that exist in a CLOSED SYSTEM, which we don’t live in. We live in an OPEN SYSEM where energy is given off from the sun and plants convert it, while animals eat the plants and we eat both to stay alive. After we die we can no longer take in energy and our bodies being to decompose as they attempt to reach a state of entropy equilibrium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics
“The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the universal law of increasing entropy, stating that the entropy of an ISOLATED SYSTEM which is not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.”
www.answers.com/topic/second-law-of-thermodynamics-2?cat=technology
Isn't it sad that this body of so-called baptist are much more concerned with global warming than they are about the eternal warming that faces anyone who does not come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ prior to their death.
didymus
The Bible is the inspired Word of God right?
If so then you should believe it all right? (sure some parts are parables).
If you don't you are doubting God right?
If you doubt God then I question your relationship with him.
This is really simple. Stop trying to make it complicated because you can't do it.
1 Timothy 4:1
[ The Great Apostasy ] Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 4:1-3 (in Context) 1 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers;
2 Timothy 4:2-4 (in Context) 2 Timothy 4 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
2 Peter 2:1
[ Destructive Doctrines ] But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.
2 Peter 2:1-3 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:4
[ Doom of False Teachers ] For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment;
2 Peter 2:3-5 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:12
[ Depravity of False Teachers ] But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption,
2 Peter 2:11-13 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:18
[ Deceptions of False Teachers ] For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live in error.
2 Peter 2:17-19 (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (Whole Chapter)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
"we humans should be degrading as we speak,"
I degrade daily! My mirror tells me so. We grow old, we wear out, we die.
The vegetables in the crisper drawer of the fridge rot and must be thrown out.
Erosion wears down the mountain.
Even my snow shovel's edge is rusting away.
New things do not stay new.
And old things do not spontaneously renew themselves.
agentorange
More than anything you just like to argue. According to the law of entropy we would not even be here because our genes and DNA would not have progressed at all in fact they wouldn't even have formed. You believe what you want to.
Crc,
”Your the one that will have to do better. I'm doing just fine.”
What nonsense, you don’t even understand what the 2nd law states and it shows. According to your view of the 2nd law we humans should be degrading as we speak, but we don’t b/c we live in an open system in which we have energy from the sun.
“Of course the entire world population could not live in Rhode Island.
The rest of the post is pointless.”
Well if it couldn’t, then why oh why did you said it could earlier?
(Crc earlier)“All the people in the world would fit in Rhode Island. 6.5 billion isn't really that many when you put it in perspective”
If you meant that those people would ALSO require land for the food, water, and other resources and all the animals they’d depend on as I described then indicating they could fit on RI is ignoring what requires organisms need to live in the first place.
crc,
> As one grows spiritually they will come to find many errors in their thinking, evolution being one of them.
So… are all those who do not repent and believe in literal 6-day creationism going straight to Hell?
And I take it that you don’t have an answer for my other question, because I’d like to know what is your biblical reason for the need to take the Bible literally. (I’m not trying to make some point with this – I’d like to know what scripture you’re using that tells you that.)
agentorange
Of course the entire world population could not live in Rhode Island.
The rest of the post is pointless.
Crc,
“Other mathematician's have determined that we would have way more than 6.5 billion people had it not been for the massive diseases and wars there have been.”
Right, but it’s also called ‘carrying capacity’. In 1800 the human population wasn’t even a billion yet, only since the industrial age and new agricultural technologies did the net population growth really start to take off. Before that it was quite slow. Populations can’t grow exponentially they are limited by their carrying capacity, which loosely means the amount of resources the organism has to use to reproduce and live.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
Did you know that bacteria double their population every 20 minutes!!. In the span of a few weeks they would consume the earth, but b/c of carrying capacity there are limits to how many can live and how fast net population can grow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity
“All the people in the world would fit in Rhode Island. 6.5 billion isn't really that many when you put it in perspective.”
Just one problem Crc. If all the people live in RI as you mentioned, it doesn’t account for all the land they require for the resources they will need to live in the first place.
Organisms require energy period. A space of land isn’t a great determining factor as it doesn’t account for the amount of space required for the 6.5 billion to get their resources like food, water, and places to store their waste and all the other organisms they directly depend on as well. By ignoring all those other factors you’re ignoring what sustains an organisms survival to begin with so it’s not even a scientifically correct argument.
agentorange
Your the one that will have to do better. I'm doing just fine.
"There are those who demand that one must believe in 6-literal day creationism to truly believe in Christ. "
Man cannot demand anything of me. God demands my utmost faith and trust in His Only Son. This is all that I am commanded. All other details are as the Spirit leads. I have no opinion on the 6-day creation. It is as it says it is. I don't question, nor feel the need to. It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter if it's 6 24 hour days
It doesn't matter if it's 6 "God" days - whatever that may be
It doesn't matter if it's 6 1000 year long "days"
It doesn't matter.
God says 6 days. I'll wait til I get to heaven and ask Him EXACTLY what He meant by that, then.
Although, I suspect I really have more important things on my mind. :)
didymus
Christianity is a relationship with Jesus who said by their fruits ye shall know them. The main point is to believe and accept the free gift of salvation that is provided by Jesus Christ. As one grows spiritually they will come to find many errors in their thinking, evolution being one of them. Remember when Jesus said that who whom much is given much is expected, referring to the parable of the talents. I think many people who believe in evolution and claim to be Christian have not thought out the full extent of what they are believing but God will work on their heart and mind as they grow in Christ. We either grow in our walk with God or we shrink back, there's not much in the middle.
crc,
“The laws you mention about the universe dictate entropy and a slow destruction of all that we can see which is exactly contrary to your theology of evolution which is a reversal of entropy.”
Hilarious you YEC’s still use this! The 2nd law doesn’t negate evolution. The 2nd law refers to a CLOSED SYSTEM ONLY in which all things will return to a state of entropy eventually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics
Our planet INS’T a closed system as we get our ENERGY from our Sun (Sol), which provides all the energy required for organic systems to live, reproduce and (drum roll) EVOLVE.
After the sun dies out, we won’t have an open system (unless you consider geothermal energy) and the natural order of things will break down, degrade and exist in a state of entropy.
We humans are currently in a temporary flux as we take in energy indirectly and directly from our sun and when we die we can no longer take this energy in and we degrade, decompose and resort back to an entropic state. You’ll have to do better than that.
agentorange
"How do you explain 8 people only 4000 years ago managed to reach 6.5 billion in such a short time?
Keep in mind the timeline of Moses exodus from Egypt in which he and 600,000 other jewish males (and their wives and assuming 1.5 kids quite conservative for Jews) put that figure at least around 2,000,000 Jews which conflicts with any notion of 8 people reproducing fast enough to create such numbers. Your very own book negates such nonsense."
I think you don't realize that large families were common in the old days. It took a lot of hands to get all the work done. Adam and Eve had many children, some think 50 to 60. Job had many
children as well. Jacob has 12 sons that formed the 12 tribes of Israel.
Other mathematician's have determined that we would have way more than 6.5 billion people had it not been for the massive diseases and wars there have been. All the people in the world would fit in Rhode Island. 6.5 billion isn't really that many when you put it in perspective.
Agent Orange:
"Hope so" and "think so" doesn't cut it. Just because you don't like the rules doesn't mean you're given a pass. And since you didn't create the game, you don't have the power to change the rules either.
God created us to be in fellowship with Him. But God is a holy, absolutely just, absolutely perfect and absolutely righteous God. He abhors sin. He says so unequivocally.
Sin is mankind's turning from God and walking their own path instead of the one that He set before us.
Does not the Creator have complete control over His creation?
If the potter makes a vessel to hold water and that pot is found to have a hole, making it useless for the purpose for which it was created, wouldn't the potter reject it?
But what if the pot has free will? And what if the potter offers to fix the hole in the pot - making it once again useful to the potter?
Does the pot have any right to disparage the potter for throwing it in the refuse pile, if the pot willingly rejected the potter's offer to be fixed?
God also says that "all (man's) righteousness is as filthy rags before (Him)". Once again it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with how good or bad you think you are or actually are.
The only fix for the pot with the hole in it is a right relationship with Jesus Christ. It is the ONLY standard - the ONLY fix and the ONLY way to heaven.
Quecat,
> Your acceptance or rejection of a literal 6 day creation account is NOT the litmus test for admission to heaven. In case you missed the point of my previous post, it's not WHAT you believe that is going to get you there - It's WHO you believe in. Nothing else matters.
Yes, I noticed this and I agree with, but not everyone else agrees with you on this. There are those who demand that one must believe in 6-literal day creationism to truly believe in Christ.
crc,
> I'm not the judge on that but I know where I feel safest.
Well now wait a second, you said in a post below that if one takes the creation stories as mythical (or your words “fairy tales”) that that would be a “serious offense to Jesus”, and is tantamount to saying that “God is a liar”. But the core of your post below was summed up with, “Just remember if you pick and choose out of the Bible what is true and what is not true you will be in for a rude awakening on judgment day.”
But now your saying, “I'm not the judge on that”, in response to “are all those who do not believe in literal 6-day creationism going straight to Hell?” That sounds to me like a milquetoast answer, like your not wanting to give what you think the real answer is, because that might be a little too extreme.
And you didn’t even try to answer my other even simpler question, “And where does it say in the Bible that we must interpret it literally, or else?” This one should be easy for a biblical literalist.
BTW, I’m not picking and choosing from the Bible, I believe it’s the whole word of God.
agentorange
Obviously the following are a metaphor to describe the earth and how stable it is and that it will for example not come out of it's orbit around the sun. If anyone can move the earth so as to destroy it or for example cause global warming to destroy it we can see that this will not be man as he does not have the capability.
1 Sam. 2:8 ~ . . . for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the earth upon them.
Job 9:6 ~ Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Psalm 73:3 ~ The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars of it.
The laws you mention about the universe dictate entropy and a slow destruction of all that we can see which is exactly contrary to your theology of evolution which is a reversal of entropy. You have a grave inconsistency in your beliefs.
The rest of your post I have covered exhaustively previously.
Pete says: "Keep your foolishness in the churches and the heck out of the public square":
Isn't freedom of speech wonderful? I am free to speak my mind in my church AND in the public square and all your ranting and raving can not change that.
You said: "...and you cannot win"
But you're wrong again. God exists outside of time. Nevermind that your finite human mind cannot understand that. He who was and is and is to come has already revealed the ultimate outcome of history. And guess what?, I do win!, as does anyone else who has put their trust in Him.
Throughout scripture He speaks in hundreds of what mankind consider to be prophecies. And He hasn't been wrong once. Why?, because it's the same as you or I writing our memoirs - it's already happened, we're just recording the results.
Quecat,
“It's WHO you believe in. Nothing else matters.”
Then about 4 billion people are set for hell for sure. You really think god (if there is one) above all things considered, utter faith and belief in a particular god is the most virtous action possible?
This doesn't sound logical.
What if a hindu lives a very moral and ethical life (mirroring Christ in respect to morality, ethics, and fairs no worse then other Christians) what then do you make of him/her?
Shouldn’t ones ACTIONS be just as, if not more important with regards to how god will judge a person than ones belief?
I would hope so.
Also consider those that believe for beliefs sake and don't even live ethically at all. Should their 'belief' above all else trump their actions and automatically give them a pass to heaven?
One wouldn't think so.
Get the Cornwall Alliances' newsletter, it is very informative. I do not believe Al Gore and his scare tactics. Even his research and film are faulty.
Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation
"The Cornwall Alliance is a coalition of clergy, theologians, religious leaders, scientists, academics, and policy experts committed to bringing a proper and balanced Biblical view of stewardship to the critical issues of environment and development. The Cornwall Alliance fully supports the principles espoused in the Cornwall Declaration on Environmental Stewardship, and is seeking to promote those principles in the discussion of various public policy issues including population and poverty, food, energy, water, endangered species, habitat, and other related topics."
http://www.cornwallalliance.org/
Why 'Global Warming' Is Not a Global Crisis
by Christopher Monckton
Hawaii Reporter, January 22, 2008
"The High Court in London recently ordered the British Government to correct nine of the 36 serious errors in Al Gore’s climate movie before innocent pupils were exposed to it. It was Gore who, in 1994, announced that Mars was covered in canals full of water. This notion had been disproved before his birth. It was Gore who recently spent $4 million of the profits from his sci-fi comedy horror movie on a luxury condo just feet from the supposedly rising ocean at Fisherman’s Wharf, San Francisco. No surprise that he and the mad scientists with whom he has close financial and political links are under investigation for racketeering -- peddling a false prospectus to investors in his “green” investment corporation by distorting climate science even after the UK judge’s ruling.
It is not so well known that the UN’s climate reports are also error-packed and misleading."
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?9c8600a9-6750-45cb-b7ee-c8ca6b6d3a75
Gore Uses 'Fascist' Tactics to Push Global Warming Agenda
by Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute, January 16, 2008
"Liberalism and fascism aren’t polar opposites in the world according to National Review Editor at Large Jonah Goldberg. In fact, he says they’re the same – especially when it comes to pushing liberal causes such as global warming.
Goldberg outlined how the left has used fascist tactics on climate change by promoting the view that global warming skepticism should be immediately dismissed as nonsense. That’s a tactic used by global warming alarmist and former vice president Al Gore."
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080116132158.aspx
Global Warming is not Avenue to Evangelical Vote
Confusion Persists in Presidential Primaries about Evangelical Electorate
http://www.cornwallalliance.org/press/read/global-warming-is-not-avenue-to-evangelical-vote/
Crc,
“You can find an exception to most anything.”
Well I would have posted more examples, but I am a pacifist and don’t need to ridicule you. Making a point will suffice, if you have other ‘overwhelming evidence’ for a literal 6 day creation and a 6000 year old universe/earth I’d be happy to hear what AIG, ICR have on tap these days.
How do you explain 8 people only 4000 years ago managed to reach 6.5 billion in such a short time?
Keep in mind the timeline of Moses exodus from Egypt in which he and 600,000 other jewish males (and their wives and assuming 1.5 kids quite conservative for Jews) put that figure at least around 2,000,000 Jews which conflicts with any notion of 8 people reproducing fast enough to create such numbers. Your very own book negates such nonsense.
Didymus said; I’d like to know… are all those who do not believe in literal 6-day creationism going straight to Hell? And where does it say in the Bible that we must interpret it literally, or else?
Scripture is largely self-explanatory if you truly make an effort to read it with an open mind. Some is allegorical, some is in parable, some is plain matter of fact. Sometimes scripture is not as specific as our human minds would like it to be. That's when you've just got to trust God and say "okay, I'll accept that that is all that will be revealed to me at this time." Stop wasting your time with the pointless conjecture over unrevealed details.
Your acceptance or rejection of a literal 6 day creation account is NOT the litmus test for admission to heaven.
In case you missed the point of my previous post, it's not WHAT you believe that is going to get you there - It's WHO you believe in. Nothing else matters.
On this one point - you're either RIGHT or WRONG. There is no in between and nothing else in all the world is as important as this.
crc,
“Do you really think that everything you see is a big lucky accident?’
No, I think it largely involves the way the universe reacts according to the fundamental laws that dictate how atoms and molecules react.
But I wasn’t talking about that; (try to stay on topic) I was talking about taking your book being taken literal word for word which Seedplanter, didymus, chris333 and other apologetics don’t.
Crc, since you take it all literal. How do you interpret the parts that say the earh moveth not and that it rests on pillars? Obviously you don’t take these parts literally as you have to conceded your ignorance, but why then does the literal 6 day creation which is an obvious metaphor and symbolic have to be taken literally?
Why don’t you try to convince them and me of why YEC is right? They are after all as equally skeptical of a 6000 year of universe/earth and coming from Seedplanter you should at least consider his points (and mine too) as he is after all a Christian.
didymus
I'm not the judge on that but I know where I feel safest.
The problem with picking and choosing what you want out of the Bible is where does it stop? Maybe you say Genesis 1 & 2 are not literal, maybe somebody else says Jesus was just a man and some people do that. If you consider the Bible the inerrant Word of God then it is all true. If you find something that doesn't make sense you search until you figure out the problem.
agentorange
You can find an exception to most anything. You have not proved a thing. You found a place in New Mexico, that does nothing for the rest of the entire world.
agentorange
You are incorrect that we are what we are because of where/when we were born. Have you studied any religions, including your own? (athiesm) If you look at each religion you can easily recognize the validity of Christianity over the others. For starters it is the only one with a risen Saviour that can change your life and has been proven to do so for millions of people.
Do you really think that everything you see is a big lucky accident? No one in their right mind would answer this affirmatively. Oh and before you say it was an alien you better explain how he got here or maybe he was a big lucky accident.
Romans 1:20 - For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
crc,
"There is way too much helium in the rocks. The content of helium in the rocks matches up very well with a 6000 year old earth and is totally unrealistic with an earth that is millions of years old'
Too much helium huh? okaaayy. Helium deposits are common in New Mexico, and excess helium has been found just a few miles from where the sample was taken.
Source: www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD015.html
Any other evidence?
crc,
I’d like to know… are all those who do not believe in literal 6-day creationism going straight to Hell? And where does it say in the Bible that we must interpret it literally, or else?
http://didymuspov.blogspot.com/
Gee, I got flagged. No supirise around here.
Crc,
I love how literal 6 day YEC attempt to define evolution. Evolution, very loosely means adaptation and change over time. Microevolution is defined as allelic frequency changes in an organisms genetics, while Marco evolution (you know, that one YEC’s never support) is evolution at or above the species level barrier, which has been observed countless times as speciation events.
“Ants are noted as creeping things in the Genesis account’
Right, those same creepy things that have 4 legs according to Leviticus. All of which are an abomination to eat as well, but in Asia and Africa they are part of a much of the populaces diet.
‘Besides this there is overwhelming evidence that the world is not more than 10,000 years old.”
Oh really….? Where might one find this overwhelming evidence? Let me guess….you’re going to point me towards AIG, ICR and Kent Hovind none of which even use scientifically peer reviewed articles.
It seems Seedplanter can at least recognize how lacking young earth and sin relationship is. It’s a metaphor Crc get a clue.
Just b/c the bible says the universe is 6000 years old doesn’t make it true, try to think critically for a change. Do you think that when Richard Nixon said ‘I am not a crook’ somehow means he’s not a crook? Of course not.
"It seems pretty desperate and speaks volumes when you feel justified in comparing God's written word to the claims of Richard Nixon."
No it isn't. It's true, you consider his word and none of the other 3000 gods true b/c you were raised in this time period and where you live. had you been born in the middle east you'd equally think only allah's word is true, or if in india you'd think only krisha as the only word. One's religion and their view of it relative to all others stems directly from the cosequence of when and where they were born. had you been born in classic Greece you'd swear by Zeus or Appolo, but if you were born in the Eyptian Dynasties you'd swear that only Amen Ra is the true word of god.
This is what I mean by you lack critically thinking as you only think of the world from you ethocentric view inwhich ONLY yoours is correct.
HampsteadPete
Do some personal study of your own with an open mind of course. One other thing, if your not a Christian and sincerely interested in getting to the truth of the matter then you won't. Also if you were raised on evolution teaching throughout your education you have a lot of reprogramming to do in your brain, especially if your not a Christian. You need the light of Gods word in your heart to see the light. This is why so many evolutionists and people like Al Gore come to so many erroneous conclusions.
I'm envisioning one day in heaven ...
Say perhaps the young earth model were the correct one. Are you going to see a bunch of young-earthers running around in heaven high-fiving one another saying "YES! we were right!" - Do you really think the alternate camp is going to be sullen and mumbling "Gee, guess we were wrong." You're in heaven! - Who cares if your conjectures were right?
In contrast however- suppose you wind up in hell? Do you really think the same thing will be going on? Really - if you end up there, whether you were right or wrong on this one point will be largely immaterial. I've bet you'll have most pressing issues on your mind. But then again, you will have all of eternity to rethink your position.
What does it boil down to? The argument at hand does not matter!
What matters is do you know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?
If you do, everything else is gravy.
If you don't, you probably ought to be taking care of 1st things 1st and stop letting the world distract you with trivial matters.
Oh my, you're not kidding, you folks really DO believe all that creationist stuff! Well, I hope your kids have more sense.
It seems pretty desperate and speaks volumes when you feel justified in comparing God's written word to the claims of Richard Nixon.
Young earth - old earth - I don't see where any of this has any bearing on my faith.
Fact 1 - God said thus
Fact 2 - What God says is so, is. He does not lie.
Conclusion: - I don't need to waste my time nit picking with people over trivial imaginary alternatives to the revealed word and truth of God.
In most cases whenever I meet an intransient evolutionist, I see a person who is desperately trying to prove that we came from puddles or apes or something so that they may feel justified within their heart in denying the existence of God, and by extension, the reality of sin and man's need for repentance a savior and forgiveness.
No wonder they struggle so.
agentorange
Maybe you should get a clue and stop your lies about evolution.
Those dietary laws of the old testament served a purpose and are backed up with scientific data. Since you act like such a know it all you can look it up yourself.
For those who believe in an old earth:
There is way too much helium in the rocks. The content of helium in the rocks matches up very well with a 6000 year old earth and is totally unrealistic with an earth that is millions of years old. There are many more facts that evolutionists routinely misconstrue to fit their old earth model.
kevin82,
The reason why it’s important, and the divinity school student would be right, is that the environmental issue of global warming has a whole host of negative effects. Global warming will strain resources in dynamic ways that will stress societies into conflict. There will be more Sudans in the future because there are too many people living in areas that have too few resources. And abortion will be enforced by law in some place, as in China, which already has a one child per family law in place. We need to stop worrying, especially as Christians, about how responses to global warming will affect our standard of living here in America, and start thinking about the very negative effects that the global warming reality will have on our societies.
seedplanter
You have some interesting ideas. It is evident that there is variation within the species. That's how Noah was able to get all the animals he needed on the ark but dogs make dogs, cats make cats etc. That is not evolution, it is only variation within in the genetics that God has already provided. Ants are noted as creeping things in the Genesis account. Personally my believe is that the earth did not exist in it's pristine perfect condition for more than a few hours or maybe a few weeks before Adam and Eve sinned. If they had and Adam and Eve were perfect then Eve would have gotten pregnant and had a perfect sinless baby that would have not needed to be saved from sin unless it also sinned later on. If this baby would have not sinned then it would have never died. Given this there is nothing to be concerned about regarding toenails and hair as you mention in your response. The fact that you can pull a hair out of your head is not evidence of not being perfect.
On the length of days, I have heard your argument before but it holds no water because the creation account is repeated plenty of times throughout the old testament as well as the new testament almost always specifically mentioning 6 days for creation, God is not out to trick us. This is why the Bible says morning and evening for each day of creation. There is no slight of hand here. Besides this there is overwhelming evidence that the world is not more than 10,000 years old.
"The environment is the No. 1 issue in terms of how we are putting hands and feet to the call of Christ - not just saying but doing," said Bailey Edwards Nelson, a 24-year-old divinity school student at Mercer University's McAfee School of Theology in Atlanta, as reported by The News & Observer."
You've got to be kidding. What about abortion? Or the Sudan? Well, I guess recycling and patting yourself on the back is much easier (and more amenable to the liberal elite).
crc: “If you believe in any sort of evolution then we were not made perfect (sinless) and in God's image.”
I don’t know of any creationist scientist that doesn’t believe in micro-evolution or at least changes within species. Also, many hold to evolution up to and not including humans. In other words they do not adhere to the theory of the decent of man.
didymus, I think that if you study up on Al Gore’s rhetoric, you would understand that it is just that. In England the teachers who show Gore’s movie are mandated to explain how it is not correct. Notice, Gore did not win the Nobel science prize.
Crc, “God says he made the earth in 6 literal days”
The Hebrew language uses the word ‘day’ for 12 hours, 24 hours and a period of time (the day of the Lord, the day of trouble). Another question, is it God’s time for day or man’s time for day? These are all things to take into consideration.
The argument that is used against old earth creationism the most is the problem of sin and death. My problem with this as one who is going through transition from young earth to old earth is that numerous things indicate that death and dying did occur before the fall; i.e. Hair, fingernails and toenails are actually accumulations of dead epidermal cells. Was Adam and Eve completely bald and without nails? Did they live on milk and honey? (Plants and animals are living organisms). Did they make certain to sweep wherever they walked to ensure not to step on ants? If accommodation is made for these things are you still taking the text literally? If it is said to only mean animals with blood, then what argument is there against it meaning animals with a living soul? What grounds is there against literally interpreting it as to mean spiritual death? There is a lot to consider here before condemning people who hold alternative views.
didymus
Just remember if you pick and choose out of the Bible what is true and what is not true you will be in for a rude awakening on judgment day. The Bible is the inspired of God written by Holy men of old and Jesus said not one jot or title shall pass. To say that Genesis 1 & 2 are fairy tales is a serious offense to Jesus. Just because certain people cannot properly interpret the scientific data is no reason to say God is a liar. Knowledgeable scientist have interpreted the data and it agrees with the Bible. You owe it to yourself to do more study.
2 Peter 1:21
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
didymus
Do you not believe that we need salvation from a fallen condition?
If we evolved we have not fallen because we were never perfect either physically or spiritually.
crc: That’s not much of a brain teaser for me since I don’t interpret Genesis 1-2 as literal fact. The need for Jesus, a sinful fallen world, and evolution, all together make perfectly good sense to me.
Here's a brain teaser for you:
If you believe in any sort of evolution then we were not made perfect (sinless) and in God's image. Jesus came to die for our sins so if we are "fallen" just as we evolved to be then you are saying that Jesus came here and was crucified for absolutely nothing. To clarify my point I'm saying that any life that would have evolved (but we know that has never happened) would have not been perfect or it wouldn't have needed to evolve. Basically evolution is anti-Christian but many people have never thought about it that evolution also negates the need for salvation. To put it another way, if you believe God used evolution with repeated death and destruction then we are already as we were created and we don't need to be saved from anything.
Zadokrev:
I disagree with you 100%. I’m a Christian and a theistic evolutionist and if you can’t see what an overwhelming number of scientists have shown to be in fact happening, you need to get your head out of the mythic clouds. There are more than a “few smoke stacks” out there. And “valuing human life” is more than just being “pro-life”. For further comment on my point of view among other things check out didymuspov.blogspot.com thanks!
Zadokrev:
I agree with you 100%. If you are a Christian then you believe it when God says he made the earth in 6 literal days and if you believe that how can you believe that he made it so fragile that a few smoke stacks are going to destroy the world and kill us all? There are so many scientist that disagree with Al but the media won't pay them any attention. Basically ever since the flood of Noah's time the earth has been warming (about 5000 years). That's when all that ice was created and it's been slowly melting. Man's contribution to the problem is basically nothing but I agree we should take care of the earth because that was part of the admonishment God gave to Adam. Revelation tells us that things are going to get hot but we won't stop it. We just need to practise moderation and common sense.
Boy.... this is a very interesting picture! The New Baptist voice seems to be a voice riddled with compromise. Besides how can Al Gore speak of "glorifying GOD'S creation" while supporting all of the anti JESUS CHRIST and GOD the FATHER policies that he and his cronies create? Glorifying GOD'S creation starts with valuing human life! This entire ordeal is "Hogwash!" For further comment on global warming among other things check out zadokrev.blogspot.com thanks!