Thank you, Albert Mohler. This is a clear approach to the evolution vs creation controversy. This controversy boils down to this: Do we accept the Bible as God's Word, or do we not? If we do, we accept the creation account of Genesis as true, like the rest of the Bible. There is indeed no middle ground!

Women, according to what I said in the previous post, may preach, if they subject themselves to the authority of the male elders. Preaching (kerussein) is not necessarily teaching (didachein). Women preachers should abstain from reprimanding the known sins of male believers in the congregation. This is the job of the male preachers.

I agree with John Piper. But some women believers may preach, as long as the male elders exercise oversight over their preaching, like the preaching of everyone else. Having the gift (charisma) of preaching does not make a woman an elder.

Note that Jefferts Shori does not once mention sin against God. She merely focuses on the darkness brought on by political oppression. She chooses to ignore chapter 1 of Isaiah (vs 4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward). Sin b...more

Note that Jefferts Shori does not once mention sin against God. She merely focuses on the darkness brought on by political oppression. She chooses to ignore chapter 1 of Isaiah (vs 4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward). Sin before God sets the tone for the whole prophecy, including chapter 9:2.
Do Episcopalians in Haiti and Sudan and the USA, who have to accept her apostate leadership, need to repent of their sin in order to see the great light mentioned in Isaiah 9:1? Of course they do. There is a more insidious darkness than the darkness brought on by political oppression. It is the darkness of brazen apostasy, the darkness of a leader who probably does not believe in an historical Adam -- why should she accept an historical Jesus? It is the forlorn moral twilight of someone who flouts the Biblical teaching on marriage, allowing same sex marriages for her apostate clergy, who dares to speak of the Light of the World.less

I think the distinction that God hates sin but loves the sinner is not valid. Yes, He loved the world so much that He sent his only begotten Son (John 3:16). Yes, He has no pleasure in him that dieth (Ezek 18:32). But He hated Esau (Rom 9:13). Jesus does not pray for the world, but for the elect (John 17:9). When God hates the sinner, though, He is innocent of his downfall and damnation. His hatr...more

I think the distinction that God hates sin but loves the sinner is not valid. Yes, He loved the world so much that He sent his only begotten Son (John 3:16). Yes, He has no pleasure in him that dieth (Ezek 18:32). But He hated Esau (Rom 9:13). Jesus does not pray for the world, but for the elect (John 17:9).
When God hates the sinner, though, He is innocent of his downfall and damnation. His hatred for Esau did not cause Esau to sin -- rather the other way round: Esau's hatred for God caused God's hatred for Esau. God's love for Jacob preceded and caused Jacob's love for God. But God's hatred for Esau succeeded Esau's hatred for Him. We should therefore work out our salvation with fear and trembling. The only difference between me, a saved sinner, and an unsaved sinner is God's love and grace. It makes my skin crawl -- and yet I accept his amazing grace with a thankful, amazed heart!less

Science has religious roots based in faith. A scientist is someone who tests knowledge against a criterion which he believes to be true. What do all of us -- Christians or atheists, scientists or non-scientists -- believe? Firstly, we believe that we exist. And secondly, we believe that what our senses tell us is true. We cannot prove either of these beliefs -- we accept them by faith. Atheists ...more

Science has religious roots based in faith. A scientist is someone who tests knowledge against a criterion which he believes to be true. What do all of us -- Christians or atheists, scientists or non-scientists -- believe? Firstly, we believe that we exist. And secondly, we believe that what our senses tell us is true. We cannot prove either of these beliefs -- we accept them by faith.
Atheists are religious people, because they religiously accept their own existence as truth, although they reject God's existence as a lie. And they religiously believe what they perceive via their eyes, ears, noses, tongues and touch to be true. If you do not believe in the existence of a creator-God, which gives meaning and hope to your existence, why do you believe in your own existence, or in your own senses? Why discard the more obvious (God's existence) and accept the less obvious (our own existence)?less

I think the evidence is overwhelming for God to exist, to put it mildly. Just think how conditions on earth work together to make life and especially human existence, possible. Everywhere there is a delicate balance which is critical for our survival. So many factors on earth are 'just right'. Now compare this fact to the dismal conditions that may be existing on this distant, newly discovered pla...more

I think the evidence is overwhelming for God to exist, to put it mildly. Just think how conditions on earth work together to make life and especially human existence, possible. Everywhere there is a delicate balance which is critical for our survival. So many factors on earth are 'just right'. Now compare this fact to the dismal conditions that may be existing on this distant, newly discovered planet. I pray that the scales may fall from the eyes of many unbelievers when God touch their unbelieving hearts through his mighty Word and Spirit!less