|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Choosing a faith | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Phat, in 1Timothy 5:8 Paul states "But if any provide not
for his own, and specially for those of his own house (eikeios), he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." Now notice Ephesians 2:19. "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners,but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household (eikeios) of God. The exact same word (eikeios) used for a human family isused for God and His family. Eikeios refers to relative, family, of his own house. In Matthew 12:47-50 while Jesus was speaking to a group,one said unto Him that His mother and brother were standing outside. Jesus stretched forth His hands towards His disciples andsaid, "Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven,the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." 2Corinthians 5:17 "Therefore if any man be in Christ, heis a new creature, old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." 1John 3:2 "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and itdoes not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is. What does Christ look like in His Spirit body? Revelations1: 13-16 gives a vivid description of Him. Angels are also spirit beings, but the do not look like Him. We, as members of the family of God, will look like Him. Hebrews 2:10 "For ir became Him, for whom are all things,and by whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory..." Again it states that there will be many sons of God, andthat these sons will be brought unto glory. I am running out of time on this. But the Bible states thatwe will be far greater than angels, and that we will rule over them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
GDR, you need to read all of Numbers 15 before forming
an opinion. God understands the difference between a sin that iscommitted in ignorance and one committed with malice and forethought (verses 23-31 explains the difference). A sin committed in ignorance of God's laws was not asin for stoning. Even today we have different punishments for manslaughtervs premeditated murder. The man who was stoned deliberately disobeyed God'sSabbath Commandment. He meant to do so. He was challenging God's authority in front of all theIsraelites. If God had allowed him to deliberately rebel against Him,what would have prevented all of them from rebelling? Concerning the woman taken in adultery, only the Romanauthority had the power to sentence one to death. The Pharisees brought the woman caught in the act ofadultery to Jesus in order to trap Him. They said that the law of Moses states that such a personbe stoned. What are we to do, they asked Him. If Christ had answered let her go, they would have accusedhim of violating the law of Moses. If He had answered that they were to stone her, thePharisees would have reported Him to Pilate, because In Palenstine only the Roman authority could sentence a person to death. Jesus, during this time, had been writing in the dirt with Hisfinger. We do not know what He wrote, but it is possible that He listed some of the sins each of her accusers had committed. He could have made a list of sins that they believed noone else was aware of. He said, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stoneat her." One by one they left.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
The problem C2 is that you have a very different belief of how we should understand the Bible. John Chap 1 tells us that the Word became flesh. He didn't say that the Word became a book, or more accurately a collection of books.
Yes, the Biblical authors were inspired to record their stories, understandings andhistories. You want to read it as if it was essentially dictated by God. Doing that essentially makes a false idol out of the Bible. As humans we don't like grey areas and we want things to be black and white. A massive problem in doing that is that we can find a verse in the Bible to find support for pretty much anything we want. When we read the Bible as if Yahweh is commanding genocide then it seems reasonable that we in the west should get busy and nuke other nations that have practices that we disagree with. I suggest that we should understand the Bible, as a series of books written over time by humans with their own personalities and agendas to form a narrative of the progressive understanding of the nature of God. The climax of the narrative of course is found in the man Jesus. They were inspired to write their stories in the same way that Beethoven was inspired to write his music. When we read the Bible that way, it allows God to speak to our hearts through what these ancients have written. You prioritize an inerrant reading of the Scriptures over the life and teachings of Jesus. It's Biblianity as opposed to Christianity.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
A&E are not the only people to change their minds about events or ideas. Christian scientists also learn new information. "Christian scientists"? What does faith healing have to do with this? Why would you think it should? My father's aunt Vivian was a Christian Scientist. He described her as a very beautiful woman, but she was in an accident where she was thrown from the car. Now, it was a Model T at slow speed, so she only suffered a face-plant on the road surface so her only injuries was road gravel embedded in her face. Easy to treat, but being a Christian Scientist she refused any medical treatment, her injuries got very infected, and she spent the rest of her life disfigured with her beauty marred by pock marks. All because of her Christian Science religious beliefs. Another example would be children dying from their parents withholding simple life-saving treatment (eg, treating bacterial infections like meningitis with antibiotics) because of their faith-healing beliefs ("allowing medical treatment would signal our lack of faith"). A few decades ago the news reported on parents that were convicted for that and at the sentencing the parents, despite being devastated by their child's death (they may be religious fanatics, but they're still human), stated that if they have another child and the same situation arose again then they would act the exactly the same. Such Christians are willing to sacrifice innocent lives for their faith. In contrast, my Rabbinic Literature professor, Rabbi Kalir, told us that in Judaism it is very important to obey God's Law, but if obeying God's Law would result in the loss of a life (even of a non-human life, eg livestock), then you save that life. To me, that demonstrates the superiority of Judaic morality vis-à-vis Christian "morality". And there's Tom Lehrer's introduction (c. 1964 to his "Send the Marines" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFvxqQTh3m4 ), his ode to America's ultimate tool of diplomacy (my emphasis added):
Teacher Lehrer: So what the fuck is Christian Science supposed to have to do with evolution? I know of no issues that that church has with evolution. Yes, I know that your church has issues with evolution, but nobody knows what those issues are, not even you. Jessica H. Christ! What is wrong with you that you feel that you must constantly deflect and divert? Or do you think that you just made up that "new" euphemism for "lying deceiving piece-of-shit creationists"? Like Trump "just made up" "priming the pump"? It's obvious that you just stole it from yet another lying creationist source and you started using it without any thought (like how Kent Hovind fell for the "Onyate Man" April Fool's Day prank -- named after Juan de Oñate y Salazar, infamous in New Mexico history). Piece of advice: when you pull yet another bullshit deception out of your ass, verify that it doesn't already exist with an entirely different meaning than the disinformational one you intend. Whenever you first use a new term, you need to define that term, which we all know that you will never do because you always refuse to! Like your use of that creationist dog whistle, "evolutionist". Therefore, every time you use "Christian scientist" that will immediately tell us that you are deliberately lying to us. Now to try to analyze and determine what the fuck you are talking about, since you never ever will tell us what the fuck you are talking about! So by calling purveyors of "creation science", "Christian scientists", you are trying to claim that there are two different kinds of science: Christian (ie, religion based) and secular (ie, actual science). By that measure, your "Christian science" is nothing but apologetics, which among you fundies has no purpose other than to defend your beliefs no matter how false or stupid they are and in the defense using whatever it takes, including lying about everything. IOW, "creation science", AKA creationism. There is no such thing as a distinction between "Christian science" (ie, religion-based science) and "secular science". You are lying by drawing a blatantly false dichotomy. The only purpose for creating a false dichotomy is to deceive. As in that false dichotomy, The Two Model Approach, which forms the foundation of that deliberate deception, "creation science".
By its very nature, science is secular. Science studies how the natural universe works. Since we can only observe or work with natural processes and phenomena, science also can only work with natural processes and phenomena. We (ie, you and I) have established and agreed that it is impossible for us humans to deal with the supernatural since it we cannot detect it, observe it, test it, etc -- refer to my Message 2880 replying to your Message 2875. Therefore, since we cannot work with the supernatural then neither can science, science cannot include the supernatural. This issue was covered and discussed 16 years ago in So Just How is ID's Supernatural-based Science Supposed to Work? (SUM. MESSAGES ONLY) in which, after nearly 400 messages, nobody could offer any way in which a supernatural-based science could possibly work. Any form of "science" which includes and depends on religious beliefs could not possibly serve as a functional science. Science can only include and consider the natural, which is appropriate for the purpose of studying the natural world. Therefore, science is secular. That makes science NON-theistic, meaning that it doesn't include "God stuff". From your recent messages, you seem to not understand the difference between "NON-theistic" and "Atheistic", since you denounce subjects that are NON-theistic as being Atheistic, which is not only wrong but downright stupid. God never gets mentioned in algebra class, so you would denounce it as atheistic? Well, you had better get ready to become a Muslim, since the "God" you would need to include in algebra would be Allah. Just as in algebra, in science including "God" not only would serve no purpose, but including or leaving out "God" makes no difference in your results! Conducting an experiment or solving an equation does not depend on which "God" the scientist/mathematician believes in or not nor on whether he had muttered the right prayer or incantation. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever!. Indeed, I even produced a mathematical "proof" (repeated in Message 2869) in which I included or excluded a "God term" to the same function and, since we get the exact same results with or without that "God term" then that "God term" equals ZERO. Therefore, trying to inject "God" into science only serves to reduce "God" to NOTHING.
It isn't science vs creation. It is A&E vs creation. No, rather it's YEC and creationism against Creation. We've gone over this before. There is no inherent conflict between science and Divine Creation. Just as there is no inherent conflict between evolution and Divine Creation. If one believes in Divine Creation, then the natural world is a result of that Creation. Science studies the natural world, so it cannot conflict with the Creation. And evolution is the net result of life doing what life naturally does, which for a believer in Divine Creation would be because of the Creation. A believer in Divine Creation would see the Creation as proof of the Creator and a way to learn more about the Creator -- indeed, many believers who become scientists for precisely that reason. In sharp contrast, creationism opposes Divine Creation by placing their flawed theology (which is by definition Man-made and the product of fallible humans) over the Creation. This misleads creationists to rejecting and denying the Creation and teaching instead that if the Creation is truly as we find it to be that would disprove the Creator. A couple decades ago, a devout Christian grandfather, George H. Birkett, had his website on AOL (who offered web hosting from 1997 to 2008) but it was lost when AOL went out of the hosting business. One of his pages was "The First Testament" in which the First Testament was the Creation and the Second Testament was the Bible whose purpose was to prepare us for reading the First Testament. He also accepted evolution as a scientific explanation and had concerns about creation science, such as that creationists have chosen to worship the Bible instead of worshipping God. A similar idea was central to the filk song, The Word of God; the last verse:
The Word of God: Clearly, the issue is creationism versus Divine Creation. Neither atheists nor "evolutionists" have anything to do with it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Dwise, stop playing dumb. Biden's top agenda when
taking office was to close oil production in America. Only a Liberal (and trust me, I do not know oneConservative who thinks this way) would think it wise to cut production when demand is rising. Recently Trump was asked what he would do to curbinflation and lower the price of gas. His answer was "drill baby drill." Biden and the Democrats in California pushed EV's as ameans of cutting petroleum use. Many of those who bought EV's were not able to chargethem. The power grid was far from adequate. How is it that Conservative could see this outcome, but Liberals could not? I will follow up with a post about EV's vs. petroleumpowered cars. Demonizing and defunding police has consequences.How come Conservatives see this but Liberals cannot? It is the Liberals who want to take away our guns. Readsome of these efforts by Illinois, Washington, New York, California, Oregon, etcc... What they want is to get their greedy paws on are rifles.However, handguns are used to kill many more Americans than rifles. Even knives are used to commit more murders than rifles. Google: U.S. Gun Deaths by Type of Gun. Conservative know why Liberals want our rifles, especiallythose with high capacity magazines. Listen, I would never use a weapon to kill anyone. It isagainst God's laws. However, the first thing to go before socialism takes over are always the guns. How is it that the cities with the most gun control lawsare the cities experiencing the most homicides. The illegals are registering and they will vote in the nextpresidential election. This is one of the reason that the Liberals allow them to pour across the border. It is kind of telling that when these illegals are shipped toLiberal controlled cities the Liberals then start to whine and complain. They do not care about these illegal immigrants, they aremerely pawns in their ultimate goal. America has too large of a middle class to pit the richagainst the poor. They must destroy the middle class. Until this happens they pit Blacks against Whites,Democrats against Republicans, and Christians against atheists. And in every situation they blame the conflicts on the Whites, the Republicans, and the Christians. They are dumbing America down. Our school standards are being lowered by every year. Weare constantly being outperformed by other developed countries. Some of the undeveloped countries are passing us up. The Liberals are in complete control of our schools anduniversities. And they have been for decades.They are responsible for this. They care more about indoctrination than they do aboutactually educating our kids. This is enough of this talk. But check out this Jen Psaki statement on YouTube, inwhich she admits they are out to strip Americans of our rights. "We Are Looking at Efforts to Prevent People FromExercising Their Fundamental Rights." You know, like they do in socialist countries such asNorth Korea and Venezuela. Stop getting all your news from indoctrination networks. When a news network is 100% one-sided a wise personwould question everything that the network says. Also on Youtube: "Varney: Trump Warned Europeans Against Relying on Russia,for their oil, gas supplies." Energy prices in Europe are increasing at greatlyaccelerated rates. Look it up. This same thing will happen to America, and soon.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Dwise, stop playing dumb. I never have played dumb. You are projecting again. You are the one who can never answer a simple question but rather must try to divert the discussion off-topic with long, long posts filled with stupid bullshit that only a stupid idiot would say and which never addresses the message you are "replying" to. You are trying to divert us from the topic instead of just answering the questions: From Message 2911 YET AGAIN!!!: dwise1 writes:
Here's another question you need to answer: If Life arose through natural processes, would that disprove Creation? Or God? WHY? Since you are so devoted to fake creationism, I predict that you will answer "Yes", that life having arisen through natural processes would disprove God. Therefore, the important part of that question is the "WHY?". Whatever would lead you to belief something so utterly stupid? You stated that you would answer those question, but you have not done so! So then now you are trying to avoid providing those answers to a few simple direct questions by posting all kinds of irrelevant nonsense. So what's keeping you? Stop your stupid stalling games and answer the fucking questions!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
GDR, I have stated on this forum many times that the
Word in John 1 is the member of The God family who became Jesus. Verse 14 makes it clear that the Word became fleshthrough a virgin birth. 2Timothy 3:15-17 states that all scripture is given byinspiration of God. All scripture is for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, forinstruction in righteousness. The Apostles taught from the scriptures years before thebooks of the NT were written. Paul, in the Book of Romans, quoted from the OT 84passages. In Hebrews he quoted the OT 83 times. He quoted from the OT in all His books except Philemonand Titus. Paul tells us that our faith has been built upon thefoundation of the Apostles and the OT Prophets. Ephesians 2:20. All of the NT writers quoted from the OT. Jesus believed in the accuracy of the OT. He states inLuke 24:44, "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I wasyet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me." 45. "Then opened He their understanding, that they mightunderstand the scriptures." The only scripture at the time was the OT. Jesus is the central theme of both Testaments. He wasour Creator; He was the One who wrote the 10 Commandments on stone; and, He was the One who led the Israelites out of Egypt. Read 1Corinthians 10:1-4. Paul is very clear in that Jesus(who at the time was the Word) was the One who led the Israelites in the cloud. The OT makes many predictions about Jesus. Not one ofthem has been false. Pretty good for a book of myths isn't it? I will give just a few: 1. He would be born of a virgin. Isaiah 7:14. Fulfilled Luke 1:35. 2.Born in Bethlehem. Micah 5:2. Fulfilled Matthew 2:4-6. 3.Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver. Zechariah 11:12-13.Fulfilled Matthew 27:6-10. 4. Christ would become our Passover. Exodus 12:46.Fulfilled 1Corinthians 5:7. 5. They would cast lots for His clothes. Psalms 22:18.Fulfilled John 19:23-24. 6. They would pierce His hands and feet. Psalms 22:16.Fulfilled John 19:36-37. 7. The scepter would come through them Judah (the Jews)Genesis 48:10. These are just a few. There are dozens of fulfilled OTprophecies about Christ. I can give you more, I'd you wish. You say that we can find support in the Bible for almostanything we want. Okay! Show me in the Bible where the OT is not to beaccepted literally. Show me where the OT it is said to be only a myth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.5
|
dwise1 in Message 2976 writes: You are the one who can never answer a simple question but rather must try to divert the discussion off-topic with long, long posts filled with stupid bullshit that only a stupid idiot would say and which never addresses the message you are "replying" to. I'm becoming more and more convinced that candle2 is a Russian Chatbot. The level of person to person communications is hovering just above zero. And the bullshit meters exploded a couple years ago.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that it has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --Percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
GDR, are you trying to equate the West with God? God
(Jesus) made those decisions to take life in the OT. God plainly tells us that He gives and He takes away. It isalso appointed for each of us to die. The bottom line with me is that I trust God to alwaysmake the right choices. . People are always blaming God. They blame Him when He allows evil to exist, and they blame Him when He does something about it. Also, you mentioned finding a verse in the Bible that onecan use to say pretty much anything. If you look at my posts (for instance, the ones about Godcreating a family) you will see that I use many verses. I utilize the writings of numerous authors. This is what God expects one to do. The example Hegives us is found in Isaiah 28:9-10. "Whom shall He teach knowledge? And whom shall Hemake to understand doctrine? Them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts." "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept;line upon line, line upon line; here a little and there a little." There are those who want to know more of God's truths.But they refuse to believe what is clearly written in His Holy Bible. When they do this He will not open their heart and mind to understanding other scipture.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
c2 writes: Okay! Show me in the Bible where the OT is not to beaccepted literally. Show me where the OT it is said to be only a myth. Sure. Read Matthew 5 and the opening to the "Sermon on the Mount". Just count the times when Jesus say that "you have heard it said but I tell you this" or some equivalent.Jesus says that we are to love our enemies but the OT has Yahweh commanding genocide, as well as the command to love others. Jesus discounts the sabbath laws saying that "the Sabbath made for man, not man for the sabbath. Yahweh commands public stoning to death for the poor scmuck picking up firewood on the sabbath. Jesus tells us that "all the law and the prophets" hang on the command to love God and neighbour with Matthew bringing the the two ideas int one. In Matthew 25 we have the story of the sheep and the goats with the sheep being the ones that followed the command to love and with Jesus telling them that they served the least of them they were doing it for Him. Like I said, you are making a false idol out of the Bible. It becomes your focus of worship which is a doctrine that was born out of a response to enlightenment. Christianity is about serving the God whose nature was perfectly lived out in the person of Jesus.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Dwise, I don't like evolution being taught in schools as
though it is actuality science based. I don't mind people believing in something as fairytaleishas evolution, but keep it to yourself. However, you will never take any explanation that I offerabout evolution. Now then, tell me how evolution works? Tell me howexactly evolution has led to millions of different animals and organisms. I want it in your words. I am not asking you about the origin of life, nor am Iasking how new codes and information is acquired. Just tell us your definition of evolution, and how evolutionhas led to millions of organisms. I am not the one pushing evolution. You are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
GDR, you are exactly right. The Sabbath was made for man.
It was made for our benefit. Jesus, as both the Creator and Lord, of the Sabbathintended for man to use the Sabbath day to rest from our work. Since creation He gave us a weekly model to live ourlife by. It is intended as a day to rest and to assemble ourselves with other Christians. The fourth Commandment was the easiest for Satanto attack. It was rather easy for him to manipulate us with philosophical reasoning. Some reason that any day will be accepted as the Sabbath.But, this not what the Bible states. Nor does the Bible state that Sunday replaces the Sabbath. The Sabbath reminds us of the Creator. Those who observethe Sabbath know that the teaching of evolution is satanic. GDR, since you are so full of love for your fellow man, areyou willing to die in the manner that Christ died for us? I can tell you right here and now that you would not. But, Christ, who has always existed with the other memberof the God family (Father), even before the universe was created, separated Himself from Him for 33 and a half years. They had never spent any time apart. The love betweenthem was/is deeper and stronger than we can imagine. Thirty three years is a very long time for a human to livewithout having those whom they dearly love with them. When you look at God you only see what Satan has put inyour heart to see. There were many times that Christ went without food. Hewas like all of us in that He could feel hunger. He could feel sadness. I cannot imagine the number of times that He sought outthe opportunity to pray to Him, to gain some comfort from Him. Christ loves us so much that He put Himself through aliving hell in order to gain us a resurrection from death. You should study up about crucifixion and the RomanLicters who were given the responsibility of scouring the condemned. They were highly trained and efficient and bringing thecondemned close to death without crossing over. Licters used a short rod with leather straps attached toit. Pieces of metal, bones, glass, ets..., were attached to the end of each strap. Each time the Licter hit Jesus with this cat-o-nine tailschucks of meat were ripped from Him. He was then forced to carry His own crucifixion beam.when He could no longer carry it, it was carried for Him. While He was nailed to the beam it was very difficult forHim to breathe. Each time He took a breath He had to push Himself up against nails in His hands an feet. Jesus dreaded this so much that He sweated blood. Heprayed to His Father asking if there were another way. But, there was not. His death as our Creator was/is theonly thing that could pay the penalty for sin in our place. He was not forced to do this. It was His choice. It wasa decision based on tremendous love. We need to keep in mind that we were bought at a price.It was a tremendous price. It is the greatest act of love that I can imagine. The veryOne who created us was willing to humble Himself and died in such a manner. GDR. where you have accusations, I have praise. There is coming a time to where men will pray for themountains to fall on them to hide them from the wrath of God. Men hearts will fail them out of fear. God can punish in the same way that loving parents do. However, God knows what it will take to correct the world. GDR, you are free to believe anything you want to believeabout the Bible. After all, you are responsible for your life, not me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member Posts: 850 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
GDR, you state that all the Commandments hang on two.
They are to love God with all our heart and to love our neighbor as we love ourself. The other Commandments hinge on these two. The first four Commandments are in reference to ourrelationship with God. The last six concerns our relationship with our fellow man. Which of the first four Commandments are we free todiscard, and why? Which of the last six are we free to discard, and why? What did Jesus mean when He said, "if you love me, youwill keep my Commandments," and My Commandments are nor grievous." You seen to think that I am making an idol of the Biblesimply because I trust it and follow it. What a weird way to think.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
candle2 writes: GDR, you state that all the Commandments hang on two.They are to love God with all our heart and to love our neighbor as we love ourself. The other Commandments hinge on these two. The first four Commandments are in reference to our relationship with God. The last six concerns our relationship with our fellow man. Which of the first four Commandments are we free to discard, and why? I have no problem with any of those 4. However you break #2 all the time by making a false idol out of the Bible and discounting Yahweh who we can understand as being perfectly embodied by Jesus.
candle2 writes:
No problem with the last six either. However as you agreed Jesus says that sabbath was meant for us to give us rest. It is not meant to be treated legalistically. If you needed firewood to keep your family warm on a cold sabbath day would you go pick some up? You seem to believe that if you were to do that God would want you cruelly executed by your neighbours. Which of the last six are we free to discard, and why? What did Jesus mean when He said, "if you love me, you will keep my Commandments," and My Commandments are nor grievous." You seen to think that I am making an idol of the Bible simply because I trust it and follow it. What a weird way to think. ...and that's not weird.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Dwise, I don't like evolution being taught in schools as though it is actuality science based. Sorry, but evolution is a part of science and therefore it's "actuality science based. It belongs in science class and needs to be learned, especially by creationists (much more on that below). Indeed:
quote: Supporting that was the experience of Dr. Eugenie Scott when she was teaching Physical Anthropology. At her university, undergraduate biology students weren't taught evolution, but she did. Every semester, she'd get a number of biology seniors taking her class to satisfy their degree's elective requirements, figuring it would be an easy A ("The poor fools!", she said). Then throughout the semester she would watch the light suddenly go on in each one's head: "So that is why ... !" In four years they had learned all kinds of facts and factoids, none of which really made much sense, until now that they had learned evolution. Similarly, my nephew hated science class because of how it was taught, tons of individual facts to memorize without anything to tie them together. My sons excelled in science class, because their mother and I had raised them with our attitude that it does all tie together and here is how; armed with that, we could reason through all kinds of new information and be able to see when something didn't quite make sense. In the history of the revival of the 1920's anti-evolution movement leading to the creation of that deliberately crafted deception, "creation science" (AKA "scientific creationism"), the four-decades-long successful barring of evolution from public schools was broken by the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) biology text books written by actual biologists instead of by professional textbook writers -- that series was written as part of our "closing the science education gap" with the Soviets after they surprised us by launching Sputnik (revisit the movie, Dr. Strangelove to hear the rhetoric of "we must close the missile gap", "... bomb gap", "... mine gap", etc, still popular c. 1964 though no longer when I saw it in high school (1966-1969) so it sounded a bit foreign to my young ears). Being biologists, the BSCS authors knew that evolution is the cornerstone of biology, so their textbooks were filled with evolution. The school district in Little Rock, AR, adopted the BSCS textbooks which put biology teacher Susan Epperson in jeopardy of losing her teaching credential for violating the Arkansas "monkey law", which led to her lawsuit, which led to the US Supreme Court decision, Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), led to the striking down of all the monkey laws, which awakened the anti-evolution movement who wasted half a decade using their religious purpose in court (and losing) until they figured out that they had to hide their religious purpose, hence "creation science" (as we have discussed several times before). But of course, I'm talking about evolution, whereas you are not. That's the source of your problem and of your terminal confusion: You do not know what evolution is so you base everything on creationist lies about "evolution". You use the word, "evolution", to describe something that has practically nothing at all to do with evolution. I would also not want what you call "evolution" to be taught in schools, but then that is not evolution, now is it? Your "evolution" is indeed "fairytaleish" (especially with its utter nonsense such as having dogs give birth to kittens) and you should keep it to yourself! Above I wrote:
dwise1 writes: Sorry, but evolution is a part of science and therefore it's "actuality science based. It belongs in science class and needs to be learned, especially by creationists (much more on that below). The way for you to stop being misled and deceived by creationist lies about "evolution" is to learn evolution. That is especially true if you want to actually fight against evolution. If you were to know what evolution actually is, then you could direct all your efforts against evolution instead of against a stupid bullshit creationist strawman that has practically nothing whatsoever to do with your real target. Amazon Prime had a documentary about the WWII US Army unit, 23rd Headquarters Special Troops, AKA "The Ghost Army":
quote: Your bullshit strawman "evolution" is nothing but a ghost decoying you away from your real enemy. And you fell for it, you idiot! I'll continue after I return from class. Edited by dwise1, : corrected bold tag
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024