Answers in Genesis [Archive] - Kentucky Sports Forum

BaseballMan

05-20-2008, 08:33 PM

There are many answers that can be found in the book of Genesis as well as the rest of the Bible. The site has already been posted many times and can be found accurately by seaching the google button. Many of life's questions can be found by searching for the truth in the Bible, and from scholarly men who conduct an exegesis of the Bible.

There are some who think I have broken rules, and I apologize for that. I was only abiding by what an administrator instructed me to do with posting information. However, I hold tight to my findings. Evolution that teaches we evolved from primordial soup is wrong and leads to many things that are not good. There is a difference in this type of evolution I have explained and the fact that animals and populations can adapt. That is observable, but there is no evidence for Darwinian evolution.

I expected to be challenged on these views, and it has been great to discuss, but I didn't expect someone may completely try and wipe out these threads by saying they are false information. None of the information I posted was wrong or misleading. The guys who came up with the posted website did so because they wanted to tell the world that we're being led astray by our own thinking and not following the Word of God. I have found that to be very true among many posts I have seen here.

So I challenge anyone who wants to discuss any of these current events concerning intelligent design vs. evolution to google information about it and be open minded taking in information from all angles. I urge you to think of the basis for your beliefs, and hope you discover the truth.

ComfortEagle

05-20-2008, 08:48 PM

BaseballMan

05-20-2008, 08:59 PM

With this, my final word on the subject will be for those of you who have been following these topics and websites to visit www.aigbusted.com

That is the link to Answers in Genesis Busted.

Please check out this site that has been posted. But do it with an open mind. Then check out the site I have posted. See where the true evidence lies. See whose information is more credible. Discover where the real lies are coming from.

Coach_Owens87

05-20-2008, 09:08 PM

With this, my final word on the subject will be for those of you who have been following these topics and websites to visit www.aigbusted.com

That is the link to Answers in Genesis Busted.

IMO someone shouldnt have to visit this site to know that a lot of information given by AIG is mostly crap. They use statements from scientist, and scientific facts and manipulate them in order to fit their agenda (They would make great politicians). They try to make it seem that science and religion cant mix, and because of people and sites it's been a struggle to get people to see things with an open mind. Everything in science does not challenge god, and IMO a lot of science just shows evidence that god must exist.

BaseballMan

05-20-2008, 09:18 PM

IMO someone shouldnt have to visit this site to know that a lot of information given by AIG is mostly crap. They use statements from scientist, and scientific facts and manipulate them in order to fit their agenda (They would make great politicians). They try to make it seem that science and religion cant mix, and because of people and sites it's been a struggle to get people to see things with an open mind. Everything in science does not challenge god, and IMO a lot of science just shows evidence that god must exist.

Actually, you must have never read the site. They never once say science and religion can't mix. As a matter of fact, they always use science to support their information. Go read for yourself. You'll see this. I've never posted anything that even says science challenges God, but everything is completely opposite. So who has the real agenda here?

Coach_Owens87

05-20-2008, 11:02 PM

Actually, you must have never read the site. They never once say science and religion can't mix. As a matter of fact, they always use science to support their information. Go read for yourself. You'll see this. I've never posted anything that even says science challenges God, but everything is completely opposite. So who has the real agenda here?

Ive read every article you have posted from that site. I guess you could say they use science, but I think the more appropriate world we be manipulate. They take things that are known in science and twist and distort that information in order to make their views seem correct. On many of your articles they use false information to convey their views.

When you completely distort evolution, and lie about scientific findings, it makes it seem that science and religion can't mix because they seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum, which isnt true in all situations. I have no agenda, and frankly dont care what AIG, or any other site of the sort has to say. I dont need someone to read the bible for me, and I don't need someone to tell me what is true in science (Im a biology major). Taking information and changing it to fit your idea seems like an agenda to me.

BaseballMan

05-23-2008, 11:30 AM

Ive read every article you have posted from that site. I guess you could say they use science, but I think the more appropriate world we be manipulate. They take things that are known in science and twist and distort that information in order to make their views seem correct. On many of your articles they use false information to convey their views.

When you completely distort evolution, and lie about scientific findings, it makes it seem that science and religion can't mix because they seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum, which isnt true in all situations. I have no agenda, and frankly dont care what AIG, or any other site of the sort has to say. I dont need someone to read the bible for me, and I don't need someone to tell me what is true in science (Im a biology major). Taking information and changing it to fit your idea seems like an agenda to me.

Could it be said that evolutionists distort evidence to fit their theory? I think so. And there are many instances to provide evidence of such. I have seen where many scientists take the evidence found and try to fit a square peg into a round hole. At least these scientists at AiG use the same evidence to prove their point that it holds true to the biblical account of creation. Their agenda is to show that God's Word in Genesis is literal and true. Evidence strongly supports their claim. Darwinian evolutionists have an agenda of proving the world evolved from primodial soup. They have the same evidence, but have to keep changing their story to fit the evidence every decade or so.

I'm glad you don't need someone to read the bible for you. But you should study the bible to show yourself approved. That's the command for followers. Because you're a biology major doesn't mean anything other than you've been taught evolution from a one-sided stance. Take the same evidence, go to the site with an open mind, and see if it fits. Then go study Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and study from the original texts of Scripture. The fact remains: If you believe the book of Genesis is not literal, then you undermine your own proclaimed faith in Jesus. It is because of the fall, the sin of Adam and Eve, that death entered the world. That is the same reason Jesus came to die to save your soul. If you take away the first, then the latter is useless. If dinosaurs lived and died before humans ever came about, then death was already in the world, and therefore God is a great deceiver and Christianity is nothing more than a myth. And when you study Hebrew correctly, and understand what the words mean, then you see that God didn't mean thousands or millions of years when Moses wrote about how He made the world in Genesis 1. Therefore, you either believe the the scriptures of God mean what they say, or you undermine your own faith and don't really know what you believe in.

Amun-Ra

05-28-2008, 08:56 AM

Scientists lie, AIG lies, everyone is lying. Maybe life is a lie. Maybe it is all a dream????

BaseballMan

05-28-2008, 03:23 PM

Scientists lie, AIG lies, everyone is lying. Maybe life is a lie. Maybe it is all a dream????

John 8:31-32 (ESV)
31To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

Maybe there is the truth, and maybe some are afraid that it may be the truth so they choose to think it is all just a dream. Not a very good or effective philosophy to think a chair is not a chair, but its just all in your mind. Besides, if you actually have anything solid to share, then do so. Your sarcasm is refreshing, but nonetheless, ineffective in sharing any knowledge you have.

EKY Sportster

05-29-2008, 07:03 PM

thecavemaster

05-29-2008, 08:01 PM

I can tell you all one thing - if anyone believes that they evolved from some lesser species or that the earth and all of the perfect parameters necessary for its existence just evolved; then you are living in a fantasy land. I have read the Bible and I can't say that I have all of the answers, but I don't personally think it necessary to even know about the Bible to know that we didn't just evolve and end up here on perfect life sustaining planet Earth. As for the Bible, it gives as good an explanation as any other. I prefer to stick with my faith. Evolution makes no sense IMO!

Christoper Hinchens, Stephen Hawking et. al. make a considered, thoughtful case for the evolutionary process. Why is it necessary in order to demonstrate one's own faith to invalidate someone else's beliefs? If one is secure in what they believe, they are not threatened to the point of inflammatory rhetoric in defense of their own faith/beliefs.

EKY Sportster

05-30-2008, 08:24 PM

Hey to each their own! But they better hope they are right! That's all I'm going to say on it. At least I don't have any worries!

ComfortEagle

05-30-2008, 10:27 PM

Hey to each their own! But they better hope they are right! That's all I'm going to say on it. At least I don't have any worries!

Believing in evolution and believing in Christ are two different things. Who's to say God doesn't use evolution? We don't know, we may never know.

Mr.Kimball

05-31-2008, 02:58 PM

Believing in evolution and believing in Christ are two different things. Who's to say God doesn't use evolution? We don't know, we may never know.
Doesn't sound to me like he used evolution when you read about Adam and Eve.

ComfortEagle

05-31-2008, 08:36 PM

Doesn't sound to me like he used evolution when you read about Adam and Eve.

Maybe not, but we have evolved since then and other animals have evolved over time as well. Why is it such a bad thing? God gave us the ability to adapt to different situations, lifestyles, habitats, etc. then why reject it?

Panther Thunder

06-01-2008, 11:24 AM

BaseballMan

06-01-2008, 04:27 PM

Maybe not, but we have evolved since then and other animals have evolved over time as well. Why is it such a bad thing? God gave us the ability to adapt to different situations, lifestyles, habitats, etc. then why reject it?

It is a different type of evolution that you are speaking of however. Yes, we adapt to our environments, and animals adapt to their environments, but that in no way proves or shows that we evolved from primordial soup because of our environments.

Darwinian evolution is a bad thing mostly because it was given as an alternate view to creation. Darwin himself denounced his faith and gave this idea from his studies. Although Darwin was very intelligent, he was also biased in his theories.

God is the one who divided us at the Tower of Babel. It is because of Him that we speak different languages, live all over the world, etc. The humans defyed the command of God to multiply and fill the earth. Humans decided to glorify and worship their own minds and abilities (sound familiar). It still happens today.

The only thing I reject is the fact that Darwinian evolution dismisses the God of the Bible, and it rejects the historically reliable fact that Jesus died and resurrected to defeat death which entered the world through the fall of Adam and Eve. Instead, it pushes that death and decay were part of the world for millions of years, and then humans came at some point, but it isn't because of their sin that death entered the world. It's just like that, so essentially the entire orthodoxy of christian belief becomes invalid. However, it is not historically reliable.

thecavemaster

06-01-2008, 07:08 PM

It is a different type of evolution that you are speaking of however. Yes, we adapt to our environments, and animals adapt to their environments, but that in no way proves or shows that we evolved from primordial soup because of our environments.

Darwinian evolution is a bad thing mostly because it was given as an alternate view to creation. Darwin himself denounced his faith and gave this idea from his studies. Although Darwin was very intelligent, he was also biased in his theories.

God is the one who divided us at the Tower of Babel. It is because of Him that we speak different languages, live all over the world, etc. The humans defyed the command of God to multiply and fill the earth. Humans decided to glorify and worship their own minds and abilities (sound familiar). It still happens today.

The only thing I reject is the fact that Darwinian evolution dismisses the God of the Bible, and it rejects the historically reliable fact that Jesus died and resurrected to defeat death which entered the world through the fall of Adam and Eve. Instead, it pushes that death and decay were part of the world for millions of years, and then humans came at some point, but it isn't because of their sin that death entered the world. It's just like that, so essentially the entire orthodoxy of christian belief becomes invalid. However, it is not historically reliable.

"We walk by faith and not by sight..." Digging through archaeological sights for the elusive ark and other such endeavors, then turning to a doubting or unbelieving world and saying, "See, see, we told you; we told you." I believe; therefore, evidence as the world counts it is non-essential. Flesh understands flesh; spirit understands spirit.

BaseballMan

06-01-2008, 07:25 PM

"We walk by faith and not by sight..." Digging through archaeological sights for the elusive ark and other such endeavors, then turning to a doubting or unbelieving world and saying, "See, see, we told you; we told you." I believe; therefore, evidence as the world counts it is non-essential. Flesh understands flesh; spirit understands spirit.

2 Corinthians 5:6-10
6So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. 10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

We walk by faith and not by sight is a present and future message. It means, as a believer, even though we don't know what will happen, even if it is hard, then we will go on. It means we are to do good in our earthly bodies because we know we will be judged. We will walk by faith, but not by which what we see. It has nothing to do with archaelogy or evolution.

Archaelogy has to do with historical things - things that have already happened. We can know that Jesus actually lived according to eyewitness biographies as well as secular documents. We can give great evidence for his resurrection according to minimal historical facts. We can also determine by scriptures that the world didn't evolve from primordial soup, and all the evidence - archeology, etc. - actually support a created young earth.

Evidence is essential, especially for historical claims. If there were no evidence for George Washington, then why we would teach he is our first president.

BaseballMan

06-01-2008, 07:45 PM

Christoper Hinchens, Stephen Hawking et. al. make a considered, thoughtful case for the evolutionary process. Why is it necessary in order to demonstrate one's own faith to invalidate someone else's beliefs? If one is secure in what they believe, they are not threatened to the point of inflammatory rhetoric in defense of their own faith/beliefs.

I don't doubt these men have made a long considered and thoughtful case for the evolutionary process. If it were not so, then it would have easily dwindled away.

It is necessary for you, if you claim to be a christian or a follower of Christ, to know that evolution describing the earth evolved from primoridal soup from a possible big bang in which life originated and then eventually let into smaller bacteria and into dinosaurs, monkeys, and eventually into humans in contradictory to the faith you would claim in Jesus as your Savior. Jesus could not have died to defeat death for you if yours sins were not the cause for death. If the fall of man did not let death enter the world, then the rest of the bible is pointless. Therefore, under close examination, you contradict your own faith by saying death was in the world millions of years before the first humans.

NO, if one is secure in their faith, then according to the words of Christ, we are to share that faith with the world and make disciples of all nations. And how are we to show that faith unless we can back it up with historical reliability. Why share what we believe to be true unless we can examine it closely to prove it above all other beliefs?

Romans 6:23
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

thecavemaster

06-01-2008, 09:30 PM

2 Corinthians 5:6-10
6So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. 10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

We walk by faith and not by sight is a present and future message. It means, as a believer, even though we don't know what will happen, even if it is hard, then we will go on. It means we are to do good in our earthly bodies because we know we will be judged. We will walk by faith, but not by which what we see. It has nothing to do with archaelogy or evolution.

Archaelogy has to do with historical things - things that have already happened. We can know that Jesus actually lived according to eyewitness biographies as well as secular documents. We can give great evidence for his resurrection according to minimal historical facts. We can also determine by scriptures that the world didn't evolve from primordial soup, and all the evidence - archeology, etc. - actually support a created young earth.

Evidence is essential, especially for historical claims. If there were no evidence for George Washington, then why we would teach he is our first president.

Are you suggesting that the historical evidence for jesus being born of a virgin et. al. is as documented, as verifiable, as unequivocal as that for George Washington? "Thou art a god who hidest thyself" ...prophet Isaiah...

BaseballMan

06-02-2008, 02:42 PM

Are you suggesting that the historical evidence for jesus being born of a virgin et. al. is as documented, as verifiable, as unequivocal as that for George Washington? "Thou art a god who hidest thyself" ...prophet Isaiah...

No. And how you read that from my previous post, I don't understand. I am simply saying there is historically reliable evidence that Jesus was real, that He did what the Bible claimed He did, and that there was an uprising in faith after His resurrection. There are even secular documents that talk about the faith of the early believers, and how they were persecuted. There is evidence of Saul of Tarsus's conversion who persecuted the early church, and he later became the apostle Paul after his own eyewitness account.

Jesus was who He said He was. He did what He said He would. He said, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." He is the image of God. He died for a reason, and did not resist it, but was led like a lamb to the slaughter. He did it to defeat death that entered the world through Adam which you can read about in Genesis. The answers are there to the origin of this world. The evidence is there for Jesus' account in history. The faith is real and it is separate from all other in the world. Jesus said, "No one can come to the Father except through Me." That means you abide by His teaching and His words that proclaim Him to be the Son of God, the only way to Heaven, or you don't go. That's His truth, That's His way, That's the life.

Amun-Ra

06-02-2008, 03:27 PM

thecavemaster

06-02-2008, 06:17 PM

No. And how you read that from my previous post, I don't understand. I am simply saying there is historically reliable evidence that Jesus was real, that He did what the Bible claimed He did, and that there was an uprising in faith after His resurrection. There are even secular documents that talk about the faith of the early believers, and how they were persecuted. There is evidence of Saul of Tarsus's conversion who persecuted the early church, and he later became the apostle Paul after his own eyewitness account.

Jesus was who He said He was. He did what He said He would. He said, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." He is the image of God. He died for a reason, and did not resist it, but was led like a lamb to the slaughter. He did it to defeat death that entered the world through Adam which you can read about in Genesis. The answers are there to the origin of this world. The evidence is there for Jesus' account in history. The faith is real and it is separate from all other in the world. Jesus said, "No one can come to the Father except through Me." That means you abide by His teaching and His words that proclaim Him to be the Son of God, the only way to Heaven, or you don't go. That's His truth, That's His way, That's the life.

"Evidence is essential, especially for historical claims" (your words)... followed immediately by a direct example/reference to George Washington. I would think it pretty clear how I took the inference.

BaseballMan

06-03-2008, 03:43 PM

The reason for my sarcasm was due to the fact the all your posts are essientally the same and when people post their views, you shoot them down with some kind of novel. Only now you dont't post the link to the site you are reciting from.
And as for the knowledge I have, yes it is ineffective because the only thing you pay attention to is what you have to say.

Now go ahead and post some scripture or something you got from your other site to make me look like a fool. Really I enjoy it.

My posts refer to a truth which is the same and has been the same since the beginning of time. There is no views that have invalidated it and therefore it sticks as the answer. If you wish to try, then go ahead. Investigate for yourself the truth of God, and I can assuredly tell you that you will discover it's true validity in the end under close examination.

As for my words, all have been my own. If I use something from somewhere else, I put it in quotes or site a reference.

Scripture has far more weight than any words I could come up with. They are the inspired, God-breathed, words of the Creator. It is very effective and has been affecting people's lives since the beginning.

Nothing I say makes you look like a fool. You do that all by yourself.

BaseballMan

06-03-2008, 03:52 PM

"Evidence is essential, especially for historical claims" (your words)... followed immediately by a direct example/reference to George Washington. I would think it pretty clear how I took the inference.

Evidence is essential, especially for historical claims. If there were no evidence for George Washington, then why we would teach he is our first president.

That's what I said. It means that we know by close examination and written documentation that GW was our first president, and we know much about his life. By that same process, we know that Jesus lived, taught, and was crucified. By historically reliable documentation, we have references to his resurrection, over 500 eyewitness accounts, and radically changed lives who believed to the point of death under persecution.

We have more evidence for George Washington because it is closer to modern time, but we have a great deal of verifiable documentation for the life of Jesus as well - more so than Julius Caesar and many other great people of before Christ, and we write large sections about that smaller amount of information in our history texts.

thecavemaster

06-03-2008, 04:36 PM

Evidence is essential, especially for historical claims. If there were no evidence for George Washington, then why we would teach he is our first president.

That's what I said. It means that we know by close examination and written documentation that GW was our first president, and we know much about his life. By that same process, we know that Jesus lived, taught, and was crucified. By historically reliable documentation, we have references to his resurrection, over 500 eyewitness accounts, and radically changed lives who believed to the point of death under persecution.

We have more evidence for George Washington because it is closer to modern time, but we have a great deal of verifiable documentation for the life of Jesus as well - more so than Julius Caesar and many other great people of before Christ, and we write large sections about that smaller amount of information in our history texts.

Josephus, Flavius...et al. men and women argue back and forth as to reliability, as to who knew what and to what degree of historical accuracy. Here is my point: if I read the Gospels, find there a figure that captivates my imagination, challenges my worldview, divides my prejudices, exposes my frailty, speaks to somewhere deep within me, then (personally) I don't need to find ancient artifacts to believe. A still, small voice witnesses to a truth no artifact can illuminate. The earliest believers had no such tome upon tome of voluminous verbage, yet they were burned in flames, devoured by lions. Love and gratitude produce a loyalty no book can fathom.

BaseballMan

06-03-2008, 04:57 PM

Josephus, Flavius...et al. men and women argue back and forth as to reliability, as to who knew what and to what degree of historical accuracy. Here is my point: if I read the Gospels, find there a figure that captivates my imagination, challenges my worldview, divides my prejudices, exposes my frailty, speaks to somewhere deep within me, then (personally) I don't need to find ancient artifacts to believe. A still, small voice witnesses to a truth no artifact can illuminate. The earliest believers had no such tome upon tome of voluminous verbage, yet they were burned in flames, devoured by lions. Love and gratitude produce a loyalty no book can fathom.

I don't need ancient artifacts to believe either.

John 20:29 "... Blessed are those who have believed and not seen."

I did not start believing because of ancient artifacts or small voices in my head. God tugged at my heart and gave me the sense that what I was doing was right and true. He called me out of my sinful lifestyle and into an abundant life of love and goodness. Although I still mess up at times, my life is much better than it was. I have more character, am more confident, and have peace.

The reason I enjoy giving information about the historically reliability of Jesus and the answers in Genesis is because in the book of Timothy, Paul urges him to study to show yourself approved. And in so, it is more of all christians to study to show ourselves approved. It is good to take our beliefs under close examination and compare them to the worldviews and beliefs of others - wheter it be evolution, Islam, Sufi Mystics, or any other. And I have found through much study that Biblical Christianity surpasses all other worldviews and religions as to historically reliable evidence, artifacts, documents, etc. It makes sense and has logical and good explanations for our whole world and meaning. It doesn't make things too spiritual or anything else. When put to the test, the God of the Bible and His Son Jesus stand firm while all else seems to crumble around them.

thecavemaster

06-03-2008, 05:50 PM

I don't need ancient artifacts to believe either.

John 20:29 "... Blessed are those who have believed and not seen."

I did not start believing because of ancient artifacts or small voices in my head. God tugged at my heart and gave me the sense that what I was doing was right and true. He called me out of my sinful lifestyle and into an abundant life of love and goodness. Although I still mess up at times, my life is much better than it was. I have more character, am more confident, and have peace.

The reason I enjoy giving information about the historically reliability of Jesus and the answers in Genesis is because in the book of Timothy, Paul urges him to study to show yourself approved. And in so, it is more of all christians to study to show ourselves approved. It is good to take our beliefs under close examination and compare them to the worldviews and beliefs of others - wheter it be evolution, Islam, Sufi Mystics, or any other. And I have found through much study that Biblical Christianity surpasses all other worldviews and religions as to historically reliable evidence, artifacts, documents, etc. It makes sense and has logical and good explanations for our whole world and meaning. It doesn't make things too spiritual or anything else. When put to the test, the God of the Bible and His Son Jesus stand firm while all else seems to crumble around them.

I cannot fathom a literal seven day event. However, I am deeply moved by a destitute beggar, used and ignored by this world, being carried into portals of bliss, within the consciousness of a proud and rich system where silver and gold count for more than flesh and blood: a parable illuminated by Revelation 18.

BaseballMan

06-03-2008, 06:28 PM

I cannot fathom a literal seven day event. However, I am deeply moved by a destitute beggar, used and ignored by this world, being carried into portals of bliss, within the consciousness of a proud and rich system where silver and gold count for more than flesh and blood: a parable illuminated by Revelation 18.

If you can fathom God as being the supreme creator as the bible proclaims Him to be, then it is not hard to fathom He made the world and everything in it in 7 literal days. He is much greater than us, His wisdom far outdoes ours, His works are far greater, His knowledge is supreme as he knows all and can be everywhere all at once. He is God, He is the Creator, He is the Judge. And since He is so wonderfully good, it is not difficult to believe His words and His works.

Super-Card

06-04-2008, 08:11 AM

My posts refer to a truth which is the same and has been the same since the beginning of time. There is no views that have invalidated it and therefore it sticks as the answer. If you wish to try, then go ahead. Investigate for yourself the truth of God, and I can assuredly tell you that you will discover it's true validity in the end under close examination.

As for my words, all have been my own. If I use something from somewhere else, I put it in quotes or site a reference.

Scripture has far more weight than any words I could come up with. They are the inspired, God-breathed, words of the Creator. It is very effective and has been affecting people's lives since the beginning.

Nothing I say makes you look like a fool. You do that all by yourself.

So the Bible that is written by mortal men is actually written by God? People that are under his influence I assume. Such people as Charles Manson and the Klu Klux Klan (that also claim to to God's will). So why is it ok to assume that long ago when people talked to God it was ok, and now when someone does it they are crazy? Who is to say that Moses, David, or anyone else in the Bible was not a nut-job?

Fact of the matter is the Bible since written by men is flawed since humans are flawed creatures. Bible's don't fall from heaven. God dosn't Fed-Ex them to people they are mass produced by the lowest bidder. They are just as fiction as The Davinci Code or Forrest Gump.

Amun-Ra

06-04-2008, 09:23 AM

My posts refer to a truth which is the same and has been the same since the beginning of time. There is no views that have invalidated it and therefore it sticks as the answer. If you wish to try, then go ahead. Investigate for yourself the truth of God, and I can assuredly tell you that you will discover it's true validity in the end under close examination.

As for my words, all have been my own. If I use something from somewhere else, I put it in quotes or site a reference.

Scripture has far more weight than any words I could come up with. They are the inspired, God-breathed, words of the Creator. It is very effective and has been affecting people's lives since the beginning.

Nothing I say makes you look like a fool. You do that all by yourself.
Getting mad? That's not very Christian like. What did you expect when you came on an open forum and started discussing religion? Some people are going to have different views than you. Accept that. But you don't. You try preaching. And it starts an internet fight. And I think it is funny because you did exactly what I said you would do. You don't listen to anyone else's opinion and when they post their's, you immediatley try to shoot it down by saying disprove God. Are you serious? Who can do that? But at the sametime when someone tells you to disprove what science has explained, you do that by posting things that are faith based. All that is, is an opinion man. Not everybody believes what you you believe. And when they don't, obviously you get angry. I can see you now, at your computer seething.
The only thing that I got aggrevated at was that you use the same methods in every argument. It is like you use the same answers for different topics. I dunno. It just got funny.
And by the way, I believe in God. And I believe He is my saviour. i just don't see things the way that you do. And that isn't open to discussion because I don't have to come on here and prove my faith to you. Because that would be useless.

BaseballMan

06-09-2008, 11:14 AM

So the Bible that is written by mortal men is actually written by God? People that are under his influence I assume. Such people as Charles Manson and the Klu Klux Klan (that also claim to to God's will). So why is it ok to assume that long ago when people talked to God it was ok, and now when someone does it they are crazy? Who is to say that Moses, David, or anyone else in the Bible was not a nut-job?

Fact of the matter is the Bible since written by men is flawed since humans are flawed creatures. Bible's don't fall from heaven. God dosn't Fed-Ex them to people they are mass produced by the lowest bidder. They are just as fiction as The Davinci Code or Forrest Gump.

The Bible itself declares this - not me. I simply put my faith in the Words because they have shown through the ages to be infallible and true. There are always people who claim God did this or God did that, but that does not make them credible. You can tell this because of their fruit, or the way their lives were lived. Moses and other inspired writers of the OT and NT were great leaders. Also, all of their writings can be backed up with historical evidences and holds true against the closest examination.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

BaseballMan

06-09-2008, 11:20 AM

Getting mad? That's not very Christian like. What did you expect when you came on an open forum and started discussing religion? Some people are going to have different views than you. Accept that. But you don't. You try preaching. And it starts an internet fight. And I think it is funny because you did exactly what I said you would do. You don't listen to anyone else's opinion and when they post their's, you immediatley try to shoot it down by saying disprove God. Are you serious? Who can do that? But at the sametime when someone tells you to disprove what science has explained, you do that by posting things that are faith based. All that is, is an opinion man. Not everybody believes what you you believe. And when they don't, obviously you get angry. I can see you now, at your computer seething.
The only thing that I got aggrevated at was that you use the same methods in every argument. It is like you use the same answers for different topics. I dunno. It just got funny.
And by the way, I believe in God. And I believe He is my saviour. i just don't see things the way that you do. And that isn't open to discussion because I don't have to come on here and prove my faith to you. Because that would be useless.

Actually, you are completely wrong. Jesus showed his anger a few times. Have you ever read about the den of thieves? The Bible speaks a righteous anger; however, I am not angry with you. I just gave you a stern explanation.

I don't try to ask anyone to disprove God. I ask them to disprove the things we have - such as the Bible and the evidences that support it. If you have a belief, you should be able to defend it under close examination.

The book of Timothy tells us to study to show ourselves approved. Can you tell me why you believe Jesus to be your savior? Also, if that is the case, then great for you. But I am not mad at you, so don't think just because someone gives you a stern answer with confidence that it is the truth means they are seething or angry.

Super-Card

06-09-2008, 01:54 PM

The Bible itself declares this - not me. I simply put my faith in the Words because they have shown through the ages to be infallible and true. There are always people who claim God did this or God did that, but that does not make them credible. You can tell this because of their fruit, or the way their lives were lived. Moses and other inspired writers of the OT and NT were great leaders. Also, all of their writings can be backed up with historical evidences and holds true against the closest examination.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Ok. So all of the writings can be backed up by historical evidences. Show me some real proof that Jesus rose from the grave. Show me some real proof that there is a god or heaven. Show it to me. Get out photo's of Jesus rising. Give me heaven's address. Something more than your little book written by people no more qualifed to write than JK Rowling. There is no proof. You throw around all this junk like you have all the answers, but you are just a person standing there looking for someone to solve all your problems for you. You look to the sky and hope everything you want will fall right out for you to take. Some of the Cardinals and other high ranking Catholic officals (some even claim the Pope) who have lived by God's words are nothing more than pedophiles. So does that mean they lived fruitfully lives. Who is to say Moses wasn't a pedophile? You wern't there so you can't a-test to the fruitfulness of his life. The only thing fruity here is you and your posts.

Moses may have inspired, but so did Hitler, Manson, Bundy, and even Bin Laden. So I guess they deserve their own passages as well.

BaseballMan

06-09-2008, 02:08 PM

Ok. So all of the writings can be backed up by historical evidences. Show me some real proof that Jesus rose from the grave. Show me some real proof that there is a god or heaven. Show it to me. Get out photo's of Jesus rising. Give me heaven's address. Something more than your little book written by people no more qualifed to write than JK Rowling. There is no proof. You throw around all this junk like you have all the answers, but you are just a person standing there looking for someone to solve all your problems for you. You look to the sky and hope everything you want will fall right out for you to take. Some of the Cardinals and other high ranking Catholic officals (some even claim the Pope) who have lived by God's words are nothing more than pedophiles. So does that mean they lived fruitfully lives. Who is to say Moses wasn't a pedophile? You wern't there so you can't a-test to the fruitfulness of his life. The only thing fruity here is you and your posts.

Moses may have inspired, but so did Hitler, Manson, Bundy, and even Bin Laden. So I guess they deserve their own passages as well.

If you wish to buy yourself a copy of The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel, it will save me a lot of time. In this book you can find out the historical evidence that convincingly supports the eyewitness accounts for Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. There are no pictures or addresses for you, but you can see clearly that based on historical documents Jesus lived and did what the Scriptures say He did.

I don't look to the sky and hope something falls for me. I don't act like I have all the answers. I am stating that the inspired Word of God does have the answers. Another book for you to look into, Why I Still Believe by Joe Boot, will intrigue your mind about why the world just makes sense through faith in the God of the Bible.

You make claims about the fallibility of humans. We all know that humans are not perfect. But you see, I don't claim in the perfection of any ordinary humans. I claim in the perfection of God and His Son, Jesus.

I can test the fruitfulness of Moses' life based on the historical evidence for it. We can know that He was a man of great faith who wrote the Pentateuch, the first 5 books of the Bible. We can know how He led the Hebrew people out of slavery in Egypt. The Bible even speaks of him as a fallible man at times, so he was not perfect. Neither was David perfect, who committed adultery with Bathsheba, which is clearly mentioned in the Bible and we know it to be an abomination to God. You see, you have to look a little deeper to see that God shows us that we have messed up, and that without Him, our lives would be nothing, and only with Him can we see the real picture.

You make irrational insults and think that it accounts for knowledge, and you show that you have no true knowledge of any of the subject at hand based on your posts. You can insult me all you wish, but please at least try to read and understand what the posts are saying before you go on ranting foolishness. With your last statement, you have shown that you hold no real knowledge to this situation.

BaseballMan

06-09-2008, 02:27 PM

If you want to know more about the teaching that God has inspired men to write the Bible, go to this website:

http://www.calvarybaptisthsv.org/doctrine/detail.php?id=7

thecavemaster

06-09-2008, 03:15 PM

If you want to know more about the teaching that God has inspired men to write the Bible, go to this website:

http://www.calvarybaptisthsv.org/doctrine/detail.php?id=7

It is not those who know exactly what they believe and what they must do who irritate others; it is those who know exactly what others must believe and what others must do...here is the irritant.

RammsteinFan92

06-09-2008, 03:28 PM

BaseballMan

06-10-2008, 12:38 PM

It is not those who know exactly what they believe and what they must do who irritate others; it is those who know exactly what others must believe and what others must do...here is the irritant.

What? No one on the website is telling you what you must believe and neither am I. You are free to believe whatever you wish. I'm just challenging what you believe for you to examine it a little deeper to find out what is really true. Sorry if that irritaes you, but if one sincerely believes in something and has studied to find it more accurate and undeniable above all else, they should share that with others to challenge them to examine their own way.

BaseballMan

06-10-2008, 12:45 PM

Evolution is just as Justifiable as Creationism....cause look at both of the answers to the begging of the world

Creationism: God Made Anything and everything and we know cause the bible tells us so....no one saw it but we know this to be true

Evoulution: we Believe that things evolved out of one cell and we have science to back us up...

BOTH ARE JUSTIFILABLE\]

and i'm not stateing my views on this so nobody won't bash me or anything

Actually, the same science you refer to supports Creationism. What's more is that creationism also has the Bible as the absolute authority to help determine what happens. If you would actually take some time and read about it, you'd understand this better. There is actually no science that supports Darwinian Evolution. There is observable science that animals adapt to their environments, but nothing that ever proves one animal changed into another. However, there is much observable science that shows that animals reproduce after their own kind. There is historical science that supports the great flood being a prime reason for much of the explanations on our earth today.

You already stated your views, and I'm not bashing you. I'm simply challenging you to study a little deeper. Read the book of Genesis, examine the archaeology, and dig into science and biology with an open mind. Then see where the evidence takes you.

BaseballMan

06-10-2008, 01:02 PM

thecavemaster

06-10-2008, 01:18 PM

^^ Questions to consider:

1. Why is supernatural creation considered to be a “science stopper” and not a “science starter,” considering that most of the founding fathers of science believed in the Bible and a supernatural creation event?

2. If an all-knowing Creator God exists, wouldn’t it be logical to say that He knows about the scientific laws He created? Why not use what He says as a foundation for scientific thinking?

As I understand it, many of our Founders were Deists, meaning they believed a Creator set things in motion, then stepped out of the equation. Thomas Jefferson re-worked a Gospel in which all things not explainable by reason were removed. I do not think science and faith are mutually exclusive. Nor do I think post-divulian creatures could survive without tremendous adaptations.

BaseballMan

06-10-2008, 02:27 PM

As I understand it, many of our Founders were Deists, meaning they believed a Creator set things in motion, then stepped out of the equation. Thomas Jefferson re-worked a Gospel in which all things not explainable by reason were removed. I do not think science and faith are mutually exclusive. Nor do I think post-divulian creatures could survive without tremendous adaptations.

Actually, that's not entirely true. Although some have declared themselves deists, there were those who were christians by the apostle's creed. And even though all didn't believe the same, they all believed in the supreme-being of God. The law was taken from biblical principles. And hence, many founding fathers believed in creation and the Bible.

I get that while some had varied beliefs, the central belief was that in the God of the Bible. Here is a good website to find some quotes from our founding fathers: http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm

Adaptations is provable. We know animals adapt and sometimes have tremendous adaptations. The point is they don't adapt so much that they involve from a monkey to a man.

thecavemaster

06-10-2008, 06:13 PM

Actually, that's not entirely true. Although some have declared themselves deists, there were those who were christians by the apostle's creed. And even though all didn't believe the same, they all believed in the supreme-being of God. The law was taken from biblical principles. And hence, many founding fathers believed in creation and the Bible.

I get that while some had varied beliefs, the central belief was that in the God of the Bible. Here is a good website to find some quotes from our founding fathers: http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm

Adaptations is provable. We know animals adapt and sometimes have tremendous adaptations. The point is they don't adapt so much that they involve from a monkey to a man.

I do not believe a "missing link" will ever be found. However, if there is one creative mind at the core of creation, it would be entirely likely that animals and human beings would share many characteristics (physiological systems, etc.). Also, according to jesus, a tiny sparrow, in our day let us say a 50 cent gold fish given out at a school carnival, cannot be flushed down the commode outside the care of god.

BaseballMan

06-11-2008, 12:28 PM

I do not believe a "missing link" will ever be found. However, if there is one creative mind at the core of creation, it would be entirely likely that animals and human beings would share many characteristics (physiological systems, etc.). Also, according to jesus, a tiny sparrow, in our day let us say a 50 cent gold fish given out at a school carnival, cannot be flushed down the commode outside the care of god.

If you wish to use the Words of God as your reference then you must know that He also said each will reproduce according to their own kind. Never did He say I will make a monkey and it will soon become a man. That God takes care of the sparrows tells us that if He cares for an animal that insignificant, how much greater does He care for the one He made in His image.

And of course we will share common characteristics. After all, we were made by the same Creator. Normally, when a human creates something he/she deems good, you will see similar characteristics in the way they have created other things. Take for example a car and a boat. They are different, but yet have many similar characteristics because it works. But we'd never say that both were once a train and evolved into cars and boats over time because the train ran in a city or near the water. Nor would we say that all of these things just evolved from a small piece of wood which turned into a wagon wheel soon to be a Lamborghini in today's time.

BaseballMan

06-11-2008, 01:57 PM

I do not believe a "missing link" will ever be found.

I wonder why there is no "missing link" that has ever been found. You'd think that after billions and billions of years with animals evolving so many times from one to another, there would be so many different bone structures found, especially considering all the "ice ages" that should have preserved them. The fact is there is absolutely no evidence to support the theory and by the scientific method, Darwinian evolution falls apart. I mean, after so much time, and so many archaeological finds of fossils - thousands upon thousands - there should be at least ten or twenty - maybe even one - bone structure of an animal that is half monkey, half man or part whale and part elephant.

The fact is that there is nothing. The fact is there are so many animals that live today that defy evolution in the fact that if they evolved they would have never made it. A woodpecker and a giraffe are two that would have never existed.

Woodpecker -- If it had to adapt a hard beak, then the first time it tried to peck into the wood it would have shattered it's beak and died.

Giraffe -- Did you know that a giraffe has a small flap at the base of it's skull that keeps the blood from rushing to it's head and killing it instantly every time it gets a drink of water. Had it had to adapt or evolve this function, then the giraffe would have died the instant it got it's first drink of water.

There are so many more, but I've made my point.

thecavemaster

06-13-2008, 06:29 PM

I wonder why there is no "missing link" that has ever been found. You'd think that after billions and billions of years with animals evolving so many times from one to another, there would be so many different bone structures found, especially considering all the "ice ages" that should have preserved them. The fact is there is absolutely no evidence to support the theory and by the scientific method, Darwinian evolution falls apart. I mean, after so much time, and so many archaeological finds of fossils - thousands upon thousands - there should be at least ten or twenty - maybe even one - bone structure of an animal that is half monkey, half man or part whale and part elephant.

The fact is that there is nothing. The fact is there are so many animals that live today that defy evolution in the fact that if they evolved they would have never made it. A woodpecker and a giraffe are two that would have never existed.

Woodpecker -- If it had to adapt a hard beak, then the first time it tried to peck into the wood it would have shattered it's beak and died.

Giraffe -- Did you know that a giraffe has a small flap at the base of it's skull that keeps the blood from rushing to it's head and killing it instantly every time it gets a drink of water. Had it had to adapt or evolve this function, then the giraffe would have died the instant it got it's first drink of water.

There are so many more, but I've made my point.

The problem here, it seems to me, is that evolution occurs over a huge chunk of time; a slow progression where natural selection begins to favor birds with stiffer beaks or whatever, a slow process which EVENTUALLY ends in an adaptation of a beak that can penetrate the bark and get the food. I don't see this particularly as species change. A friend of mine spent four winters in North Dakota in the Air Force. When he came back to Kentucky, he would go outside in 30 degree weather in shorts and a tank top. His body had made some adjustments. Crude example... he wasn't a different species... he had just adapted.

RammsteinFan92

06-14-2008, 11:04 PM

Actually, the same science you refer to supports Creationism. What's more is that creationism also has the Bible as the absolute authority to help determine what happens. If you would actually take some time and read about it, you'd understand this better. There is actually no science that supports Darwinian Evolution. There is observable science that animals adapt to their environments, but nothing that ever proves one animal changed into another. However, there is much observable science that shows that animals reproduce after their own kind. There is historical science that supports the great flood being a prime reason for much of the explanations on our earth today.

You already stated your views, and I'm not bashing you. I'm simply challenging you to study a little deeper. Read the book of Genesis, examine the archaeology, and dig into science and biology with an open mind. Then see where the evidence takes you.

i'm not an evolountionist nor am i a creationist...but....how is it possible a man in the sky made everything just cause he wanted to tell me this

RammsteinFan92

06-15-2008, 02:28 PM

i'm not an evolountionist nor am i a creationist...but....how is it possible a man in the sky made everything just cause he wanted to tell me this

ok that was a ridiculos reply and i am sorry...:D

BaseballMan

06-16-2008, 12:48 PM

i'm not an evolountionist nor am i a creationist...but....how is it possible a man in the sky made everything just cause he wanted to tell me this

I don't think He intended to tell you this because He created everything and gave it an order - a detailed way that things would work, and figured that most of us would see this and be wowed by it. Being God though and all knowing, he knew that some would let him down and believe such things that would lead them away from the truth. Therefore, sometimes, He has to tell us things that surely He had hoped He would never have to do in the beginning. I guess it's God way of dumbing things down for us so that we sometimes might see a smaller part of the big picture. I'm glad He's into the personal business of helping me out, because the Lord knows I am definitely in need of it many times. Sometimes it just takes a little leap of faith with some study to see the clear picture.