bOb - I don't know what you mean.

WAT

WAT My comment doesn't make sense now you edited your other post. I was just smiling at your use of irony in argument, which is now removed.

I'll go back in the cellar again now ! LOL !

Hmmmmm - I don't remember removing anything. Perhaps my oldstimers again.

edit: And I'm not trying to convince ANYBODY to change their beliefs. I'm just trying to understand them and clear up what I perceive to be factual errors - which could include errors on my part. If in reconciling errors, someone chooses to change their beliefs, so be it. I've changed mine on this thread - I admitted to being wrong about certain aspects of the ID argument.

WAT

WAT its cool. I'm just watching from afar. The 'facts' never change but the argument styles do. Its fascinating !

Though I still think M theory ever making sense is a wilder hope than a benevolent God ! ;o)

Enjoy

Just got to say--the christian model stopped working for me a long time ago.

Should have stopped working for me when my Christian father abandoned us.

Should have stopped working for me when my step father--who happened to be leading bible studies at the church, was also a deacon and in leadership at the church started molesting and beating me on a regular basis. It is sad to me to this day that at 8 years old I had a *father* who would tell me that he would have to slam a door on *it* just watching me. Eight! But hey he was a good on the outside kind of Christian.

Should have stopped working for me when my mother told me that as a girl, future woman, I had to submit to that crazy step dad who was sexualizing me and yes, she did know about the beatings with all kinds of objects. Frequently she would watch and tell me I deserved it. I don't know, not sure I ever deserved the beating with the hammer or the table or the phone or the lamp. I thought he was going to kill me when he came at me with the hammer. I limped for quite awhile, pretty sure I had broken bones but no way were they going to take me to the doc. I mean how would that go down in the church bulletin??!!

Should have stopped working for me when my ex-husband was using the church as a way to meet other women. He too was in leadership roles, teaching bible classes and such. His last affair was with a woman he meet at a christian 12 step group he and another recovering acoholic started. The church did absolutely nothing when everyone started noticing him spending too much time with her.

I did divorce the church and then eventually rejected the Christian idea of God when the church completely abandoned me and my children after ex left for the OW. They didn't want to get involved and I was becoming a problem for them since the dumb youth pastor tried to put the moves on me and no Hhe just wouldn't do that, I was imagining him asking me to sleep with him. So I had to go.

I have absolutely no problem with christians believing whatever they want, as long as it doesn't impose on my right to believe whatever I want.

I don't really care if a Christian wants to believe the Judeo-Christian creation myth. Most cultures have creation stories on their history pages.

Why do Christians have to so concerned about what I believe??

And to whoever was arguing that you need an outside force to have morality---it's called culture, peer pressure and laws. I think that church served a purpose at one time in history in keeping people from doing things that were immoral but not neccisarily illegal--like infidelity. I don't think it works anymore on a large scale.

The church, God, the bible (which my crazy step dad read to us on a regular basis) never stopped him What stopped him was our legal system. And for what's it's worth, that church pretty much abandoned my mother and sisters when that all came down. In a way she had it coming but still being the wonderful loving christians they said they were, they could have at least tried to live up to their words.

Okay, I have issues with the christian church institution and the christian god. But I no longer have any problems at all with my spiritual self. I was set free when I left the christian church with all it's contradictions and face saving junk behind.

Tiggy

Tiggy,

I am sorry to hear that. As you know, Christians are human...and christian churches are made up of humans. I have had my share of Christians and my church, let me down. So what?????

I do not follow a church. I do not base my Christianity on what other Christians do or dont do. I for one base mine on the very real relationship I with Jesus...and He NEVER fails!!

Unfortunately, too many people say "I was raised in a Christian home, thus I am a Christian." Bologna!! Or, "I go to church all of the time, and serve in ministries there...thus I am a Christian." No way. Just because I might sleep in a garage doesnt make me a Ford Mustang.

Christianity is defined (or used to be) those that have accepted Jesus payment of our sins, and follow Him and have a relationship with Him. Many religions and people have now co-opted the name Christian, saying they are Christians. So let's get away from the title here. What you are missing here is the relationship with Christ.

Look, I have some Jewish friends that will not call themselves Christians. But they are saved and have accepted Jesus as the Messiah and their Lord and Savior. So in today's society, the name doesnt mean much to me.

On your contention that morales come from society/laws etc. Who makes those laws? Humans. If tomorrow, a majority of people said that we should go back to having African-Americans as slaves, what would you say? What would you say if that was a law? I mean, that society voted and passed laws saying that the subjugation of another race is permissible. Now who are we to say that is wrong? Who are we to say that poloygamy is wrong? Who are we to say that murder is wrong?

From where do these morales, laws, etc come from? If they just come from the majority, the majority could change their minds and decide to do something different.

As far as I am concerned, there is right and there is wrong...and we dont get to decide that. If we did, that would be anarchy and debasement at its worse.

In His arms.

MM


Excellent point. And I will say I was a bit emotional during my last post. I think morality most likely comes from numerous sources--inside ourselves, from religious moral codes, from our culture, from our family, from what we have learned and taken to heart....and many other sources I am sure.

I have been surrounded by Christians and the church most of my life and if I am remembering right they all professed to have accepted Jesus as their saviour. I don't know if it was real or not. Doesn't matter to me anymore.

My step father would get up in front of the church and ask for forgiveness for doing "evil things." I remember that a few times and felt as time went on that being a christian was a way for him to do whatever he wanted since he could always ask and receive forgiveness. Now what God actually thought of him and did with him, I don't know.

I do know understand that God and Christians are very seperate. And honestly I think that it is Christians that frequently give the Christian God a bad name. Jesus was a very revolutionary individual and Christianity in it's purest form is amazing--making God available to the masses and having a mediator who stands on your behalf in front of God. Amazing concepts and quite revolutionary at the time of Jesus.

But I have honestly realized that for me personally I no longer feel that I need a saviour and if I did, sorry, it wouldn't be the Jesus that is presented in today's world. Stepping outside of the Christian circle helped me see how closed minded the Christian church is. It demands that it is the only way and then tries to push it on everyone else. And if that is what you believe, that is OKAY with me. Just know that if you try to push it on me, I won't accept it and depending on how hard a person pushes, I may push back. (Speaking generally here, not to you specifically MM.)

I respect that you and millions of others and have found strenght, comfort and peace within Christianity. I think it is awesome for you.

I just didn't find that same thing within Christianity or Jesus as a faith. And I hope you (speaking generally again to all Christians) can be okay with how I find my strength, comfort and peace.

Getting long here but just want to say I understand too that my evil step father was predatory pond scum and would have used any religious avenue to justify his sociopathic ways. He just happened to use the Christian church but it could have been almost any belief system. That is what evil people do though, they take a innocent belief system and stain it with the way they twist it to fit their designs. People have used all different religions to do all sorts of horrible things.

Stopping now before I babble on and on.

Tiggy

MM,

Maybe you could answer a question I have had in the past. Why does the morality of the bible change as christianity evolves? Or I should say, why does it seem that the morality change?

I am thinking of the stories from the old testament where men had oodles of wives, not to mention tons of concubines and the prophets seeing prostitutes? I think that one was Abraham, could be wrong, don't really read the bible much anymore. Also if I am remembering right, Paul spoke about how one should treat their slaves.

But why has the morality of the bible changed? I am not trying to challenge you, I asked this question in 7th and 8th grade. I was going to a private christian school and asked that a few times in Bible class. No one ever answered me to where it made any sense. I mean if God doesn't change, why would his rules change from one time to another.

The answer that I was given btw, was that Jesus ushered in a new era with redemption. But then I ask, why was it okay to have slaves during Jesus' times? It never added up to me.

Tig

Folks:

I would like 2 keep participating in this thread, because it's been very enlightening 2 me 2 see the range of different outlooks on 42 (life, the universe, and everything, that is).

But my sitch just 2k a 2rn for the mediocre again, and I've got 2 deal...

best,
-ol' 2long
P.S. If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve

FH--Dimpsasawa – Don’t you think that the way you phrased this statement is “part of the problem?” When you said, “do you get your conclusions from a scientific perspective or something else?” you are elevating a “scientific perspective” (read this as “scientific opinion or predisposition against Creation and/or a Creator) to the position of “established fact.”

D--No, I am in no way doing this. This is your inference. Just because something is a scientific fact does not make it absolutely true, and I, nor should any legitimate scientist, imply otherwise. We may be arguing different things here: I am arguing that the creationist research is not scientific. I am not necessarily arguing that it is incorrect. Whether it is correct or not is a different topic (to me) entirely.

FH--“We have acknowledged that most scientists believe in evolution, but this is not at all the same as saying that science teaches evolution.

D--I would agree completely. The personal opinion of a ‘scientist’ is irrelevant. What is relevant are the conclusions that the scientific community came to by using the scientific method. These conclusions are reported in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. And that consensus most definitely is what science teaches.

FH--Scientists are people, and this means that they are fallible, sinful, prejudiced, selfish, and proud – just like all other people!

D--Yes. And this is exactly why the methodology of science works so well--because it requires repeatability; empirical verification from others who may not share your perspective. This supposedly weeds out incorrect findings based on personal biases.

FH--Science, on the other hand, means knowledge – not theories, opinions, beliefs, or philosophies, but actual, verified, factual, certain knowledge –

D--This person appears to have little knowledge of how science operates and what it can and cannot do. A scientific theory is not at all similar to a hunch or opinion; and nothing in science can be known with absolute certainty.

FH--There exists a minority of scientists, just as in every other walk of life, who do believe in Biblical Christianity, and this in itself confirms that nothing in science, as such, compels a man to believe in evolution and its philosophy.

D--As we agreed earlier, personal opinions are irrelevant in science. However, repeatable findings--as recorded in the peer-reviewed literature--are relevant; in fact this is the only record of what is relevant. Unlike evolution, creation has no such record in the scientific literature.

FH--Dimpsasawa, the “problem,” if one wants to call it a problem, is not with science and observable facts. It is with the predisposition of those evaluating the data.

D--The practice of science is not an individual enterprise, as the method rests on the idea of independent verification. Thus no individual by himself can come to reliable ‘scientific’ conclusions. I certainly agree that it is hypothetically possible that the scientific community may come to an incorrect conclusion. They may very well call something a theory/law/fact --which is completely wrong. But note: until the error is identified and the theory/law/fact refuted, it does not change the scientific status of the conclusion. Thus (although I doubt it), it is completely possible that creationists have the right answer. However, their methods and conclusions are outside the realm of science, as evidenced by a lack of publication in the scientific literature and lack of verification of their findings by the scientific community. Thus, whether they are right or wrong, in an absolute sense, is completely irrelevant to whether their findings are ‘scientific’ or not. In other words, and this is very important to understand:

*Science is a method. It is not a result.*

FH--There are only TWO models for how things “came to be” and one of those models “requires” a living Creator. The other requires only time, luck, and (as does the Creation model) going against the “laws” of nature. The first and second laws of thermodynamics, for example.

D--I know of no unrefuted peer-reviewed scientific publications that makes such claims. Do you know of any? I’m a little rusty on my thermo but I could debate this with you if you wish. My guess that, as in most creationist literature, you may be misusing what the word ‘order’ means in a thermodynamic sense. Just as ‘theory’, ‘energy’ , ‘work’, etc. have specific meanings in a scientific context, which are very different from the common lay usage, so does ‘order’.

FH--Okay, I can do that for you. But before doing so, perhaps you’d be kind enough to state the scientific hypothesis of Evolution.

D--Sure. This is not my area, however, so I can only speak about it in a general sense and I am not qualified to argue details. You of course can look up a much more detailed description than I have here.

Scientific Hypothesis (now Theory and Fact) of Evolution: All living things are reproductive descendents from a common ancestor species.

As required for any scientific hypothesis, evolution makes a large number of specific, empirically testable and potentially falsifiable predictions. Grouping all of these specific predictions into a few groups:

1. All living thing must have specific similarities: must be genetically related; must be chemically related; must be anatomically related; and most importantly, these similarities must correspond (in an objectively measurable sense) to a unique historical phylogenetic tree.

2. Living things would be expected to exhibit both molecular and macroscopic suboptimality, parahomology, and anatomical atavisms.

3. Genetic material must have the ability to be modified upon reproduction, and in a ‘irreversible’ way.

4. Living things must be historically and presently found in specific geographic areas of the world, even though they could have lived well in a particular uninhabited area.

5. The fossil record must correspond to the historical phylogenetic tree.

All of these, of course, have been confirmed by the scientific community and none have been falsified (to date). I can provide you with plenty of scientific references if you would like to see them. Note that I am not an evolutionary biologist, so I may not have used the precise technical term or description in all cases.


FH, before you put anything down, I will warn you of this, so you do not waste time: if the information you present does not appear unrefuted in a peer-reviewed, scientific journal, as the hypothesis that I have does, it is not scientifically valid by definition and thus it is irrelevant in a discussion of scientific findings. Therefore I will not consider it further if we are limiting ourselves to a scientific discussion.

Peace,

D

Tiggy, great question!! Ones I asked years ago, as they did cause me to think the more I delved into the Bible.

First off, multiple wives, concubines, etc were not allowed, nor condoned by God. Not at all. Now, the Old Testament speaks of these men that had all of these wives, right. But it never condones those actions. It is a historical accounting of what those men did, and the message that god wanted us to learn from it.

Want a more modern example? We have great respect for Benjamin Franklin and what he did for this nation, right? He was a great man! But, have you ever looked into the writings and stories about his personal life, how he treated his wife and kids? How he treated all of the women he hit on? Look it up...he was not a good father...and was a womanizer (hello, early Bill Clinton!!).

Now, the stories we tell about Franklin...do we talk about these things. Maybe in a cursory way. But for the most part, we concentrate on what he did for the Republic.

What the Old Testament did was tell the history of Jesus up until He was born. His lineage. The Beginning. The OT is much more of a historcal document than anything else. And, as can see by His commandments and how he treated many of these people, God never condoned these sins.

Look, the law is there not to make us better people. The law is a mirror, to show who we are and ow far we have fallen short. The Old Testament is a historical document with God's plan for man and what he intended. And we fell short. Thus, the Old Testament points to the New Testament...right to Jesus Christ.

You talked about slavery. First off, yes...slavery was allowed. Long ago, alavery was actually a somewhat nobel institution. How? Well, let's say I was broke, nothign of my own left to sell. there was no such things as government handouts like today. Where would I go? Well, I could go to a local business man and sell myself to him for a cetain period of time. That I would be his slave for that period of time and work for him as he saw fit. At the end of that period, his debts would be paid off, he would have some money to get started again with his life...and he would be free. Slavery was actually like a welfare program. That is why the Bible outlined how to properly treat your slaves. But of course, sinful man ignores this...and becomes despots. they conquer lands, and instead of freeign these people after a period of time, they are subjegated for generations. Again, the Bible and God NEVER condoned this!

As a matter of fact, why did the Great Flood happen? Because man had moved so far away from Him, that He had no choice but to just wipe mankind out and start over. So, god has never condoned this.

How about all of those nations that sinned (and yes, we can sin as a nation...and God has said that He will destroy nations that move too far away from Him...we had better wake up here in the U.S.)? What happened to them? Every last one of them have been destroyed. Have you seen the Roman Empire anytme lately?

God does not sit idly by and let this go on!

Tiggy, this was a great question. One I wrestled with for a long time. God says in Malachi that "I never change." And He doesnt. His standard has always been the same. Of course, we can never on our own meet that standard. It is because of that, we get jesus and His atonement.

I hope that answers your question. God's standard has never changed for marriage, for sin, etc. Hope that helps.

In His arms.

Tiggy - As a follower of Jesus, I am so sorry for your experiences. You suffered pure and simple abuse.

Now, back to the subject. I find Christianity and Evolution equally amazing. God making the world in seven days is no more miraculous than a fish crawling out of the water and breathing (and later evolving into a human).

What a wonderful world we live in.

Okay, but then whose idea of higher source will it be?

Neo Paganism calls on the Godess/God of the sun/moon and nature as their "higher source", from my limited knowledge of, and they are deeply concerned with the earth, preserving and "doing no harm". We NEED them, the earth needs them.

Buddhism is concerned with self, with the mind. With self-actualization, divinity and inner peace,again from my very limited understand of their religion. We could use ALOT more of those types around.

So whose religion will set the standard of the source of this authority?

I'll buy what you say if all people can practice the religion of their choice with equal respect and reverity from all others.

Because all religion is after all for the good of all mankind. Don't you agree?

Like you MM & FH, I want the best for people. I can think of nothing lonelier or more frightening than having no religion. But again that is a personal choice and to be respected, and who am I to say what is best for others though really. I believe that God will shine through for all people, in what ever form they can understand if given an opportunity. It makes no difference to me what form it takes, as long as it brings peace and love into their hearts.

OK, MM - now you've raised the "Great Flood."

I've asked too many times to keep track of on this thread for assistance in understanding this.

It appears that FH won't answer my questions because of some "game" I'm playing.

I contend my questions are reasonable. If Creation Science is taught in schools, I'd expect school kids to ask the same things. Certainly I'm not the first to ask such questions.

If the flood is part of the logic for dating the age of the Earth - why and what is that age? 6000 years as some have referred to? How is this rooted in Christianity?

When did the flood occur? +/- a few thousand years?

If it was less than 10,000 years ago and it did indeed wipe out the humans except for Noah's family (as you stated in your reply to Tiggy) did the diversity of human life we see today develop on its own? i.e., did Asians, Africans, Europeans, Native North Americans, Native Australians, etc. "evolve" in that short time frame? Or did they get "created"?

And again, how did the kangaroos and koalas come to inhabit only Australia afterwards?

WAT

MM,

I honestly think you are the first to give my inner 12 year old child a good honest shot at a tough question. My inner pre adolescent self feels like I just got at least listened too. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Interesting that people that were my teachers rarely answered the tough stuff. I have another about the creation account if you are ever interested. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Thank you. And you know it didn't fully answer the question, but is there ever a full answer to any question?

You did make me come to one idea--that surely Christianity works within a culture. Heck, we are working within our culture with internet and such. So perhaps it isn't God who changes but people. People are still catching up and perhaps the message presents itself with a little different flavor to different generations and to different cultures. Hmmm. I love discussions where I can actually use the grey matter. And I kind of started this out on this thread rehashing some old demons. Full circle I guess.

Genuine thanks for not taking offense at my first post. I was feeling rather worked up for some reason. I still have a wounds around church and God. It has been interesting to me that it is coming up now after I am feeling so secure in my marriage finally.

Believer--Thank you very much. It is folks like you and MM that make it easier to heal some more.

And you are so right about evolution, it takes some faith too, since it can't be simulated in a lab somewhere and is only a theory.

A thought a science teacher threw out there once--why couldn't it have been God that caused the big bang? Just something to throw into the mix instead of charged up emotions.

WAT--I am not a scientific person. Ha ha ha--laughing at even the thought of that. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> But I remember reading something a long time ago about studies done on Spirit Lake around Mt. St. Helens that threw some doubt on the acuracy of carbon dating. I feel a little small even bringing it up since I can't say more than that on it, just a faint memory. But you seem very articulate so maybe you know what I am talking about.

LOL at myself, that was a fishing pole I was sending into your mind WAT. Getting late here, obviously since I am fishing in someone's head for things that I once read. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Tiggy

Yes, Tiggy, that topic has already been discussed on this thread several pages ago. I'd be happy to offer a Readers Digest version of it if you're interested. Generating "doubt" was the intent, but it had to be acquired via deception.

WAT

Weaver,

All good questions. And the answer is that the truth will always eventually come out.

Look, not all "religions" are good. Some worship Satan, and soem of those are destructive and violent. Some cults teach and practice things that are harmful to themselves and society.

So, who decides? The truth decides. Christianity cannot be a good religion if it calls Jesus the one and only way to God and that isnt true. That makes it a farce, a sham...a lie. And thus, should not be taken seriously. Same thing goes for any religion in the world.

I heard a great analogy the other day. What if you and I were hiking one day and came up to Niagara Falls. We then hiked up river, above the falls. A little ways up, around a bend, we see a guy in a canoe, heading downstream. We yell out to him that there are falls ahead and that he should turn back. He yells back that his map says there are no falls ahead, just the river. And that we should mind our own business. What do you do Weaver? Wipe your hands of it and walk away, saying "Well, I told him." Or do you try to get through to him before it is too late?

As a Christian, and having a personal relationship with Jesus, I know about the falls ahead. I have seen them. What do I do then, when friends of mine...even on this site...state that they have their own map and that I should show tolerance for their position and to stay out of their business. What do I do? I mean, I am safe. And my conscience is clear because I told them. But is that it? Is that all I should do?

I can show you the evidence all day of Jesus, of who He was, who He said He was...and who He is. I can show Biblical prophesy written hundreds of years before He was born, that predicted His coming. I can show that the statistical probablities of someone meeting all of those prophesies.

I can show you how, moving backwards i ntime, that the Bible has been proven to back right after the Great Flood (more on that in my response to WAT). That the Bible so far, has been the most accurate historical document ever produced by man...and has yet to be proven false.

Now, your question is "What religion decides?" And with that question, there poses great problems because then there is a battle of religions. Some Islamic nations force clitorectomies on young girls. Is that wrong? Some force women to wear burkas, and are second class citizens. Is that wrong? Not if religion gets to decide. Any religion.

No, the Creator gets to decide. And that leads me back to the same question that has been posed over and over here...who is the Creator...who was/is Jesus Christ? That answer will decide who makes the rules. I have a personal relationship with Jesus...thus, I do know the answer. I have seen the falls. So have so many others. And, in the end, we will all be without excuse if we ignore the warnings and do not accept Him and what He has done for us. We were all told...and some chose to continue downstream.

Many flippantly say "Oh well...I'll deal with that then." They do not know what they are talking about. It is like the canoist saying "well, if there are falls, I will deal with that then." Sure, everything will be quiet for awhile, and he will just be laughing at those that warned him. But that moment of realization that the falls are there...it is too late to listen...too late to respond.

As an American, our country was founded on the fact that our inalienable rights do not come from government, society, religion, or the inner self. Our rights come from the Creator. Says so in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence. This nation was founded on the rights given to us by the God in the Bible.

Morality, rights, etc come from the Creator. Man does not get to decide. You see, we are way too arrogant!! Life isnt about mankind. Christianity isnt about making us better people. We cant be better...we are sinful by nature, and are stuck with that our entire lives. You can put a suit on a pig...but it is still a pig. We are who we are.

Life has ALWAYS been about Jesus. This whole thing got started for Him. The Universe was created for Him. We are so self-centered, we believe it is about us. And then we can make the rules. That is what happened in the Garden. Our ancestors Adam and Eve believed the lie that if we ate of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, then we would be as God. And ever since that point, we have wanted to be our own gods.

Who is Jesus? Answer that, and you may then know the answer to your other questions. Look, I wasnt here for the Great Flood. Science is just beginning to discover evidence from that age that just may prove it happened. How did the Roo get to the Outback? Dont know...yet. But my realtionship with a very real man (Jesus) as well as the inerrorancy of the Bible so far, lead me to be able to connect the dots and see the truth.

Look, when Galileo proposed the Earth was round, people then could not fathom that. Before Galileo's birth, it was basically unquestioned that it was flat. I mean, how in the world could we stay on top of a round ball? We would fall off. Or at the very least, wouldnt we feel like we were upside down? Science to that point had very little concept for this sphere we lived on. But there was evidence even back then.

The evidence is beginning to emerge about the Great Flood. Some may be refuted. Some not. Just like evolution. And we can argue all day about what that evidence suggests, what it means.

Man is never going to prove any of that beyond a reasonable doubt. NEVER. Not the beginnings as evolution suggests. Not the beginnings as creationists suggest. We were not there, and pure science is not going to prove it.

But, we can use other ways to discern the truth, to fill in the gaps.

Weaver, I digressed there into WAT's stuff. Who decides? Well, who is Jesus? If He is a lunatic or a liar, then we are stuck fighting amongst ourselves for eternity in order to find that answer. I guess the strongest will decide (survival of the fittest???).

Or, if Jesus is who He says He was, then He decides. And then morality stems from Him. And then we are without excuse if we die tomorrow and meet Him...and He says "I never knew you."

I understand you want an answer where I guess God Himself comes down and says "this is my one true religion." But that is not going to happen. So, who decides. Well, either the fittest of the religions and the peoples following them will. Or the real Creator will.

So, is Jesus who He said He was? That is the question. Lunatic? Liar? Lord? These are the only three possibilities.

In His arms.

WAT, I mentioned a little of this in the post above to Weaver. On many fronts, all I can say is "I dont know." Just as those on the other side have to say the same thing, because we do not have definitive proof one way or the other. Of course, these are the questions I continue to ask God. God does not want mindless followers. He does not mind the questions. So, I believe that the answers will be provided to us.

You know, for the longest time, there were people that said that since we had not found the Baths of Bathesda, that the Bible was wrong. It was the first time in a while that someone had "evidence" that the Bible had been wrong. Guess what? Not long ago, the Baths of Bathesda were found.

I beieve that many of these questions will be answered. I also believe that as God allows those questions to be answered, then the protagonists will just move onto a new set of questions. Kinda like drawing a line in the sand. Then God crosses the line...so they draw a new line.

As I search for the answers (and I am actively reading some evidence now and will post once I digest it), I also know that as I look back over my journey, I have seen the answers provided for me. So, I have no doubt that the answers will come.

Like I said, as soon as I digest some of this research, I will post it.

In His arms.

Tiggy,

I am happy this has helped you in some way. I know that I am sorry for the things that have happened in your life that have caused you to reject Jesus. And as a person that knows Jesus, I can tell you He is saddened also. But I also know that He has not given up on you.

I have prayed lately and talked directly to Jesus about you. And I know that He has a plan for your life, a wonderful plan that is so much bigger than what you have lived so far.

I took no offense to what you originally posted, as I too have been in similar places in my life. It is not my job to judge you, or force you to do anything. If Jesus gives you free will and respects your free will...then I really have no choice but to respect that also.

A pastor once told me "If you come in here with your $300 suit, and it next to a fellow Christian who is in rags, dont you look down on them. Because they have the same inheritance you do." So, I look down on no one.

I am here for more questions or discussion. This whole thread has not only afforded me a chance to tell others about jesus, but has also challenged my faith and given me a push towards finding even more information.

So, Tiggy...I have faith in Jesus that He is right there with you, waiting for you to come home. He wants so badly to give you everything He has to offer, to lavish blessings on you like you would never believe. I just pray that you take this opportunity to continue your search for the turht. Because I know that with that search, you will find Jesus along the way.

In His arms.

Well now WAT, would you believe that I have been very busy at home and at work and have limited time to "play" the evolutionary game? Would believe that I am a fairly slow typist and that it takes me a fair amount of time to simply type in a message, not to mention the problems I have in even posting a message on the "new and improved MB."

As for a game, I do see no serious inquiry on your part. All is see is an appeal for someone "dumb enough" to believe in the Creation model to post something so you can it all apart with your predisposition for denying the Jewish/Christian God, much less the ability of such a God to intervene in human histority in "miraculous ways."

You want me to present a "textbook" or "course" in "Creation Science." It's possible to do that, but it's not possible to do that in a simple, quick, post.

As I said before, I personally don't care what you believe. The issue is much simpler for me. I believe in Christ and take Him as THE authority, not some "peer reviewed" (read as: run by committed evolutionists and not 'predisposed' to publish 'contrary' information) publications or "anti-God caused" reason for opposition to anything but Evolution.

If God did NOT Create, then naturalistic "evolutionary" processes are the only other possibility. "Science" bases most, if not all, of it's "possible explanations" for the "way things are" on known observations and extrapolations that "all things are the same as they have always been...uniformity." There are underlying "assumptions" to the evolutionary model that are no more "provable" and "reproducable" than are the assumptions about "how" God created "ex nihilo."

But proponents of evolution are quick to pull a "mea culpa" anytime some new information or discovery comes along that "disproves" a previous "proof of evolution." For example, when I was studying biology, the "favorite" phrase of evolutionary proof was: "philogeny recapitulates ontogeny." It's not necessary to go into all that such a phrase, taught as FACT, entails. It's enough to know that means basically that "higher forms of life" "pass through" earlier evolutionary stages as the fetus is developing. "Gill slits" for example, that are "reabsorbed" as the fetus passes through that "earlier step" along the way to what it is today.

Suffice it to say, that "theory" has been discarded. I previously mentioned the Coelocanth as another example. There are many many problems that still exist with the Theory of Evolution, but it is still clung to because the only other alternative is "Special Creation" by a Creator. And we all know that belief in a "god" is just for the simpleminded. It's a "nice thing" to have and to hold, but it's not reality, as all "good and sane" scientists know.

Yes, that's a bit facitious and sarcastic, but it's also how many many evolutionists think and see anyone "foolish enough" or "dumb enough" to believe that either a real "God" exists or that "Jesus Christ" WAS God the Son, incarnate.

So until I have more time to honor your request with a "proper" posting of information, I guess I'll just have to be content with your thinking I'm avoiding responding to you because of some "game" or some other reason other than I simply have other things to do that are occupying my time.

Later.