IW,
Concerning our friend Clash, you wrote: The great pity is that men like yourself while claiming great knowledge are spiritually blind.
Uh, you wouldn't be the same IW who jumped all over me for calling Clash a bad speller, would you? : )
aChristian
JoinedPosts by aChristian
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
aChristian
Clash,
You wrote: I think we may have a failure to communicate. ... Maybe we mean two different things when we mean bible believing. Look I am going to give you a historic evangelical document that defines bible believing Inerrency if you believe all of it then everything is cool. Your cool and were are probably having a missunderstanding.
I read the statement. I agree with nearly all of it. However, there are a few things I would have worded a bit differently. For instance, section 12 said, "We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood." Those words imply that the Bible itself "teaches" that the flood covered the whole earth. I say it does not. I believe that the Bible itself only teaches that the land of Noah was completely flooded with water, covering the highest hills in his land and destroying all life in his land that was outside the ark. I have plainly stated my case for this understanding on page 2 of this thread. Because this understanding of the Genesis flood account does not conflict with either the original language of scripture or the facts of science, I believe this understanding is much more likely to be the correct one than the "fundamentalist" understanding of the Genesis flood account.
In this thread I have defended my understanding of the Genesis flood account against all critics. I have shown how it is not in conflict with either modern science or the text of scripture itself. I have challenged you to defend your belief that the flood of Noah's day was global. I gave you a link at which you can read scores of reasons why we know the flood could not have been global. I challenged you to answer all of the questions there listed. You ignored my challenge. Since you apparently cannot do so, the only conclusion I can come to is that the fundamentalists' "global flood" interpretation of Genesis must be wrong.
You wrote: One more thing, women are not to be in leadership in the bible believing church.
I disagree. I'll recommend a book to you. It is called "Who Said Women Can't Teach?" by Charles Trombley, published by Logos Books. In it he shows how the words written by the apostle Paul, which are understood by fundamentalists to say that women are not allowed to hold positions of authority in Christian Churches, did not actually reflect the apostle Paul's own beliefs. And how Paul was in those passages actually citing false teachings then being promoted by others for the purpose of correcting those false teachings. I have explained this on this forum before. See this thread, a few posts down from the top:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=17102&site=3You wrote: Look there is an event coming to town http://www.answersingenesis.org/events/details.asp?Event_ID=456
... Check it out unless your just as dishonest as the Governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses.No, thanks. I've already checked out "Answers in Genesis." I know it well. It is an organization that promotes pseudo science and is often less than honest in their presentation of "evidence." Maybe they have honorable intentions. They are evidently trying to defend what they believe the Bible is saying any way they can. However, since the Bible does not say what they say that it says, God does not need their dishonest defense of him.
You wrote: Is science more authoritative than the Bible?
No, but it is more authoritative than some cultist kooks' mistaken interpretation of the Bible.
You wrote: Here is a little mock dialog between Me=jr and aChristian =ac .....
Ac: absolutely not! The bible is a bunch of crap when it comes to the accounts of the flood.I did not appreciate your putting words like that in my mouth. I did not consider your parody to be funny. The kind of Christianity you espouse is a kind that will only succeed in driving away from Christ most educated people, most women and most people with the common sense God gave them. I want nothing to do with it. You and I are done talking, Clash.
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
aChristian
Clash,
I'm afraid I have to agree with Alan, IW and Hillary. As Alan said, members of the cult known as "Fundamentalists" act as though "their interpretations of the Bible are perfect. They're exactly like the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses." As IW said, fundamentalist Christians often "practice exclusion" and "use verbal billy clubs in order to make converts." And as Hillary said, "It seems to me that fundamentalist Christians are the greatest recruiters for the cause of atheism since the Russian Revolution."
You wrote: 1. Do you go to a BIBLE believing church?
Yes, I do.
You wrote: 2. Does YOUR church that you attend, in particular the elders subscribe to your particular doctrinal distinctive that you have mentioned on this board?
I have discussed most of my views (no global flood, an old earth and universe and the possibility that God used evolution as his means of creation) with the leadership of the last three Churches I have attended regularly. (We have moved twice in recent years.) One Church was a "Church of Christ." One was a United Methodist. The one we now attend is a "nondenominational Christian fellowship." Some of the men and women Church leaders (Yes, women) I have discussed my views with have agreed with them. Some have disagreed. But all have said that they have no problem with a Christian holding such understandings.
You wrote: What is wrong with people who completely believe the bible?
Nothing, clash. Nothing at all. Believe it or not, I do too. I believe the problem you have is that you equate the fundamentalists' interpretation of the Bible with what is actually written in the Bible. Just like JWs equate what their Governing Body says with what God says.
You wrote: But I do want to dialog on the issue of free will.
Clash, I will repeat what I wrote to you earlier. "I have little time to spend on this board. ... I do not believe that God requires Christians to understand all parts of the Bible ... in exactly the same way. ... I believe you now have salvation through Jesus Christ since you have faith in the power of His sacrificial death to atone for your sins. So I don't worry about you, Clash."
I hope you feel the same way about me. Besides, man's free will is a subject that I have little interest in discussing. Professional theologians have debated the matter for centuries. I'll let them continue doing so. The topic of this thread originally had to do with Noah's flood. I have here discussed various subject matters with Alan and others which logically sprung from a discussion of the flood. I don't see how a discussion of free will really does right now. I'll tell you what. I'll agree to discuss the subject of free will with you as much as you want after you here defend your belief that our planet was completely covered with water just a few thousand years ago. To do so, I would like you to answer the article point by point that is published here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
Davis Young is an evangelical Christian and a professor of geology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, not too far from where I live. Several years ago, shortly after I left the JWs, he was kind enough to speak with me at some length on the subject of the flood and on the subject of cults such as JWs. During our conversation he shared his strong faith in Christ with me and compared fundamentalism to the cults. I have also had several long conversations with another well known Christian scientist who made the same comparison.
In one of his books Davis Young wrote, "The maintenance of modern creationism and Flood geology not only is useless apologetically with unbelieving scientists, it is harmful. Although many who have no scientific training have been swayed by creationist arguments, the unbelieving scientist will reason that a Christianity that believes in such nonsense must be a religion not worthy of his interest. . . . Modern creationism in this sense is apologetically and evangelistically ineffective. It could even be a hindrance to the gospel. ... Another possible danger is that in presenting the gospel to the lost and in defending God's truth we ourselves will seem to be false. It is time for Christian people to recognize that the defense of this modern, young-Earth, Flood-geology creationism is simply not truthful. It is simply not in accord with the facts that God has given. Creationism must be abandoned by Christians before harm is done."
Clash, scientific evidence proves, beyond any REASONABLE doubt, that our earth has not been completely covered with water at any time in mankind's history, and certainly not just a few thousand years ago as fundamentalists maintain. I believe that by continuing to insist that the Bible itself says that it was, you cause those here who believe you, to view the Bible as being completely untrustworthy. And since the Bible is the only book that tells them that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who gave His life to pay for their sins, they logically conclude that the Bible is quite likely wrong about that too. Is that really what you want to do? Because that is what you are doing, as evidenced by the comments of Alan, IW, Hillary and others I have seen you interact with on this board.
-
41
"The Day The Music Died"
by Farkel inin 1972 the great irish balladeer don mcclean introduced the song "american pie.
" it was and still is a classic.
the song is full of symbolism and even to this day almost thirty years after the song was first introduced, mcclean will not reveal the real meanings behind much of that symbolism.. in that song, he sings about "the day the music died.
-
-
aChristian
If I am right, I suspect you are posting Mclean's comments to this board because you feel what he had to say about why he wrote American Pie in the way that he did might also be true for the men who wrote the more "mysterious" parts of the Bible.
-
41
"The Day The Music Died"
by Farkel inin 1972 the great irish balladeer don mcclean introduced the song "american pie.
" it was and still is a classic.
the song is full of symbolism and even to this day almost thirty years after the song was first introduced, mcclean will not reveal the real meanings behind much of that symbolism.. in that song, he sings about "the day the music died.
-
-
aChristian
I did not read or hear the interview. But I'll guess what he said. He said that the words he wrote had no meaning at all. They were only chosen because they rhymed and fit together well. And he thought it might help record sales to get everyone trying to figure out the "meaning" of this "mysterious" song's lyrics.
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
aChristian
Faithful,
You wrote: put a fork in this subject because its done.
That's ok. Things were getting way too serious here anyway. We needed a break. I'll tell you what I could use. A good old fashioned Bibleman post. One with a couple references to "fake chronolgy," two or three astrographs and a nice photo of him in a slinky dress and high heels. Just for laughs.
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
aChristian
IW,
You are right. I was too tough on Clash and I came across as a spell checking Pharisee. I'm not usually like that. I should have just ignored him. I sometimes let Fundies like Clash here get to me. And I know I shouldn't.
It seems they are only here to tell me, and everyone else who disagrees with them, that we are all in "serious error." Since leaving the JWs and trying to find a Church home I can't tell you how many Christians have told me that because I have questioned teachings such as a global flood and six 24-hour creation days that I am not really a Christian. Since I left the Watchtower I have learned much and have changed many of beliefs. I hope to continue learning and growing. I do not engage in discussions with others here just to show them their "serious error." I engage in discussions here with an open mind, hoping to learn from others, or to at least have my faith and beliefs "refined by fire" by allowing my faith and beliefs to be challenged. I have little patience lately for those here who seem to have a much different attitude. I know I should not. For I too was once a person who thought I knew everything, and thus could learn nothing. Like most here, I was once a JW.
Clash, if you are listening, I'm sorry for acting like a jerk. Please forgive me.
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
aChristian
IW,
I was not picking on the guy. I was simply repeating what I already told him very politely and at great length several posts up. That because he misunderstands much of what I write, and because I cannot understand much of what he writes, there is little point in our continuing to try to communicate.
-
8
..........and on the sixth day man created God
by OlderTom indid god create man or did man create god?.
the book of myths says that god created man in his image yet men come in such a variety of colours and intelects.. how can they all be in his image.
please don't give me the witchtower recorded message to counter this argument i have heard it too many times before.
-
-
aChristian
Siegswife,
You wrote: When God was alone, before He created His Name/Word, was He 'God'? ... God wouldn't be 'God' without His creation, would He?
Einstein proved that time is only a dimension of our physical universe. And that time did not begin until our physical universe began. Thus, if Christ (the Word) existed "with God" at "the beginning" (John1:1) of our physical universe, it cannot be accurately stated that he was begotten by God "before" our physical universe began. Why? Because the word "before" indicates a point in time. And time did not begin until our physical universe began. So, Christ must have been begotten totally outside of the dimension of time.
With these things in mind, I believe it is safe to say that there was never a time when God was not "God."
-
251
space.com dates Noah's flood to 2350 B.C.
by aChristian inthe watchtower society dates noah's flood to 2370 b.c.e.
they do this by following bible chronology quite closely, counting backwards from 607 b.c.e., their date for babylon's destruction of jerusalem.
however, as we know, the society's date for that event is in error.
-
-
aChristian
Clash,
In your typical fashion, you wrote: So, I would like yo go into dialog with you on the subject of free will and mans ability to chose.
I assume you meant to write: So, I would like to enter into a dialog with you on the subject of free will and man's ability to choose.
I had to make six changes to your grammar, sentence structure and spelling in just that one sentence.
Now, it is certainly possible that English is not your first language. If it is not, I highly commend you for the progress you have made in learning a new language. But I also suggest that, until you make further progress in learning to speak and write the English language, you find a discussion board in your native language on which you are able to fluently discuss your beliefs. If, by chance, English is actually your native language, then I will be glad to respond to any of your posts that clearly appear to have been both proofread and spell checked.