jaybird18c

How do you keep from getting banned fron these forums? Do you just get free passes on personal attacks?

Wow. This is the stupidest thread I've seen in a long time...from start to finish.

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse." (Romans 1:18-20)

So when you stand before your maker when you die, you're going to offer all that as your excuse for what you've done?

I can't figure out why we can't just discuss stuff without attacking one another. It's a discussion board people! Life will go on even if no one ever agrees on anything.

I agree! "God has a wonderful plan for your life:" Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

How can evolution (in the New Darwinian Theory sense of the term; e.g. molecules-to-man) be real science? http://creation.com/is-evolution-scientific

You have great faith.

You can't lose money on every sale and expect to make it up in volume. I don't care how much you repackage your product or how long it takes you to sell.

What does?

Probably the best example of what I am talking about. I agree with you in that DNA is definitely coded information. Information such as that cannot originate from matter itself. Natural Selection cannot account for its origination. It can only take into account a net loss of information.

Is a logical argument not information? "A code system is always the result of a mental process (it requires an intelligent origin or inventor). It should be emphasized that matter as such is unable to generate any code. All experiences indicate that a thinking being voluntarily exercising his own free will, cognition, and creativity, is required. There is no known natural law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical process or material phenomenon known that can do this. There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter." - Dr. Werner Gitt

Good point.

Good stuff: http://wayofthemaster.com/index.shtml

No a logical argument is simply that an argument. It is not a form of evidence. How valid your argument is depends on it's supporting evidence. In the case of the Christian God there is no supporting evidence. All you have is an argument for the existence of God. No evidence. Your argument has no evidence to support it. I was speaking of information. Information has to come from somewhere...just like matter. "In the beginning was information." - Dr. Werner Gitt

Ok. So what do you do when you don't fully understand a verse with regard to a particular principal? You pull from everywhere else in scripture that deals with that principal to figure out what it means. That systematic approach leads one to believe that faith is required for forgiveness.

Let's look at the verse: "One day He was teaching; and there were some Pharisees and teachers of the law sitting there, who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from jerusalem; and the power of the Lord was present for Him to perform healing. And some men were carrying on a bed a man who was paralyzed; and they were trying to bring him in and to set him down in front of Him. But not finding any way to bring him in because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and let him down through the tiles with his stretcher, into the middle of the crowd, in front of Jesus. Seeing their faith, He said, Friend, your sins are forgiven you. The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this man who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" (Luke 4:17-21, NASB, emphasis added) That man was forgiven based on his faith. Just like Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, or anyone else declared righteous by God prior to the attonement of Jesus Christ on the cross. That's what the "Passover" is all about. The blood of the innocent lamb as a "sin covering." Sacrifice of animals doesn't forgive sin. Only God can do that. It is "looking forward" to what would occur. It's the same reason God provided a ram substitute for Abraham. The ram was a type/shadow of Jesus Christ who was to come. One of my absolute favorite sections of scripture is Romans 3:23-26. It explains every man's condition before God and how those prior to Christ could be forgiven based on the sacrifice of Christ.

It's exhausting effort just to stay on top of my A.D.D.

What RonD1120 is describing is pluralism/universalism. That is not what Jesus taught (John 14:6). I did not make that statement. It belongs to Laszloimage. Ok. I appologize.

I'm sorry. I do not mean to be. I'm just trying to explain the theology in response to the question. If I come across as smug, I appologize. My intent is not to appear moralistic or intollerant. I don't think I'm either. The point is, I am NOT righteous in and of myself. However, I have been declared and "seen as" righteous because of what Jesus Christ did in my place. It's a forensic/legal status. I have been declared legally innocent because my fine was paid for me. Now, I am expected to live for the one who stood in my place. That does not mean you don't sin anymore. It does mean that you are now being conformed over the course of your life, however. One who has not made that exchange, however, has to be "righteous" on his/her own terms, which falls short of God's standard, and justice demands that they one day give an account.

What RonD1120 is describing is pluralism/universalism. That is not what Jesus taught (John 14:6). I would say that Gandi was a very intelligent and "self" righteous man. That does not mean that he didn't do a lot of good (from our perspective). The problem is, unless Gandi appropriated the substitutionary sacrifice that Jesus made on behalf of "His" people through repentance and faith in Him, then his sins were not forgiven. He would have to give an account for them himself when he died. That's what I mean by self-righteous. It's not true righteousness which can only come God because only God is good. The issue is one of righteousness. Not whether or not he did a lot of good while he was here.

No. One's claim to be Christian doesn't make one a follower of Christ (Matthew 7). One's profession of belief or "decision" for Christ doesn't either. "You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder." (James 2:19) No one should ever tell someone they are saved. People should be told how to be saved (repent & believe the gospel). God then impresses upon them whether or not they really are and their lives should relect that change. "But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves. Again, I AM NOT talking about works unto salvation (self-righteousness). I AM talking about evidence of regeneration. That IN NO WAY indicates that the professing Christian doesn't also do "bad things." It's in his old nature to do so. However, that cannot be what rules his life. As a pattern of maturation, he should be developing over the course of his life into something different, the "image" of Christ.

Christians should display love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control (Galatians 5:22) if they are growing in their sincere faith, however, they do not have the monopoly on morality. I know many non-Christians who live in many ways better than some I find in church. Of course, this is a self-righteousness with flawed motive but with an outward appearance of morality just the same (Romans 2:14-15). I do not mean to use the term self-righteous in my previous sentence in a negative way. I was just trying to describe it. It has everything to do with what we mean by "good." But back to the point. Christianity shouldn't be judged by the misconduct of its supposed followers. "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter." (Matthew 7:21) Not everyone sitting in the pews who claim the title of Christian really is one.

That's a pity. I'd expect you not to accept scientific rules for theology and the existence of God. Not believing scientific evidence for scientific conduct is silly. It's what that language is built for. How do you think medicines are developed these days? New medical treatments? It's not the same world as theology, why would you expect to use the same language? Wendy P. Wendy....I agree with you. And I'm proud of that. Because, in my old days in here as pajarito and now, that didn't happen very often. I know what he's referring to and I agree with him somewhat. There is a subjective spiritual component to biblical interpretation, however, we should not rely on our feelings primarily. Our faith should be driven by or theology. Paul said "Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:1, NASB, emphasis added) I'm not discounting feelings but they can change and even be deceiving. Our rock that we lean on should always be the word of God which He has communicated to us through written language.

The Apostle Paul was beaten, imprisoned, prevented (so he thought) from traveling and taking the good news to the gentiles, and eventually executed in prison. However, his letters became some of the most influential in Christendom. He (rather God) beat the system through Paul...and in doing so...Paul, even imprisoned and in death, shared in God's victory.