Creation vs. Evolution

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Green_Manelishi:
God did make it happen. Humans can study the end result and order (at least what's left of the order) which is exactly what scientists did for years.

I'll ask the same question that has gone unanswered through this entire thread...

What leads you to believe that the bible is 'correct' and other religions are 'wrong', especially given that a literal translation of the bible directly contradicts what we know to be true about the world through observation and experimentation?
 
Marvel:
This link was posted earlier & ignored. I sort of suspect because it speaks of a highly respected scientist who converted from atheist to Christian- sort of refutes the idea that scientists have all found all the answers in their research, doesn't it?
It's not been ignored, just waiting to read the article. Keep in mind that Collins is hardly a supporter of any of the conventional Christian bumph, he is an evolutionist, knows that the universe is billions of years old, etc. This is typical of his views: "By being outside of nature, God is also outside of space and time. Hence, at the moment of the creation of the universe, God could also have activated evolution, with full knowledge of how it would turn out, perhaps even including our having this conversation. The idea that he could both foresee the future and also give us spirit and free will to carry out our own desires becomes entirely acceptable."

I have to agree with Dawkins that this is a cop-out. It just avoids the issue with a bizarre deus ex machina construct for which he presents not one whit of evidence, only epistemological smoke and mirrors. It all rests with the word "could." That one word can make any foolishness true.
 
H2Andy:
i fail to see how quoting from the Bible and keeping it simple can be "false doctrine"
but hey ... i guess anything can be false doctrine

all i need is two passages to make my point:

How can it be false? It can be incomplete.
John 3:16

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten SOn, that whosoever believeith in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2, He was in the beginning with God. 3, All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4, In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

Biblically speaking, would you say that Moses, Elijah, David and other Old Testament saints ("saints" meaning all those who were set apart as believers...not just the big names) have eternal life (saved)?

If so, how?

Can Jesus payment for sin and finishing of Gods salvation plan be retroactive, covering those who came before Jesus lived on earth? What about others without benefit of our level of knowledge of the Gospel?

Those are questions that article tried to address. You just skip them.
and

Revelation 20:10-15

10. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

15. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Who are those being judged at this time?

what is the book of life? belief in Jesus, who gives everlasting life. if you don't believe in Jesus, you go to hell with the devil and his followers.

Is that what the Book of Life is?

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great standing before God, and the books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written the books.

simple, to the point, and Biblical

(i may not take it literally, but i do know the Bible -- and i know bad exegesis when i see it)

Simple and to the point but maybe not so complete. Satan believes in Jesus but will not be saved. Faith in Jesus (Gods salvation plan) and rebirth in the spirit is required...lots of scriptures already presented earlier in the thread. Again, what level of knowledge is required in order to consitute "beliefe in Jesus", have sufficient faith and be reborn in the spirit?

I think you've raised two seperate issues. One, you refer to those who willingly and knowingly reject God and His salvation plan. Here, I agree that we can make a strong Biblical case as to their fate. they are in trouble. I think your issue here is that you think there should be more choices?

The second issue you bring up is the salvation of those who lack knowledge of the gospel...your 21 year old reasonably good man who dies without ever hearing about Jesus. By the same token, what about a child or one otherwise unable to fully understand? These are questions that I'm not prepared to thouroughly address using scripture. The article attempted to do that. You grab a couple of scriptures and right them off as going to Hell? I'm not at all convinced that is a Biblical assumption. Again, what level of knowledge is required? Where must that knowledge come from? Is reading the Bible or having it taught to you the only source of sufficient knowledge? I think to jump to that conclusion is to underestimate God and as the article tries to show, I think there are lots of scriptures that give us some hints that God has other ways, though, those scriptures may not fully explain all of Gods ways to us.

In this second case, if your intent is to scripturally support the assumption that all those with incomplete knowledge or understanding of the gospel automatically go to Hell, I think you have more work to do.
 
Marvel:
Me too. FWIW, I consider it an honor to be in the same general area of the graph as Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, & the Dali Lama....

Really? I don't know about Nelson Mandela's religious affiliations, but the other two are not Christian, and according to the bible are condemned to hell. Don't you find it odd that you are honored to be near these unrepentant sinners?
 
Soggy:
Really? I don't know about Nelson Mandela's religious affiliations, but the other two are not Christian, and according to the bible are condemned to hell. Don't you find it odd that you are honored to be near these unrepentant sinners?

Were you hurt by a Christian at some point in the past to such a degree that it has resulted in this bitterness?
 
DiverBry:
Were you hurt by a Christian at some point in the past to such a degree that it has resulted in this bitterness?

Not at all. I have no bitterness. I'm marrying a Christian. I just expect people to think rationally and consistently. It surprises me that a fundamentalist Christian who disagrees with evolution, a proven theory, would be honored to be aligned with a group of people that, by their own beliefs, is going to hell.

Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways. If you believe that 'accepting Jesus' is the only way to salvation, then 4 billion people on this planet are going to hell regardless of how much good they did while here. And that includes Gandhi and the Dhali Lama. I just want someone to stand up and be consistent enough with their own beliefs and say it...or, explain to me how someone can make it to heaven without believing in Jesus without being a hypocrite.
 
Soggy:
I'll ask the same question that has gone unanswered through this entire thread...

What leads you to believe that the bible is 'correct' and other religions are 'wrong', especially given that a literal translation of the bible directly contradicts what we know to be true about the world through observation and experimentation?

No, I have tried to answer that question for you. You are apparently just unwilling to accept the answers that I gave. That's not the same as not answering though.
 
MikeFerrara:
No, I have tried to answer that question for you. You are apparently just unwilling to accept the answers that I gave. That's not the same as not answering though.

Yes, you're right. You did try to answer. The answers you gave don't make sense to me, but you did answer. Pug privately also tried to answer. His answers didn't make a lot of sense, either. I guess I don't have the mental ability to be able to comprehend this type of faith. It makes absolutely no sense to me and things that don't make sense to me frustrate me.
 
Soggy:
Not at all. I have no bitterness. I'm marrying a Christian. I just expect people to think rationally and consistently. It surprises me that a fundamentalist Christian who disagrees with evolution, a proven theory, would be honored to be aligned with a group of people that, by their own beliefs, is going to hell.

Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways. If you believe that 'accepting Jesus' is the only way to salvation, then 4 billion people on this planet are going to hell regardless of how much good they did while here. And that includes Gandhi and the Dhali Lama. I just want someone to stand up and be consistent enough with their own beliefs and say it...or, explain to me how someone can make it to heaven without believing in Jesus without being a hypocrite.

Is that all you want?

I don't agree with all the points that I think Andy is trying to make but I do agree that anyone who knowingly rejects God and His salvation plan is headed for big trouble...Hell, if you will but more to the point, seperation from God because that is what they have chosen. There I said it. Whether or not that includes Gandhi and the Dhali lama, I have no idea.

That said, I also believe that there is a scriptual basis for believing that God has ways of imparting "sufficient" knowledge of the gospel to those who lack direct and detailed academic knowledge of the gospel.

As a side note...I don't want to be too picky here or appear overly thin skinned but I can't help but notice that you never use capitol letters in "Bible" which is a title or "God" (which can be a name depending on useage) but that you do when writing "dhali lama". Are you just a poor typist and a lousy speller like me or is there a message there?

Your not the only one and I don't really even want an answer but I just thought I'd point it out as something to think about.
 
Soggy:
Yes, you're right. You did try to answer. The answers you gave don't make sense to me, but you did answer. Pug privately also tried to answer. His answers didn't make a lot of sense, either. I guess I don't have the mental ability to be able to comprehend this type of faith. It makes absolutely no sense to me and things that don't make sense to me frustrate me.

I understand. I don't understand the full implication or meaning of all scripture or matters of faith and I probably never will. Understanding and even faith seems to come in degrees. I find that if you take one piece to heart and apply it in your life then you are then somehow granted understanding of a little more. I think it's a journey and we are all at our own place in that journey. From a Christian point of view I think it would be correct to say that we are dependant on the work of the Holly Spirit in us. Why the Holly Spirit gets started on some before others or does more with one than another is a mystery to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom