Born Again Christians Thread-No Bashing please

[ead79]

I understand what she is saying. Sometimes, we, as Christians, tend to lump unbelievers all into one group, just as unbelievers may lump us all into one group along with people who are members of cults, who proclaim to be Christians but aren't, etc. I don't know how many of the other threads you read, but there are a lot of varying opinions out there, some of which are not so nice towards Christians in general. Caitycaity is always very respectful and I enjoy her participation in this thread. I understand this thread is for Christian fellowship, but IMO the questions and respectful comments of anyone are welcome, and may even help us on our Christian walk because sometimes people with varying opinions make us think much more than talking to someone who agrees with everything we say.

I completely agree with this, Aidensmom. Also, I think we should all be careful with our tones and the use of sarcasm. I want people with questions to feel welcome here. This has been a great thread for people outside our faith to understand us better, and vice versa.

 

[ead79]

Listening to Dr. David Jeremiah (www.turningpointradio.org) this morning on WMBW.(www.wmbw.org)....he is speaking about the rapture.......he's speaking pre-trib rapture......very interesting message. One verse he refrenced as the promise that the church will not go through the tribulation is Revelations Chapter 3, Verse 10 - Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

Adrian Rogers (www.lwf.org) message was really good this morning too.

That was the pre-trib reference that I couldn’t find! Thanks for posting it.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Wow, a lot of different topics going on all at once!

First, about 'science', and the age of the earth... I would have to respectfully disagree with Ford Family.... The term 'Creation Scientist' is a relatively new term. The fact is that this term has only come into being because it is common knowledge that the scientists who have done the major work and hypothisis on the origins of the earth, evolution, etc... (Darwin, etc...) have all been biased unbelievers. And, they have come up with a plausible sounding story, which has been generally accepted without question, until recently. The truth is that a huge percent of what science has presented as fact and truth, is based on nothing but hypothesis and flawed cyclical thinking... There are so very many examples where todays findings do not support these preconcieved theories. "Creation Scientist" had to kind of break away and form their own label, because they have kind of been forced to, due to their contradiction to traditional mainstream science.

And, yes, Buckalew11.... What you have stated about the 6000 - 7000 years of mans existance closely parallels what I have come to believe. It has been a LONG time, and I would not have specifics here to post for you guys, but, in my studies, I too have followed the timelines and have discovered the parallels with how mans existance is to be 6000-7000 years. This is the kind of thing that is not directly spelled out... It is the type of thing that seems like it is revealed to us by God, thru study of his Word. Like pieces of a puzzle, with passages from old and new testaments that take on a real and greater meaning when pieced together. I did not pick up on this from any currently available materials, but had come up with this myself, years ago, thu Gods revelation in the study of His Word.

 

[ford family]

The fact is that this term has only come into being because it is common knowledge that the scientists who have done the major work and hypothisis on the origins of the earth, evolution, etc... (Darwin, etc...) have all been biased unbelievers. And, they have come up with a plausible sounding story, which has been generally accepted without question, until recently. The truth is that a huge percent of what science has presented as fact and truth, is based on nothing but hypothesis and flawed cyclical thinking... There are so very many examples where todays findings do not support these preconcieved theories. "Creation Scientist" had to kind of break away and form their own label, because they have kind of been forced to, due to their contradiction to traditional mainstream science.

Are you not over generalising here? As I said before, most scientists are focussed on their endeavours and any religious impact is tertiary. Your people are ONLY looking at the world around us from the perspective of how they can validate the bible version of creation. Do you really believe that a large proportion of scientists deliberately create theories in order to denigrate any and all religions?
You have to remember that few people in the world hold their religious beliefs as strongly as you do. Most people are happy just getting on with their lives. They may be believers or non believers, it isn't that important to them, it doesn't colour everything they do and say. These people do things without religious bias because it doesn't occur to them to do otherwise.
I think religion has held down the advance of science for centuries and I fear that the negative science of creationism could do a great deal of damage to progress in coming years, especially in the US where most of its subscribers appear to be.

ford family

 

[Grandma Bear]

Hi all!
I've been lurking on this board forever and a day, getting ready for my big WDW vacation which begins next week!
Not only am I a believer, but a worship pastor at a large church in northern NJ. I'm so excited to see brothers and sisters coming together, even on a Disney level! Keep on keepin on. I long for a day when Disney and the world is looking to the church again for creativity, new ideas and innovation!

Your bro,
Steve Hawthorne

I belirve this will happen when the body of Christ can become more unified and people can see that we have something worth having!

 

[hyerpraise]

Ken Hamm has a theory that I tend to agree with that dinosaurs and Adam and Eve coexisted in the Garden of Eden. I believe the Bible so therefore I must agree that death did not come before Adam and Eve’s sin brought death into the world. So if nothing died before the great sin of Adam and Eve then dinosaurs lived with them in the Garden but did not start dying until after the great sin that caused death to enter into the world.

 

[dcentity2000]

I was given this brain by God and with it I have evaluated the evidence and interpreted the Bible around what I have found. The age of the earth, the big bang and evolution all, on balance, appear to be truths, due to the large libraries of supporting evidence and apparent lack of counter-evidence.

Such is the Progressive Christian faith.



Rich::

 

[ThAnswr]

Are you not over generalising here? As I said before, most scientists are focussed on their endeavours and any religious impact is tertiary. Your people are ONLY looking at the world around us from the perspective of how they can validate the bible version of creation. Do you really believe that a large proportion of scientists deliberately create theories in order to denigrate any and all religions?
You have to remember that few people in the world hold their religious beliefs as strongly as you do. Most people are happy just getting on with their lives. They may be believers or non believers, it isn't that important to them, it doesn't colour everything they do and say. These people do things without religious bias because it doesn't occur to them to do otherwise.
I think religion has held down the advance of science for centuries and I fear that the negative science of creationism could do a great deal of damage to progress in coming years, especially in the US where most of its subscribers appear to be.

ford family

Further indication Hell is freezing over...........ITA with Ford Family. Well said.

 

[dcentity2000]

One must remember, though, that everything that we think we know is simply theoretical. Only God can know an absolute truth, so keep your mind open. You may be surprised. Certainly there are gaping holes in the theory of evolution, and science is stumped when asked as to the creation of the universe.



Rich::

 

[Buckalew11]

Ken Hamm has a theory that I tend to agree with that dinosaurs and Adam and Eve coexisted in the Garden of Eden. I believe the Bible so therefore I must agree that death did not come before Adam and Eve’s sin brought death into the world. So if nothing died before the great sin of Adam and Eve then dinosaurs lived with them in the Garden but did not start dying until after the great sin that caused death to enter into the world.

I have also thought of this. But then again, I think "God told them if they partake in that fruit, they will surely die" and they didn't physically die. They died spiritually and that is what brought about a need for salvation. But, I also believe that man wouldn't have physically died until sin happened. Heck, as a hairdresser, I believe we wouldn't have turned gray or bald either! God said that man would have to work the soil now--I also believe we wouldn't have had weeds. Surely I believe that eden was a perfect place, huh?!

So, I am not sure of when and where the dinosaurs lived but I know they did and we have evidence of them and I think if you have ever seen a hippo, elephant or Rhino, dinosaurs don't seem that odd of a creature.

Wishing on a star,
I didn't arrive at that myself. I read it and it made sense to me that it could all be "played out" in such a time frame as that. After all, when you read that a thousand years is like a day and a day is like a thousand years to God, while I understand that time is different to God than to us, it could also have such a meaning as a 7day/7000yr parallel. After all, the tribulation is also set up as a 7 (yrs.) Things that make me go "hmm..."

 

[disneymom3]

Are you not over generalising here? As I said before, most scientists are focussed on their endeavours and any religious impact is tertiary. Your people are ONLY looking at the world around us from the perspective of how they can validate the bible version of creation. Do you really believe that a large proportion of scientists deliberately create theories in order to denigrate any and all religions?
You have to remember that few people in the world hold their religious beliefs as strongly as you do. Most people are happy just getting on with their lives. They may be believers or non believers, it isn't that important to them, it doesn't colour everything they do and say. These people do things without religious bias because it doesn't occur to them to do otherwise.
I think religion has held down the advance of science for centuries and I fear that the negative science of creationism could do a great deal of damage to progress in coming years, especially in the US where most of its subscribers appear to be.

ford family

Actually, they are coming at it from a perspective that they know the Bible to be true and therefore how does all of this make sense and fit in. I know you do not agree with that perspective, but they are not trying to validate the Bible, it is the other way around. Probably doesn't make a big difference to you, but it really is a totally different perspective than what you perceive as their goal.

 

[ead79]

ford family,

While I am sure that there have been religious people in the past who have held up scientific advancement, I don’t really see that happening with regard to the issue of how the earth began. I think the frustrating thing from my point of view is that I don’t see evolutionary scientists as being unbiased the way you seem to from what you’ve posted. Just as you are concerned that a creationist might try to “fit” science into his own agenda, I am concerned that an evolutionist might do the same. As a matter of fact, I feel that they already have to an extent. There are many gaping holes in the theory of evolution, but we are all expected to ignore them and accept evolution as fact. Many of the key elements in evolutionary principle violate existing scientific laws, yet we are not supposed to question that or look at it critically. I am not looking for science to necessarily fit with my religious views, as you seem to think all creationists are. I have no problem with people not believing in creationism, as it requires faith and cannot be proven without a doubt from a scientific perspective. However, I believe that it takes an equal amount of faith to accept evolutionary theory in its entirety.

 

[live4christp1]

ford family,

While I am sure that there have been religious people in the past who have held up scientific advancement, I don’t really see that happening with regard to the issue of how the earth began. I think the frustrating thing from my point of view is that I don’t see evolutionary scientists as being unbiased the way you seem to from what you’ve posted. Just as you are concerned that a creationist might try to “fit” science into his own agenda, I am concerned that an evolutionist might do the same. As a matter of fact, I feel that they already have to an extent. There are many gaping holes in the theory of evolution, but we are all expected to ignore them and accept evolution as fact. Many of the key elements in evolutionary principle violate existing scientific laws, yet we are not supposed to question that or look at it critically. I am not looking for science to necessarily fit with my religious views, as you seem to think all creationists are. I have no problem with people not believing in creationism, as it requires faith and cannot be proven without a doubt from a scientific perspective. However, I believe that it takes an equal amount of faith to accept evolutionary theory in its entirety.

Well said Elisabeth!

FordFamily, if I recall correctly this all has been discussed on various other threads concerning evolution, public schools, etc. Maybe we just need to agree to disagree. You see creation as a theory and that is how I view evolution. The same points you make about creation science are the same points I make about evolutionist. So lets not turn this thread into a debate about whether creation theory is right or wrong but if you have a question in regards to why we feel that way, I think many posters here would be just as happy to answer you as they did Rick.

 

[Wishing on a star]

edited to add:

quote:
_____________________________________________________
Maybe we just need to agree to disagree. You see creation as a theory and that is how I view evolution. The same points you make about creation science are the same points I make about evolutionist. So lets not turn this thread into a debate about whether creation theory is right or wrong but if you have a question in regards to why we feel that way, I think many posters here would be just as happy to answer you
_____________________________________________________

Great Post live4christ! (we just posted at the same time...)


To put it very simply...

According to every possible postulation of science, 'something' (the heavens and the earth) could never be created from 'nothing'.

Even with all of its evidence and theories and libraries full of their findings, science can come up with no clue as to where matter and energy came from to begin with.

Science is never, ever, no matter what their findings, going to come up with the conclusion that "God created the heavens and the earth". That theory has been around since the dawn of mankind, and, frankly, science seems hell-bent on dis-proving it.

 

[live4christp1]

http://www.drdino.com/seeArticle.php?artid=49

Interesting article on Was there death before Adam sinned?

 

[cardaway]

Science is never, ever, no matter what their findings, going to come up with the conclusion that "God created the heavens and the earth". That theory has been around since the dawn of mankind, and, frankly, science seems hell-bent on dis-proving it.

Understandable considering the number of different Gods out there and the different claims to truth for each God. Better to leave that open than to open that box. IMO science has left that open, not just because there is no answer, but also because so many scientists believe in a higher power. They are not mutually exclusive concepts.

As for disproving things, religion is just as hell-bent the other way, including initially rejecting many scientific findings only to eventually accept them as fact.

As long as science classes are allowed to continue without religious involvement in public schools I am happy. "Evolution Science" is trying to validate the bible and IMO that should be left to private schools and Sunday mornings.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Understandable considering the number of different Gods out there and the different claims to truth for each God. Better to leave that open than to open that box. IMO science has left that open, not just because there is no answer, but also because so many scientists believe in a higher power. They are not mutually exclusive concepts.

As for disproving things, religion is just as hell-bent the other way, including initially rejecting many scientific findings only to eventually accept them as fact.

As long as science classes are allowed to continue without religious involvement in public schools I am happy. "Evolution Science" is trying to validate the bible and IMO that should be left to private schools and Sunday mornings.

What other gods??

The Bible validates itself through fullfillment of its prophesies.

 

[cardaway]

What other gods??

While you and I may agree all religions pray to the same God, not all share that opinion.

The Bible validates itself through fullfillment of its prophesies.

ITACD (I totally and completely disagree). Any further reponse would launch a debate.

 

[ThAnswr]

Science is never, ever, no matter what their findings, going to come up with the conclusion that "God created the heavens and the earth". That theory has been around since the dawn of mankind, and, frankly, science seems hell-bent on dis-proving it.

This comes back to what Ford Family posted. I don't think it's so much that science is trying to disprove "creationsim" as it is that scientific research is coming up with facts, fossils, etc. that get in the way of creationism.

Even I will accept the idea that you cannot get something from nothing and the biggest leap of all is look around us and rationalize that all of this is just a lucky accident.

There is a purpose and a method working here, but some of us believe we have the answer and some of us are still looking.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Yes, I did say that science will never, ever, come to the conlusion that 'God (no matter which God....) created the heavens and the earth..

Hhhhmmmm????? So, you are saying that you could believe that science could prove that a higher power created the heavens and the earth??? So, you are saying that 'God' is something that can be proven?

Science does not even acknowledge 'Faith', 'God', or anything of the sort. How could science even begin to come to a conclusion that existance is the product of something that it does not even acknowledge or believe in???