Posted on 06/18/2009 8:48:47 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Why the hostility toward the Bible and the reverence for Darwin's doctrine?
Thank you. Have a nice day.
You misunderstand. The hostility is not directed toward the Bible, but to the idiots that misinterpret the Bible to say the earth is only 6000 years old. BTW, the Bible never says that the earth is 6000 years old ...
If you’re asking if attending this or that church automatically makes one a Christian, the answer is no, there is no church that bestows automatic salvation and Christianity upon you, me or anyone else. Attending a Christian church, whether it’s Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Anglican, AME Zion, Pentecostal Holiness, nondenominational or what, may or may not lead to that result. It’s a rather individual thing, salvation is.
So you actually believe in, what, salvation by association? Where in scripture is this? Or, is it some sort of scientific process? You’ve got me genuinely intrigued. It’s like reading L. Ron Hubbard or something.
LOL, you have no idea what a can of worms you've just opened, do you?
So it’s all about YOU and whether YOU believe someone is a Christian.
In an earlier post, your first attempt at an answer included this: “...I’ve known many fine people I’ve believed to have found and accepted salvation in Christ through faith...”
I, I, I! I’ve known, I’ve believed...
They are Christians whether the numbers add up on your scorecard or not. Spout all the salvation jargon you want, but all you’re doing is setting the rules so that you can place youself above the others.
In that same earlier post, you disparaged Episcopalians by referring to them as good architects and builders. You have architcted and built a fraudulent vein of Christianity, and you occupy it without the divine presence that you so fascistically proclaim.
I am going to go 'dark'. Turn off all the lights and stay out of the sun. If the speed of light suddenly increased, one could be bombarded into annialation before one could react.
Was Christ wrong when he said “your word is truth”?
“BTW, the Bible never says that the earth is 6000 years old ...”
BTW, neither did I.
We could start by your naming something that is in conflict?
Newton had been a Roman Catholic at one point in his life, but left that church. I’d think it’s reasonable to assume he had points of contention, so perhaps you’re correct, but I honestly can’t say for certain. He was something of a Biblical autodidact, and held many unconventional views.
He even mathematically calculated the earliest possible date for Armageddon. 2060 AD. Doesn’t this qualify him for crackpot status and summary dismissal? He’s an embarrassment to the anti-theist, scientific grand poobahs of our time, no doubt. He wasn’t even peer reviewed, the putz.
Why? How do you know that 2060 will not be the earliest date for Armageddon?
You could start by questioning how life being somehow improved, continuously and over hundreds of millions of years, by means of suffering and death could possibly be harmonious with the Bible.
Cast aside Genesis all you want, and you’re still left with death being destroyed in the end. It’s back to the garden, in a manner of speaking, and so you’ll find that it’s not possible to just cast Genesis aside. Very briefly, death entered in through sin; sin and death will be abolished, and Creation restored.
“But since Buck made the assertions I quoted to you...”
About Darwin and scripture? I made no such assertion, Forrest. My assertion concerned evolution and Christianity, a very different set of terms, indeed.
I recognize your cognitive limitations, but please don’t misrepresent me when it’s so easy to get it right.
Well, the Bible has a bunch of episodes where God destroyed most of man and animals by means of suffering and death in order to 'improve' the gene pool.
Doesn't his anti-trinitism bother you?
No, it's all about you and whether you've accepted the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ that makes you a Christian, Buck W., and your being so thoroughly resistant to that is precisely why I question your profession of Christianity. It has nothing to do with me, other than it just happens to be me asking you the questions you don't want to hear.
You asked me what I beleived, and it's quite difficult to answer a question about my beliefs without referencing myself. Try it yourself. It's not really possible, unless you resort to speaking of yourself in the third person again.
If you believe someone who attends a nominal Christian church is doing anything but going through the motions, without personal acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, you're sadly mistaken. Go read your Bible, if you have one. It's in there.
As far as your frantic barking and yelping about Episcopalianism, well, a hit dog will holler.
No, it’s about you and your judgment of who is and is not Christian. I bet you leave waitresses bible tracts instead of tips and believe that they’ll appreciate the gesture.
That’s such a reach, it’s comical. A bunch of episodes? Try one in the past, and one in the future, and it has nothing to do with “improving” the gene pool. Protecting it, yes. Improving it, no.
First Eden, then the tower then the flood and then several more cities wiped out. Mucho Mucho pain and suffering.
If you destory 99.99% of the gene pool while saying only the top 0.01%, you have improved the gene pool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.