Recommended Posts
billvon 2,991
So do animals. They'll hang on to the last possible minute, even if they're in tremendous pain or torment.
>He's not thinking who's going to take care of the children, will the
>wife have enough grass to live on till old age, etc?
Higher animals do indeed think such things. Apes show compassion for other apes. Chimpanzees teach their children so they'll learn to feed themselves, use very basic tools, avoid dangerous animals etc. They can plan what they need for the next day and stockpile those things.
If your argument is that we are even smarter than apes, then I agree. But it is a matter of degree, not a matter of the ability to plan ahead being present in one and absent in the other.
Royd 0
Reading most of your posts, you seem like a very angry person, thererfore, you contradict yourself.Quotethe thing I AM I is: I am whole, strong, perfect, loving, harmonious and happy!
Royd 0
Come on. I know that you don't really believe that we are just a few notches above an ape in intellegence and that's all there is to it.QuoteHigher animals do indeed think such things. Apes show compassion for other apes. Chimpanzees teach their children so they'll learn to feed themselves, use very basic tools, avoid dangerous animals etc. They can plan what they need for the next day and stockpile those things.
If your argument is that we are even smarter than apes, then I agree. But it is a matter of degree, not a matter of the ability to plan ahead being present in one and absent in the other.
The fact that we plan things months or even years ahead of time, and then make efforts to see them through, whether it's a vacation or a kid's college education, tells me that we're just a little bit special in the whole scheme of things.
This is backed up by the Word of God.
www.truthbeknown.com
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
pajarito 0
QuoteI understand what you're trying to communicate, but I think you're being less than effective.
Regardless, it is the Biblical precedent set by Jesus himself. It is the method used by Paul. It is the method in which Christians are expected to bring the good news of the Gospel to the lost. It is a method mostly forsaken by the modern evangelistic church for a more “felt needs” approach which has proven extremely ineffective. The Gospel is foolishness to the unrepentant sinner. The heart has to be prepared for the Gospel for it to be effective. God’s moral law (10 Commandments) is the needle which pierces and prepares the heart for the thread of the Gospel. It’s the mirror into your soul which shows you your sinful nature and desperate need for a Savior.
“The law doesn't help us; it just leaves us helpless. It doesn't justify us; it just leaves us guilty before the judgment bar of a holy God.”
“They will never accept grace until they tremble before a just and Holy Law.”
--Charles Spurgeon
QuoteI also think there is more than one way to become "born again of the spirit" and those ways don't all have to involve the Bible. Like you said, "It is by grace..."
Only by repentance of sin and trust in Jesus is someone born again.
pajarito 0
Quoteeverything you PREACH is fear!
You should be afraid and very concerned. If you died tonight, the Bible says you will be judged and spend eternity in hell. I don’t want that to happen.
QuoteDo not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matthew 10:28
The unrepentant sinner is an enemy of God and God's righteous judgment abides on him.
billvon 2,991
>above an ape in intellegence . . .
We're a lot more than a few notches. At best, apes can function at a five-year-old (human) level. But they can plan for the future and make changes in their present environment to benefit them in the future.
>The fact that we plan things months or even years ahead of time, and
>then make efforts to see them through, whether it's a vacation or a kid's
>college education, tells me that we're just a little bit special in the whole
>scheme of things.
Hmm. If the lack of ability to plan for the future is a sign of a lack of intelligence, then consider:
-A third of the people in the world smoke. There is no better way to ensure an early and agonizing death.
-64% of americans are overweight. Being overweight is an excellent way to ruin your joints, develop early diabetes and heart disease, and die early.
-We have spent far more time and effort developing weapons than we have developing any vaccine or cure. Even today, the term "Manhattan Project" is used to describe an all-out effort, rather than "AIDS project" or "cancer project."
-We are the only species that plans to go to war.
If we were really fundamentally different from animals, we'd spend our talents exclusively improving our race and advancing our understanding of the world around us. Yet we seem to spend a lot more effort destroying ourselves than we do improving ourselves. This, to me, says that we have all those animal instincts left over from our evolution, and that we often succumb to them - even when, intellectually, we know they should not be followed.
pajarito 0
QuoteIf we were really fundamentally different from animals, we'd spend our talents exclusively improving our race and advancing our understanding of the world around us. Yet we seem to spend a lot more effort destroying ourselves than we do improving ourselves. This, to me, says that we have all those animal instincts left over from our evolution, and that we often succumb to them - even when, intellectually, we know they should not be followed.
The theory is as flimsy as it has ever been.
QuoteSince the controversy over microevolution and macroevolution is at the heart of Darwin's
theory, and since evolutionary theory is so influential in modern biology, it is a disservice
to students for biology curricula to ignore the controversy entirely. Furthermore, since
the scientific evidence needed to settle the controversy is still lacking, it is inaccurate to
give students the impression that the controversy has been resolved and that all scientists
have reached a consensus on the issue.
The Scientific Controversy Over Whether
Microevolution Can Account For Macroevolution
QuoteSince the abruptness and extensiveness of the Cambrian explosion are so well
documented, there is no excuse for a biology textbook to deal with the animal fossil
record without even mentioning it. Furthermore, since some biologists maintain that the
Cambrian explosion presents a challenge -- or at least a "paradox" -- for one of the
fundamental tenets of Darwin's theory, any biology textbook that doesn't discuss that
challenge fails to provide students with the resources to think critically about the most
widely taught scientific explanation for evolution.
The Scientific Controversy Over the Cambrian Explosion
QuoteScience now knows that many of the pillars of Darwinian Theory are either false or misleading. Yet biology texts continue to present them as factual evidence of evolution. What does this imply about their scientific standards?
-- Jonathan Wells
Survival of the Fakest
you prove my point, every time you post-RELIGION IS MIND CONTROL ARE YOU SO AFRAID OF THE TRUTH THAT YOU WON'T READ WHAT I HAVE OFFERED. thats all it is, you are afraid of the truth!
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
I am a Christian, and even I don't understand.
Do you believe that there were NO decribable mechanisms that explain the diversification of species??? What physical mechanisms, then, do you believe actually occurred when species were formed?
I believe in both the book of Genesis and evolution. The Bible provides sprirtual meaning, and it is left to us humans, through God's will and the scientific method, to figure out the mechanisms. I believe God meant for us to, as they put in in Star Trek, "boldly go where noone has gone before!" In other words, I believe that the growth of scientific achievment is not an attack on God, but actually God's will.
God meant for us, through the scientific method, to uncover the secrets of his creation.
By the way, I've found through the social clubs of my mother's Catholic church, that a LOT of Catholics are Trekkies.
Also, a lot of Catholics are big fans of Tolkien. I guess we're a bunch of sci-fi geeks.
--------------------------------------------------
Royd 0
So, when did evolution quit evloving?QuoteThis, to me, says that we have all those animal instincts left over from our evolution, and that we often succumb to them - even when, intellectually, we know they should not be followed.
jakee 1,490
QuoteSo, when did evolution quit evolving?
Invalid question. You've started with a false presumption.
Royd 0
The problem is that a major driving force behind evolutionary science is not just to get the facts, but to advance the idea that there is no God.QuoteI believe in both the book of Genesis and evolution. The Bible provides sprirtual meaning, and it is left to us humans, through God's will and the scientific method, to figure out the mechanisms.
They use the physical to try to disprove the spiritual.
That's where the battleline is drawn.
jakee 1,490
QuoteThe problem is that a major driving force behind evolutionary science is not just to get the facts, but to advance the idea that there is no God.
Paranoia.
Lindsey 0
They use the physical to try to disprove the spiritual.
"They?" lol....I think he's one of "them."
linz
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail
pajarito 0
QuoteI believe in both the book of Genesis and evolution.
Theistic Evolution
A variation on the theme of evolution is theistic evolution. It states that God initiated life on earth and allowed evolutionary principles to bring man to where he is--maybe with a little help from God here and there. At least this theory includes God. But this theory was developed in part by Bible believing people who thought that evolution had some merit. In addition, it is an attempt to answer the many problems existing not only in the fossil record but also with how life could somehow randomly form out of nothing. Because of problems like this, some believe they can be explained by simply adding God to the picture: God directed evolution.
For those who hold to the Bible as the word of God, theistic evolution should not be a viable option. The Bible says, "Know that the LORD is God. It is he who made us..." (Psalm 100:3). The Scriptures state that God created. God said, "Let there be..." and there was. The Scriptures speak of the creative word of God. When God speaks; it occurs. He said "Let there be" and it was so. It does not say, "Let there be a slow development through an evolutionary process."
God said in Genesis 1:26, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." The Hebrew word for "make" in this verse and in verse 25 where God makes the beasts, is "asah." It means to do, work, make, produce. This is not simply the limited Hebrew understanding of evolutionary principles.
The land animals were made differently than man. The animals were made from the ground but man was made directly by God: "the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being" (Gen. 2:7). Evolution states that man evolved from life forms that developed in the ocean. Here, God made man from the dust of the ground--not the water of the ocean.
If evolution is true and the Bible is true then how is the formation of Eve explained? She was created out of one of Adam's ribs (Gen. 2:22). There is no way to explain this if theistic evolution is true; that is, unless you want to say that Eve wasn't made from Adam's side. Then, if you do that, you are doubting the very word of God.
Also, Jesus said in Mark 10:6 "But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.'" The beginning was not evolutionary slime; in the beginning of creation there was Adam and Eve.
Though this information is brief and far from complete, it should be obvious that theistic evolution and the Scriptures cannot be harmonized.
Rebecca 0
QuoteRegardless, it is the Biblical precedent set by Jesus himself. It is the method used by Paul. It is the method in which Christians are expected to bring the good news of the Gospel to the lost. It is a method mostly forsaken by the modern evangelistic church for a more “felt needs” approach which has proven extremely ineffective.
Yes, this is true. Jesus set this precedent and Paul founded the church based on Jesus' message and the method he set forth.
The goal is getting the message across, but if that message gets 'corrupted' (like a computer file) by your own fervor, conviction, and righteousness, are you doing ANY good? Are you ACTUALLY doing what Jesus would do?
Then how are you helping people to prepare their hearts? Quoting Gospel is wasted and energy and even harmful to the ultimate goal if you engage this process out of order.QuoteThe Gospel is foolishness to the unrepentant sinner. The heart has to be prepared for the Gospel for it to be effective.
When shown this mirror before they are ready to see, they see nothing more than a bible-thumping whacko trying to tell them they're evil, sinful and wrong. Who's going to want to open ANY dialogue that way?QuoteGod’s moral law (10 Commandments) is the needle which pierces and prepares the heart for the thread of the Gospel. It’s the mirror into your soul which shows you your sinful nature and desperate need for a Savior.
I think the two operative words that turn would ME off are "sin" and "Jesus".QuoteQuoteI also think there is more than one way to become "born again of the spirit" and those ways don't all have to involve the Bible. Like you said, "It is by grace..."
Only by repentance of sin and trust in Jesus is someone born again.
People don't set out to "sin" - they set out to do what they think they have to do, want to do, or what they have no choice but to do. Calling them "sinners" doesn't validate them as people with the ability to choose to do what's right, regardless of whether or not they are sinners.
Jesus was the messenger. Saying "trust this guy" to someone who doesn't know his message is folly. Telling someone to do just "do as that guy did" doesn't give them a reason within themselves to behave that way.
Jesus is ONE way to the RIGHT message, but a person first has to know why they would even want to listen to such a message.
And if you try to bring people to that message through fear of God, as opposed to the love and joy on the other side of that message, you WILL fail.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
http://video.google.com/...146&q=sam+harris
That statement is the truth of 'religion'. Right now, we have jews and muslims killing each other, we have xtians killing muslims, in ireland protestants and catholics were killing each other, both claiming to be xtians. i have a video of u.s. troops laughing as a missile slams into a building in iraq, the soldier saying "fuck you muslim, see you in hell, you fucking muslim". here we should perhaps sing "onward christian soldiers", eh!
for two days now, a christian has called ME the antichrist, and told me that if i died tonight, I am certianly going to hell for not believing in his dogma. He has FAILED to provide non-biblical proof of the existance of his mythical saviour, with the exception of PROVEN FORGERIES.
1 COR. 2:2 IS why these people will not look beyond their MIND-CONTROL state to see through the truth about THE GREATEST STORY EVER SOLD.
ALL THIS FROM A "GOD" WHO SAYS BELIEVE OR BE KILLED!
www.tbknews.blogspot.com
the embicilic religion is the most recent blog, well worth reading
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I knew that would be the standard answer.
Humans know about death and try to prolong life by any possible means.
The gazelle, on the other hand, is munching grass and doesn't give a thought about death until the cheetah is thirty yards and closing.He just doesn't want to be dinner tonight. He's not thinking who's going to take care of the children, will the wife have enough grass to live on till old age, etc?
I find it amazing that the scientific community, who denies the consequences of sin, spends so much effort in overcoming them.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites