Members Log In Not Registered? Register Now.
Updated 12:58 pm.EST, Sat November 21, 2009
- RSS|
- E-newsletter - Preview : Daily | Weekly
CP Contents
Hot Topics :
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. (JN 8:32)
Gen1_28's Comments
-
Dear God, help us all to see your glory- to speak your words. I Lord am a weak man who would easily loose my temper at such vain arguments as some which have been presented here. Lord, help us to demolish the strongholds of the enemy, to give a reason for our beliefs, but to do so in gentleness and respect.
-
Agent-
Sorry to rain on your parade- but you brought up the word epistemology, the theory of knowledge... and then you seem to indicate that any form of circular reasoning is illogical-
And I quote "Well b/c the bible says so! Holly circular argument Batman! "
Since you brought up epistemology, I just wanted you to know that all reasoning is ultimatly circular. Yes, even science. To say that some one is using circular reasoning and therefore not worthy to listen to is circular reasoning in itself. "Circular reasoning isn't reason because it's circular." Even if you take it further and say "Circular reasoning isn't proper reasoning because it isn't based on independant facts and conclusions" you still have to justify how you came to that conclusion and again end in a circular argument.
Tha Bible clearly show that the Earth (and all creation) is somewhere about 6000 years old. God, from the beginning created man and woman perfect. He new they would sin in the garden. He allowed them their freedom and they sinned. The entire purpose of the Old testament scriptures was a forshadowing of the New Testament revelation. People before Christ were still saved by faith and not by works, as the Bible clearly shows. God didn't wait 180,000 years as you presume (you are forcing your evolutionary thoughts on a Creationist worldview). God clearly showed people how to have a relationship with Him from the start.
If you would like to continue this rant of yours, I politely ask you to explain to me the evolutionists reasoning behind morality and the reson behind the uniformity of nature. I will explain those if you need me to. I clearly say that an evolutionist cannot give any reason for an aabsolute standard of morality, nor can they give a reason why they believe things will continue uniformly (for example: why gravity will work tomorrow,) which is a requirement for science.
Should you not explain those 2 critical ideas, shut up and stop wasting my time reading your "pietistic" non-sense. -
Saudi Arabia Leader Calls for Interfaith Dialogue
Gen1_28 »Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:50 pm
Agree: 2 
Disagree: 2
I can't blame these Muslims for not allowing people to worship another faith. After all, The Bible commands that a Godly nation will follow God's laws and apply the same law to the believer and the unbeliever.
I REALLY hate to say this- but Christians can actually learn something from these Muslims... They are passionate about their faith and (mostly not in America) many follow it. How many Christians can be counted who are as adamant on following the precepts of God? Not many since most Christians send their children to public school and are stuck in a 30 year mortgage, both of which are grossly frowned on, considered curses, or outright agaist scripture.
I encourage all here to let this news article spur us on to a greater obedience to God and the Bible. -
Cloned Stem Cells Treat Parkinson's in Mice, Researchers Claim
Gen1_28 »Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:41 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0
Agent-
I see no current ethical issues in this. We would be dealing with skin cells which would be genetically altered to produce a medical cure without the destruction of an individuals life. I think some people might be initially afraid due to the phrase "embryonic-state" or some such phrase, but once Christians understand that it is used to describe the similar state of the cell and not an actual fertilized embryo (early life form) it might be heralded as a God-send.
So much of this "cutting-edge" science is difficult to understand and make (ethical) judgement calls on when there is so little actually known. -
Star,
One thing I was thinking- I do not know that we can absolutely say that his methodology is not from God. From what I read, I would agree with much f the content (though not all, there are certain allowances in scripture for women working in certain situations, and I don't see in scripture where it says you can't drink any alcohol).
Why would one say his methodology is incorrect?
Sure, he is loud and gives a hard message, but to tell the truth, Gods word is not usually liked, even by fellow Christians. I would rather someone "told it to me straight" then get the watered down gospel like they serve in many churches today.
Before we condemn his methodology, even if we disagree with come of his ideas or actions, let us examine the fruit of his labor in light of scripture… and with my limited knowledge of him…that looks alright to me. -
Late-Term Abortionist Admits to Aborting 1 Day Before Delivery
Gen1_28 »Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:47 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 3
I flagged myself-
This man is a murderer. The Bible commands capital punishment for such crimes. If you think anything else- you are not following God's commands.
The sooner we leave behing this heretical idea that we're living "in the last day" the better. This heresy is so pervasive and so easily shown false, I am amazed it is still so widly taught. God clearly commands in scripture for Christians to bring all things into obedience to God. Ever since Adam (Genesis 1_28, and again in Mathew 28) God has commanded Christians to work at teaching all peopls to be obedient to God and to bring all things under Godly authority. It is because we believe the world is not fixable that we retreat when God commands us to press forward.
God doesn't give us a picture of defeat- he commands us to press on towards bringing all things unto obedience to His principles. But we Christians have failed, as this article clearly shows.
Does anyone doubt that this sort of thing would never happen to such an extent if we followed God's commands? -
Since the issue was wether or not the County was actually spending the money on the abortion, It seems ot me that you could make a case that they did not directly contribute to the abortion, but that they indirectly supported it. Afterall, it took man hours and transportation costs. There fore, the county has become an accessory to abortion-
Its just like saying "We do not support murder" but then giving a gun to a person you KNOW is planning to commit murder. In their case, they don't support abortion with county money, but they sure will do everything they can to help yo uget one, short of actually paying the bill.
Their hypocrasy is amazing- I highly encourage all Christians to stop thinking and understanding our Biblical theology. The more we actually follow God, the more we might realize the government is actually wrong. -
Jesus Doesn't Look Like Jesus Anymore, Says Scholar
Gen1_28 »Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:18 pm Agree: 3 Disagree: 1
ifeelfine72,
I must disagree. It is not up to us to prove God's existence. It is up to the Christian to be obedient to God. This means living our lives by bringing every area into obedience to God and his word.
Furthermore, it would be impossible for any man to prove or disprove God. To prove something means you must be judge over it to decide if it is or is not. Man is not over God and cannot judge God. As much as we might like that (remember Adam in the Garden-) it is not our place. As scripture tells us, the evidence for God is proclaimed by God throughout all creation. We, God's creation, are to proclaim God. It is not up to us to prove God.
We see evidence for God the same way we see evidence for the wind (either that or the bush outside my window is coming after me!) Again - the evidence for God is obvious as Chris333 has pointed out. And as you said, it takes faith.
Maybe Hume will never "see God" - but that is not our problem. Our duty is to be obedient to God and his commands. I think every one here has tried to clearly show the evidence for God in nature, in personal convictions, and in philosophical rhetoric. I just hope we all continue to strive to live out God's commands in our own life.
Hume- It was educational to read your opinions. Keep up the questions. -
Prophet-
This will be my last post on this topic. It seems you have missed the 2 main points I have continued to emphasize.
1) God gave capital punishment for certain crimes. The OT clearly states this many times. To not admit this would be to willfully deny God.
2) Capital punishment was not given to individuals to decide upon. It was a tool to be used by the civil government.
I never said the Civil Government was above God. I said that Jesus as man was subject to the authorities placed over him.
I wasn't reading into the story of a woman caught in adultery. I clearly stated that their circumstantial evidence left me with many questions. I also pointed out that it was not within the INDIVIDUALS sphere of authority to decide and carry out the judgment of capital punishment. That is reserved to the CIVIL GOVERNMENT, as it says in scripture.
In John 8, verse 6, it shows that the Pharisees were trying to TRAP Jesus. How were they trying to trap him into agreeing with the Laws of the OT? If Jesus had said "Yes, stone her", then Jesus would be guilty of murder according to the Roman laws, and in rebellion to the authority placed over him. Jesus did not do this. He knew it was a trap. He answered as he should considering his authority. He was not the head of the civil government and did not have the authority to stone the woman. He was an individual. To allowing stoning the woman would be to stand in rebellion to the authority (Rome) which God had placed over him. The Pharisees would have had him trapped IF Jesus had commanded stoning because (1) it was outside of Jesus' authority and (2) it was against the Roman Laws that anyone should carry out capital punishment except the Roman Government.
May God grant us both wisdom that we may understand scripture better. -
Prophet-
First, I will point out that you did not answer my question. Now I will answer yours-
Second, as I have continued to say, capital punishment according to scripture should only be carried out by the civil government. Since the Israelites were under Roman authority, it would be the Roman authority that would have to carry it out. The people in general were never the recognized civil government. I refer you back to the implementation of the judges over Israel through Moses.
Third, presuming that she was "caught in adultery", where was the man who was caught with her? Obviously the case of the Pharisees was lacking further evidence. According to the OT laws, both the man and woman were to be stoned. So, where was the man? Seeing as they did not bring forth the man, only the woman, it brings into question their accusations. What the Pharisees were trying to carry out was not justice. Justice would include stoning the man.
Fourthly, to clarify Jesus position. Jesus was an individual. A teacher, and respected individual- but an individual all the same. He, showing respect for all peoples, did not pass the judgment of condemnation and encourage an unbiblical act of capital punishment by an improper authority. He, as an individual, was not accepting of the idea of living an adulterous life because he clearly stated "go, and sin no more". Jesus therefore was condemning of adultery to the extent which he had authority over the woman.
Fifthly, Jesus' authority. To clarify- though Jesus is God, he was given authority over heaven and earth after his resurrection, and while here on Earth he lived mostly according to the ways of man, excluding certain miracles he performed. Though in one case he might have had certain authority over the woman caught in adultery, as he has over all people- He, in the human sense, was not in a position of authority over her since he was not her husband, or father- or even a church elder, or a ruler in the government. His authority was limited to that of a one individual who encourages another to "go and sin no more".
I hope this has clearly explained to you why Jesus did not tell them to stone the woman, while not contradicting scripture. I encourage you to think about what you have proposed- that God is somehow dichotomous or dualistic in his thinking, and correct your thinking. I know I am not perfect in my own thinking- only through prayer, study, and petition to God can we improve. -
Prophet-
My last point... let us say that you are correct. I totally disagree- but let us assume you are right. Please explain to me how you can rationalize how God in the OT commanded capital punishment but in the New Testament said it was wrong?
Your "interpretation" is making God contradict himself. How do you reconcile this? -
Church's Gay Family Photos Row Ends with Vote to Keep Pastor
Gen1_28 »Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:19 pm Agree: 1 Disagree: 0
Slacker-
to try to answer your question: The Bible does not say that a sinner cannot attend a metting of the church body- but rather that the church body is not to associate (think: become close friends) with the sinner. The issue wasn't the Homosexuals attending church. It was their being associated as an accepted part of the church that was the issue. Now don't think I agree with accepting homosexuals "just as they are"...
My views are simple- if you are a confirmed homosexual and will not recant- the civil government has the right to put you to death. We as individuals do not have this liberty. We as individuals should not make life easy on them. We should not allow them to be a participant in anything other than to hear the Word of God that they might repent. We should not invite them over for fun and games. And we shouldn't employ them. Though this is speaking specifically of homosexuals, we can apply this to any non-Christian or unrepentant Christian. By disassociating ourselves from them they might repent. But this is what I see scripture commanding.
Think of it this way- let's say you have a habit. If that habit made it so you couldn't get a job and had no friends... and people didn't want top spend time with you...don't you think you might change? That IS the point. It is not that we cannot be polite to people living in sin- but we shouldn't help them or support them. There is a big difference between someone "living in sin" and a Christian who sometimes sins. -
DRJ-
I think you miss one point- or atleast you do not emphasize it enough. You are right to say that anyone who believes (has faith in/puts his faith in) Jesus as savior shall be saved. However, I think you miss the preticate that since we are all sinless a sinful mind cannot choose what is holy. It first must be God who works in us to salvation before we can have faith.
This man has shown a great something- what that something is, I do not know. Maybe it is faith- Assuredly he will face death threats from certain Muslim factions God tells us that we will know the chosen by those who remain faithful till the end. I do not know enough of this mans life to say one way or another what his fruit is like- but with all hope, he will help influence other Muslims towards Christ, and he will remain faithful till the end.
May God be with him. -
Judge Dismisses Gender Discrimination Suit Against Baptist Seminary
Gen1_28 »Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:32 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 1
I must agree with Doc and Hawk.
Scripture is clear on the matter. It is also an added proof for her to NOT be in her position of education in that she brought he fellow Christians into a worldly court instead of following scripture- as Hawk pointed out.
But how many families (men) have their wives working outside of the home or outside of their husbands authority? This is all another problem which stems from the failure of Men to follow our Biblical calling of leadership.
I recommend the book "Family Man, Family Leader" by Phil Lancaster. It addresses some of those key issues which would help solve some of these problems. -
Prophet,
My deepest appologies for offending you- but I must disagree. Without going into the details of the OT decentralized form of government in justaposition to our modern failing Republic too much- the two are vastly different from one another. Never the less- God gave the command for capital punishment in the Old Testament. If you believe the Bible, then you must accept both the Old Testament and the New Testament.
My views may be hard- I agree that they may seem so- but I would like to point out that only by accepting both God's commands in the OT and Christs (God's) commands from the NT can we be obedient to God.
My final note would be that the words "eye for eye" do not say CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. I believe yo uhave taken scripteu out of context and I encourge you to take a weekend and read through the Pentateuch. It takes about 17 hours, but reading through it all in a short period of time helps to give a more complete view of the main points.
Too often we all can take scripture out of context- I believe this gay bishop has so done. He does need prayer- Prayer to repentence. I pray he does, and that God may forgive him. -
And if I didn't answer clearly enough -
Jesus was talking to the individuals- not to the role of the political government. These passage you gave were not a refutation of the political government using capital punishment. They were an admonition for individuals to understand the giving attitude and humility of Christians. They were not a condemnation of God's design of justice laid out in the Old Testament. -
Prophet,
Perhaps you believe, as many do, that the poitical government cannot follow God? I do not know what you think- but I would argue that the political government is suppose to be obedient to God's law. This being the case, what does scripture teach us about how the government should punish sin and wrong doing? -
Prophet-
Perhaps you missed what the scripture were talking about. The OT passages you mentioned were dealing with JUSTICE. The punishments were to be carried out by the political governments- not the individuals acting on their own.
These passages having nothing to do with repaying evil for evil. Jesus was making a clarification of the law that we are to follow the PRINCIPLES in scripture. This is from the Sermon on the mount where Jesus says many times "You've heard it said...but I say..." Jesus was constantly trying to help people better understand scripture and the principles they embodied, not necessarily the literal "buck stops here" understanding of the words. You will notice that he ends this "eye for eye"" bit with these words, "Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you." Why would jesus be talking about giving and lending and going the extra mile, if what he meant was to stop capital punishment? The two topics are not remotely related. Jesus was explaining how we Christians should go above and beyond the call of duty, even taking injustice upon ourselves. Christians should be known for their abundant love and giving and obedience- not for their legalistic obedience to the law. In essence he was saying "You missed the principles behind what was taught, let me correct that".
Upholding Biblical condemnation of sin is not "refuted" in scripture. It is upheld. Jesus was condemning their misunderstanding of scripture because they tried to follow the "law" without understanding that actual principles behind the law.
In a similar passage, Paul speaks of the OT passage about not muzzeling an ox treading the grain- for the worker is worth his wages. Anyone who thinks this passage is about muzzeling oxes and nothing else falls short of understanding the principles laid out of being honest and paying upfront, and making sure to pay according to qualifications.
Can you show me from scripture why God would command his people to use capital punishment, and then change his mind (as you suggest the Bible really says)? Can you show me how your view is not contradictory? -
You will have to forgive my ignorance- where in the Bible did Jesus REFUTE the idea of capital punishment? It was God who instituted capital punishment for certain crimes. Jesus, being God, could not refute capital punishment lest he refute himself.
Even in situations such as the woman "caught in adultery", Jesus did not REFUTE capital punishment. IF the woman was caught IN adultery, where was the man? The man was also potentailly punishable by death. That punishment was to be carried out by the POLITICAL government- NOT the people in general. Seeing as they were under Roman Law, they were not in a position to carry out such capital punishment. To do so would be going outside of their Biblically given authority. -
Actually, the Bible speaks clearly that God's law is to apply to both the believer and the unbeliever. This was said continually in the Old Testament. For some reason people think that because the idea was first mentioned in the OT that it no longer applies- but that's just fluff and nonsense. Might as well say the 10 commandments don't apply.
I am not saying encat the death penalty for sin. I am saying we should follow the commands of God. God did not say "kill someone for stealing". He said the person who steals must pay back double. What happens today? The person who steals often pays back a portion to the other person, a big fine to the political government, and stays in jail for a while. God makes no such provisions in scripture. This show that the modern day pienal system is not in line with scripture.
What part of God's principles do you NOT think we should follow?
You might think God's law was intollerant- yes, it was. It was intollerant of SIN. As for this bit about judging... there are 2 types of judging. The judgement of condemnation and the judgement of evaluation. We Christians are told to constantly evaluate (judge) if something is right or wrong. We are not to condemn (judge) something to be wrong OUTSIDE OF GODS LAW. When it say's WE are not to condemn it means that we are not the one who makes the decision if something is right or wrong, like Adam tried doing in the Garden. We are to use God's judgement.
The political government is suppose to follow God's decrees. Part of those decrees, most actually, says that the political government was given the power of the sword (distributing punishment for crimes, including capital punishment) and the general defence of the country. When I say some of the OT laws should be reinstituted- I mean just that. It was the part of the political government, not the individual or the church, to use capital punishment.
Gen1_28 »
Holy Bible: Mosaic
On our own we are little more than bits of stone and glass. Together we are the Body of Christ. Holy Bible: Mosaic is an invitation to experience Christ in His Word and in the responses of his people. Each week, as you reflect on guided Scripture readings aligned with the church seasons, you will receive a wealth of insight from historical and contemporary writings.
- Own your Own Christian Business
- Need Health & Travel Insurance? We Provide Best Service For You
- Moving Companies - Receive Multiple Moving Quotes from Movers in your area!
- Liberty University Online - Master of Science in Management MSM : Online
- Christian Gifts from The Jerusalem Gift Shop
- new york web design
- LeTourneau University - Online and On-Campus Degrees with a Christian Perspective, designed for Working Adults
- Prophet CRM - Easy CRM Software for Outlook
- Help with Debt Consolidation Loans and budgeting your way out of debt with medical bills and credit cards
- Shop for: Special Occasion Gifts, Wedding Accessories, Kid's Personalized Music CDs & DVDs & Adoration Jewelry
- Financing for your Church Construction Needs - Darra Consulting
HOME
CP SPECIAL
CP NETWORKS
WAYS TO GET CP
