tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post3667737600575835810..comments2023-08-08T06:45:13.513-07:00Comments on Fish With Trish: Evidence for AtheismFish With Trishhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04278929770287008838noreply@blogger.comBlogger84125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-83921373272303195372009-08-22T14:11:26.583-07:002009-08-22T14:11:26.583-07:00It's a huge waste of time to go back and forth...It's a huge waste of time to go back and forth with atheist. The evidence is all around, period. We Christians need to boldly proclaim the Gospel. God does the drawing, He pricks the conscious, and He does the saving. Our mandate is to preach the word. Arguing with folk who are so smart (in their eyes) they could never be wrong is absurd. We give them the truth in love and compassion and leave the rest to God. We were never commanded to battle wits with people that think everything came from nothing. <br /> Is not My word like fire? declares the Lord, "and like a hammer which shatters rock? Jer. 23:29Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17516616816878760739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-65676779064066086892009-04-30T01:23:00.000-07:002009-04-30T01:23:00.000-07:00Ryan,
Are you serious!!!
I was using you.... oh n...Ryan,<br /><br /><B>Are you serious!!!<br />I was using you.... oh never mind you don't get it. </B>I learned in school that whenever someone starts a letter they write to whom it is for,...in all those accusations you did write my name.<br /><br />I also learned that in that same case the author could use the name or just say "you" to refer to the same person. You (that is Ryan as addressed in this letter) both used my name and said you to be specific. I apologize if I took my name followed by "you" to refer to me.<br /><br />Scripture is just a encouragement to keep up on the right track, not a accusation. If you want to know what I said read what I wrote.Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-53679299504519006972009-04-29T15:23:00.000-07:002009-04-29T15:23:00.000-07:00Jason,
Are you serious!!!
I was using you.... oh ...Jason,<br /><br />Are you serious!!!<br />I was using you.... oh never mind you don't get it. <br /><br />As far as hating Ray...DID you not put the below scripture on your last comment???? Is this not you trying to say dont hate Ray????<br /><br />"If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.- 1 John 4:20"The Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-440275979701584432009-04-29T01:25:00.000-07:002009-04-29T01:25:00.000-07:00Ryan,
You said:
First of all, I was never talkin...Ryan,<br /><br />You said:<br /><br /><B><I>First of all, I was never talking about you dude!</I></B>That clears up everything. My apologies. I was simply thinking that a statement addressed specifically from you to me that used the word "you" in it was referring to me.<br /><br />Next time you are not referring to me can you not use my name then say "you" as your address follows? <br /><br /><B><I>Second, who said I hate Ray, I just don't agree with him at all!!!</I></B>First off, who said you hate him? I didn't, and I don't see anyone else who has. It is comments that those that lead me to believe you are not even reading the comments, especially the ones specifically addressed to you. I am trying my best to be transparent and very clear as to what I am saying, but you are somehow coming to conclusions about what we are saying and who we are that are simply not true.Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-9702229172678441042009-04-28T17:28:00.000-07:002009-04-28T17:28:00.000-07:00Jason,
First of all, I was never talking about yo...Jason,<br /><br />First of all, I was never talking about you dude! <br /><br />Second, who said I hate Ray, I just don't agree with him at all!!!<br /><br />RyanThe Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-73682476058240080422009-04-28T01:51:00.000-07:002009-04-28T01:51:00.000-07:00Ryan,
Based on the conclusions you are coming to,...Ryan,<br /><br />Based on the conclusions you are coming to, I again have to ask, are you reading what I am writing?<br /><br /><B><I>Fighting with atheist about evolution is Ray style. Have you read his blog recently?</I></B>Can you show me where I have brought up the topic of evolution here? I haven't at all. The conclusions you are coming to about me have no warrant and are false,...I don't know how else to put it.<br /><br /><B><I>...they don't want to hear what the evolutionist have to say</I></B>Another blanket statement that is not true, have you read the responses and questions. People don't ask questions to the other side unless they want to hear from them.<br /><br /><B><I>...how is it working?</I></B>I have done what you are accusing me NOT doing, that is showing people how to "connect" (as you say) with God. I can do no more but preach the Word, try to clear up any misunderstanding, pray and answer any questions or objections that will be raised. God's Word will do whatever He purposes for it to do, I put my faith in God and His promises:<br /><br /><br /><B>“Seek the Lord while he may be found;<br />call upon him while he is near;<br />let the wicked forsake his way,<br />and the unrighteous man his thoughts;<br />let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him,<br />and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.<br />For my thoughts are not your thoughts,<br />neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.<br />For as the heavens are higher than the earth,<br />so are my ways higher than your ways<br />and my thoughts than your thoughts.<br /><br />“For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven<br />and do not return there but water the earth,<br />making it bring forth and sprout,<br />giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,<br />so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;<br />it shall not return to me empty,<br />but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,<br />and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.</B>- Isaiah 55:6-11<br /><br />As I told the Atheist earlier in another comment on this post:<br /><br /><B>"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,<br /><br />“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,<br />and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”<br /><br />Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.<br /><br />For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, 'Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.'</B>- 1 Corinthians 1:18-31<br /><br /><B>Since therefore it remains for some to enter it (God's rest), and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, again he appoints a certain day, “Today,” saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted,<br /><br />“Today, if you hear his voice,<br />do not harden your hearts.”<br /><br />For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on. So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his.<br /><br />Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.<br />Jesus the Great High Priest<br /><br />Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.</B>- Hebrews 4:6-14<br /><br />If you have problems with Ray go talk to him, but if he is a brother in Christ (as many are on here) then you and I are both to love him, regardless of these secondary issues:<br /><br /><B>By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.</B>- 1 John 3:10<br /><br /><B>If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.</B>- 1 John 4:20Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-77533714169888570422009-04-27T14:01:00.000-07:002009-04-27T14:01:00.000-07:00Jason said:
"Can you point out in my comments her...Jason said:<br /><br />"Can you point out in my comments here a "Ray style"? I can tell you that I am doing many things Ray wouldn't. "ain't workin"? So pragmatism is boss? How are you coming to these conclusions?"<br /><br />Fighting with atheist about evolution is Ray style. Have you read his blog recently? I come to this conclusion because it is cyclical, no "Christian" on this blog wants to budge on evolution and they don't want to hear what the evolutionist have to say. So, you tell me, how is it working?<br /><br />Did I miss any questions?The Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-68534653862123086012009-04-27T01:36:00.000-07:002009-04-27T01:36:00.000-07:00(still waiting for answers to the questions I aske...(still waiting for answers to the questions I asked)Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-61425913757167054342009-04-25T15:44:00.000-07:002009-04-25T15:44:00.000-07:00Jason,
I said not just Reformed BUT Way of The Ma...Jason,<br /><br />I said not just Reformed BUT Way of The Master believers too. <br /><br />RyanThe Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-52544279437977664072009-04-24T22:19:00.000-07:002009-04-24T22:19:00.000-07:00Bathtub,...I apologize, i thought you wanted to kn...Bathtub,...I apologize, i thought you wanted to know, sorry I couldn't tell.<br /><br />I would just point you to the Bible and show where it draws the lines.Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-23083074366164886222009-04-24T22:18:00.000-07:002009-04-24T22:18:00.000-07:00Ryan,
you said:
Since I assume everyone (believe...Ryan,<br /><br />you said:<br /><br /><I><B>Since I assume everyone (believers) here primarily are reformed or WOTM</B></I>Did you read my replies to you above? Again I say, many are not reformed, probably most if you look at the history of the entire blog.<br /><br /><br />you said:<br /><br /><I><B>I think it would be a lie to say that we all agree all the time on everything. Thats just being real.</B></I> <br /><br />I never said that, in fact I showed and explained alot of the differences, did you even read what I wrote?<br /><br /><br />you said:<br /><br /><I><B>I have yet to see in these current conversations anyone try and actually show these men and women that aren't believers, how to be believers and connect with God.</B></I>Did you not read the Scriptures I posted? Have you really read all the comments on here? How are you coming to these conclusions?<br /><br /><br />you said:<br /><br /><I><B>All I see is Ray style evangelism, and it ain't workin. Have you ever thought they might need something else?<br /></B></I>Can you point out in my comments here a "Ray style"? I can tell you that I am doing many things Ray wouldn't. "ain't workin"? So pragmatism is boss? How are you coming to these conclusions?Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-15159191139143395602009-04-24T06:33:00.000-07:002009-04-24T06:33:00.000-07:00BathTub:
That is a honest and sincere question th...BathTub:<br /><br />That is a honest and sincere question that gets finally to the heart of the issue. <br /><br />I would like to see how Trish, Jason, and Craig answer it. <br /><br />RyanThe Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-1365640037706848382009-04-24T06:29:00.000-07:002009-04-24T06:29:00.000-07:00Jason,
Sorry if it looks like I am bashing, I apo...Jason,<br /><br />Sorry if it looks like I am bashing, I apologize. Since I assume everyone (believers) here primarily are reformed or WOTM, since Trish is reformed and WOTM, I wanted to bring another voice into the mix, as I don't agree with Calvinism and I don't agree with WOTM. <br /><br />If you truly want these men and women to know Christ and His people, I think it would be a lie to say that we all agree all the time on everything. Thats just being real. <br /><br />I have yet to see in these current conversations anyone try and actually show these men and women that aren't believers, how to be believers and connect with God. All I see is Ray style evangelism, and it ain't workin. Have you ever thought they might need something else?<br /><br />RyanThe Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-55418411857077106682009-04-24T04:53:00.000-07:002009-04-24T04:53:00.000-07:00It was rhetorical. I didn't expect you or anyone t...It was rhetorical. I didn't expect you or anyone to actually draw that line.BathTubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14198295395639562763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-31051117563593062242009-04-24T01:06:00.000-07:002009-04-24T01:06:00.000-07:00Ryan,
Read my last comment to get what I am sayin...Ryan,<br /><br />Read my last comment to get what I am saying. To be specific I am asking you if you think it is wise to use this section as a place to put people in box and bash Reformed theology.<br /><br />Bathtub,<br /><br />That is a very good question. Due to time constraints and because I want to be thorough with that answer I'll have to answer it later today (hopefully).<br /><br />Soli Deo Gloria!<br /><br />jason d.Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-73431713753088450682009-04-23T16:14:00.000-07:002009-04-23T16:14:00.000-07:00Jason:
So you are saying an opposing point of vie...Jason:<br /><br />So you are saying an opposing point of view regarding "Christianity" isn't wanted?<br /><br />RyanThe Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-77657081749843124512009-04-23T14:52:00.000-07:002009-04-23T14:52:00.000-07:00Jason and Vanessa.
See I think you hit the key p...Jason and Vanessa. <br /><br />See I think you hit the key point there. <br /><br />What exactly do you need to believe to be saved?<br /><br />The Virgin Birth?<br /><br />Jesus' divine parentage?<br /><br />The Trinity? <br /><br />The Resurrection?<br /><br />I think it's an interesting question.BathTubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14198295395639562763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-25139714970601658762009-04-23T14:33:00.000-07:002009-04-23T14:33:00.000-07:00Yes but Roger, I don't see how any of that would l...Yes but Roger, I don't see how any of that would lead you to believe that we should worship Ronald Reagan!<br /><br />What a strange religion you have!<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />;)ExPatMatthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08666078524214384329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-67433707922223139022009-04-23T14:18:00.000-07:002009-04-23T14:18:00.000-07:00Quasar: Dr. Muncaster’s calculation was simple and...Quasar: Dr. Muncaster’s calculation was simple and straightforward, based on the fact that there are only two chiral forms of amino acids and of Deoxyribose in DNA. This makes the calculation SO incredibly simple and easy to understand! Since no naturalistic mechanism exists for producing anything even remotely near a 100% chiral excess, and since 100% homochirality is required within the living cell, the probability for this occurring by chance in a 15-billion-year time span and WITH all the baryons in the observable universe (as possible reactants) is easily calculated, which again comes out to 10 to the minus 300 millionth power or one chance in 10 to the 300 millionth power! <br /><br />In other words, it didn’t happen naturalistically! The probability of even ONE homochiral protein or DNA molecule forming is miniscule, to say nothing of the many required for a single cell! (Dr, Muncaster made a conservative estimate of a bare minimum of 10,000 left-handed amino acids or 100 functional protein chains, each with a few hundred amino acids, plus a bare minimum of 100,000 nucleotides with right-handed sugars, which would basically comprise a very primitive bacterium.) If it were complicated, I wouldn’t make reference to this, but the calculation is so VERY simple and straightforward; how can it be ignored? <br /><br />Regardless of how you feel about the age of the universe or Earth, Dr. Ross is an experienced astronomer and HIS CALCULATIONS HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY OTHER ASTRONOMERS, who agree that these hundreds of fine-tuned parameters exist! To avoid the fine-tuning, you need to throw much of the discipline of astronomy into the trash can! ALL REPUTABLE ASTRONOMERS ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE UNIVERSE APPEARS FINE-TUNED! Are you willing to disregard the expert opinions of all reputable astronomers? I suggest it would be absurd to do so, which is why atheists wildly speculate about a multiverse. <br /><br />About the multiverse: we don’t know if even one other universe exists besides our own. The renowned physicist Alan Guth considers the multiverse “speculation squared!” What’s the point of speculating? Our universe may be the only one; the multiverse is founded on assumptions built on other assumptions! And even if we postulate a multiverse, our observable universe appears designed because of the “Boltzmann Brain” argument: if we are all Boltzmann Brains, we’re certainly atypical (because our existence is not momentary), and atypicality implies design, which is confirmed by our observable universe APPEARING to be fine-tuned in order to allow for life and especially ADVANCED life to exist (which requires much greater fine-tuning). <br /><br />Examples of fine-tuning: the electromagnetic force holds electrons in orbit around the nuclei of atoms and permits atoms to share electrons and form molecules which, of course, are necessary for all life. The electromagnetic coupling constant determines the strength of this force. Dr. Ross explained: “If the electromagnetic coupling constant were slightly smaller, no electrons would be held in orbits about nuclei. If it were slightly larger, an atom could not ‘share’ an electron orbit with other atoms. Either way, molecules, and hence life, would be impossible.” (Design and the Anthropic Principle)<br /><br />The strong nuclear force is exquisitely fine-tuned so as to allow for life; this holds protons and neutrons together in the nuclei of atoms. Dr. Ross explained: “If the strong nuclear force were slightly weaker, multi-proton nuclei would not hold together. Hydrogen would be the only element in the universe. If this force were slightly stronger, not only would hydrogen be rare in the universe, but the supply of the various life-essential elements heavier than iron (elements resulting from the fission of very heavy elements) would be insufficient. Either way, life would be impossible.” (Design and the Anthropic Principle)<br /><br />The most extreme example of this fine-tuning is that of the space-energy density or “self-stretching property of the universe,” that property of space itself that causes the universe to expand. This parameter has been adjusted to within one part in 10 to the 120th power in order that any life at all may exist within our universe! Dr. Ross has stated that “Its value cannot vary by more than one part in 10 to the 120th power and still allow for the kinds of stars and planets physical life requires.” (Anthropic Principle: A Precise Plan for Humanity) <br /><br />The world-renowned mathematician Roger Penrose has commented that this fine-tuning may be as great as one part in 10 to the 240th power! (Penrose partnered with Stephen Hawking on the first of the space-time theorems of general relativity.) Here’s a powerful quote from page 159 of Dr. Ross’ book “The Creator and the Cosmos”:<br />“Hawking and Penrose’s colleague George Ellis made the following statement in a paper delivered at the Second Venice Conference on Cosmology and Philosophy:<br />‘Amazing fine-tuning occurs in the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use the word “miraculous” without taking a stand as to the ontological status of that word.’<br />Stephen Hawking himself concedes:<br />‘It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us.’<br />Cosmologist Edward Harrison makes this deduction:<br />‘Here is the cosmological proof of the existence of God—the design argument of Paley—updated and refurbished. The fine-tuning of the universe provides prima facie evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one.… Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the teleological or design argument.’”<br /><br />Back to the space-energy density: if it were any smaller, the “universe would expand too slowly, resulting in unstable orbits and too much radiation.” Unstable orbits and higher radiation levels would result from stars being closer together; unstable orbits would create extreme temperature variations on planets within solar systems. And if the space-energy density was any larger, the “universe would expand too quickly for solar-type stars to form.” Matter would “spread apart” too quickly for gravity to attract enough matter together to form solar-type stars, and life requires a star close to the mass of our Sun.<br /><br />Other parameters include the mass density of the universe, the weak nuclear force, the ratio of the electromagnetic force to the gravitational force, the ratio of electron mass to proton mass, and the ratio of neutron mass to proton mass.<br /><br />In his 2004 version or article on “Probability for Life on Earth,” Dr. Ross calculated that, the probability of a life-support planet like Earth existing anywhere in the universe is 10 to the minus 304th power or one chance in 10 to the 304th power! After deducting the estimated 10 to the 22nd planets in the universe, the high improbability remains; there’s one chance in 10 to the 282nd power that even one Earth should exist in our universe! (They’re revamping their website and that article may not be up yet.)<br /><br />This does not necessarily mean that another planet like Earth doesn’t exist somewhere else in the universe, but it does mean that we wouldn’t expect this to happen—if life-support planets formed on the basis of random chance or whatever you prefer to call it. I personally believe that God may have fined-tuned at least some of the other galaxies and solar systems, so that other “Earths” may well exist in the universe, but from the scientific data alone, this would appear very unlikely. <br /><br />And I had in mind (perhaps I should have stated it plainly) that the design or fine-tuning is consistent with verses declaring that God created the earth and the heavens by His wisdom and understanding, as in Jeremiah 10:12 & 51:15: “It is He who made the earth by His power, who established the world by His wisdom, and by His understanding He stretched out the heavens.” (NASB) Similarly in Proverbs 3:19: “The LORD by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding He established the heavens.” (NASB, NKJV, NRSV, RSV, ESV) Since this fine-tuning is the last scenario we’d expect within a purely-naturalistic universe, we can thus infer, from a biblical perspective, that God foreknew what life required and made the appropriate adjustments in the laws of physics and in the physical parameters of our universe, of our galaxy, of our solar system, and of the Earth itself—so that plants, animals, and especially humans would find the Earth to be a pleasant environment in which to survive and thrive!Roger Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05614010897240402644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-57564669019474685402009-04-23T14:08:00.000-07:002009-04-23T14:08:00.000-07:00Reynold: anyone can rationalize away the most obvi...Reynold: anyone can rationalize away the most obvious truths if they choose to do so. It’s so astoundingly obvious that passages like Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 refer to Jesus that many Jewish people have read them and become Christians as a result! (See the “Jews for Jesus” website.) Even some Jewish rabbis admit that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus because it’s so painfully obvious. Perhaps the “Jews for Judaism” organization was founded to “stop the leak,” because so many Jews were reading these passages and believing in Jesus! I’ve met several of them myself. <br /><br />Also, the traditional Jewish interpretation, that the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is the nation of Israel, fails on a number of points — AS you carefully take the passage in context! For instance, it’s stated plainly that the suffering servant is a MAN (Isaiah 53:3), that He was pierced and scourged (verse 5), and that He was “cut off out of the land of the living” (verse 8) — that is, He died. How could the nation of Israel be seen as a man who “poured out His soul unto death, and He was numbered with the transgressors …”? (Verse 12) <br /><br />You could say “this is all figurative of the nation of Israel.” But there’s nothing in the text itself to indicate this, PLUS God demands a spotless (i.e., sinless) sacrifice for sins. The suffering servant “had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth.” (Isaiah 53:9) And He is called “righteous” in verse 11. These things cannot be said of the nation of Israel; it was BECAUSE of their sins that God allowed them to be conquered, first by the Assyrians and secondly, the nation of Judah by the Babylonians. The nation of Israel of today is by and large secular; as a whole, they do not “love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” (Deuteronomy 6:5) Of course, I’m not saying that the Jews have been any more sinful than anyone else, for “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement …” (Romans 3:23-25, NIV)Roger Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05614010897240402644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-8400960642459952862009-04-23T14:06:00.000-07:002009-04-23T14:06:00.000-07:00Taxandrian: the statement that “God … kills babies...Taxandrian: the statement that “God … kills babies” is an oversimplification. For instance, there are several instances in the Bible where God wanted babies PROTECTED from being killed! One clear example is found in Exodus chapter 1, where Pharaoh of Egypt ordered the Hebrew midwives to kill all male babies, but they refused, and God blessed them FOR their refusal to kill the babies! (Exodus 1:15-20) The Bible also makes it clear that God HATED the “sacrifice” (killing) of sons and daughters as sacrifices to idol gods, which was practiced by the Canaanites and Ammonites. (Leviticus 18:21; Deuteronomy 12:31; Jeremiah 7:31; 32:35) <br /><br />This is an example of what God hated, of how the Ammonites sacrificed their babies to the idol Molech, as recounted by Francis Schaeffer: “According to one tradition there was an opening at the back of the brazen idol, and after a fire was made within it, each parent had to come and with his own hands place his firstborn child in the white-hot, outstretched arms of Molech. According to this tradition, the parent was not allowed to show emotion, and drums were beaten so that the baby’s cries could not be heard as the baby died in the arms of Molech.” (The Church at the End of the 20th Century by Francis Schaeffer, p. 126) God HATED this (Deuteronomy 12:31), and I believe He still hates the practice of slaughtering babies in abortion clinics! <br /><br />Why then would God Himself kill babies, as with the firstborn of Egypt? (Exodus 12:29) Some have supposed “this was a judgment on the sins of the parents.” But in Ezekiel 18:20 & 32, God said that “The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him. … For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord.” (NIV) <br /><br />What then explains this? Numbers 14:22-24, along with verses 28 to 31, indicate that God did not hold children and babies morally accountable; they are innocent or effectively-righteous in His eyes. Connecting this concept with Isaiah 57 gives us a clue. Isaiah 57:1 & 2 reads “The righteous perish, and no one ponders it in his heart; devout men are taken away, and no one understands that the righteous are taken away to be spared from evil. Those who walk uprightly enter into peace; they find rest as they lie in death.” (NIV) In other words, some who die are taken away from the evil which would have come into their lives if they had lived; instead, they enter into peace. This would particularly be the case with babies, who are clearly innocent in God’s eyes. I suspect there are other reasons for this that God isn’t telling us, but I’m thankful; for what we DO know. <br /><br />And there’s a more foundational point: we wouldn’t know that baby killing is wrong unless God had placed His moral law (sensibilities, standards) into every human heart — a clear indication that He wants babies preserved, and NOT killed! Paul said in Romans 2:14-15: “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law … they show the work of the Law written in their hearts …” (NASB) In a universe without God (if such a one could exist), we would have no real moral sensibilities. Why? Random chance and natural processes won’t produce them. <br /><br />You might say “even in an atheistic universe, society would agree on moral standards for its own preservation.” That could happen, but YOU would not feel morally outraged when someone else kills babies unless YOUR life was threatened or directly affected. Why feel upset at ANY moral crime if absolute (i.e., God-given) moral standards don’t exist? Morality then degenerates into whatever is convenient for the moment. <br /><br />However, since you DO feel outraged at killing babies, this demonstrates that God has placed His moral law in your heart — a very precious gift indeed.Roger Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05614010897240402644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-81352301207730052552009-04-23T02:06:00.000-07:002009-04-23T02:06:00.000-07:00BathTub,
Looks like we agree here:
"Now it doesn...BathTub,<br /><br />Looks like we agree here:<br /><br /><B><I>"Now it doesn't disprove it, but it doesn't help convince an outsider looking in that you know what you are talking about."</I></B>I understand that this is not convincing, but the Bible is clear that the gospel, the preaching of the cross IS foolishness to those who are perishing, why? So God can get all the credit, all the glory for saving us:<br /><br /><B>"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,<br /><br />“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,<br />and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”<br /><br />Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.<br /><br />For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, 'Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.'</B>- 1 Corinthians 1:18-31<br /><br />That is what it is, that is why we preach the gospel and to some it is foolishness, and to others, it totally changes their life and it becomes wisdom.<br /><br />You said:<br /><br /><B><I>Besides you cannot be serious that 'Christians' agree on the fundamentals. People disagree on the nature of the Trinity. People disagree on the divinity of Christ. You fall into the 'no true Christian' issue here. You are drawing your own line in the sand 'the people who agree with me, they are the Christians'.</I></B>Those issues you listed above are some of the fundamentals, and you are correct, some people call themselves Christians that don't believe in the deity of Christ, but that is not Christian, and what I mean by that is that they are believing in "another" Jesus, not the Jesus of Scripture. And that is not a line that I draw, but that the God draws (through His Word [John 8, 1 John 2, ect,...)<br /><br />You said:<br /><br /><B><I>I think it's possible that Christianity is more fragmented than Islam is.</I></B>Perhaps, but again, that neither proves nor disproves it. That does show me though and reminds me that we Christians are not perfect, we fail all the time, and I do, and I wish I didn't, but that is why I daily need God to help me, to strive for unity, to put down my pride and to help me stop sinning, we need God daily. When the Bible tells us to repent and believe, these are both words that denote continuous action, meaning it is not a one time thing, I need to always be repenting whenever I sin and I need to keep on believing in God's gracious promises.<br /><br />You said:<br /><br /><B><I>There is a poster on Rays blog, Mofi I think (I could have the name wrong) who simply doesn't believe in hell. Jesus is the son of god, died, resurrected, believe in him, be saved, go to heaven. But otherwise you die.<br /><br />Is he a Christian?</I></B>I am not familiar with Mofi, but I understand your question. I don't believe a belief in Hell is essential for salvation, however I would ask Mofi, what God saved him from then? I think it is inconsistent for a Christian not to believe in Hell, when the Bible is clear on it, and this is what God saves us from, from sin, from Hell, from His wrath, ect...<br /><br />I would also note here that God did warn us that in the "visible" church (that is the church we see with our eyes) that there would be many false teachers, false converts, wolves in sheeps clothing, hypocrites, ect... But we Christians do have unity still, for everyone who is saved (not just those who say they are Christian, but those who really are) we are all unified into Christ, into one church (we call this the "invisible" church cause it is spiritual and to not get it confused with those false teachers and false converts in the church we can see [the visible church]).<br /><br />Hope that makes sense, I kinda just started typing and don't have the time right now to make sure I was clear, though I hope I was.<br /><br />Thank you for your inquiry and feel free to ask me to clarify any points I made.<br /><br />Soli Deo Gloria!<br /><br />jason d.Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-60077471020100147262009-04-23T01:43:00.000-07:002009-04-23T01:43:00.000-07:00Ryan (The Murphy's),
"Please refer me to Trishs r...Ryan (The Murphy's),<br /><br /><B>"Please refer me to Trishs rules about what this blog is supposed to be, and do you speak for Trish in all honesty?"</B>Ok, there are no formal set rules, but do you really not know what is going on here? It seemed like you didn't so I just tried to make it clear.<br /><br />Just go through this blog and you will see that some Christians are trying to answer unbelievers questions and you are coming in here arguing with all the believers. Bathtub is pointing this out, and I think it would make sense to take your issues to a in house debate somewhere else.<br /><br />You can also read about Trish's site purpose here from her site: http://fishwithtrish.com/whyfish.php<br /><br />And, to answer the 2nd part of your question in all honesty I say these things because I personally know Trish, I help her with this website, whether it be adding new pages, or fixing things, and I have setup several other blogs for her, and even helped her with some stuff on this one. I know and I think anyone that is a regular here knows what she is all about and what she is setting out to accomplish. If I recall you have made statements in the past that showed you did not know what you were accusing Ray & Trish of (http://fishwithtrish.blogspot.com/2009/03/interesting-comments_17.html?showComment=1237538640000#c1703861273998298541) and it seemed like everyone patiently explained it to you. So I think you know what I am talking about.<br /><br />I can't stop you, but I don't see how what you are doing is beneficial or wise in how you keep fighting against Reformed theology. And based on your blog I am still not convinced that you understand it, based on the conclusions you come to about it.<br /><br />So all in all I am just asking you to use wisdom and to check your motives, I don't know what they are, but this is just a suggestion. I am very sorry how you feel about Christianity and it grieves me that someone who used to teach me about Christianity will not glorify God in the name Christian (1 Peter 4)<br /><br />Unashamedly Christian (knowing that the invisible church is one in Christ though the visible is full of hypocrites and wolves and divisions, ect...)<br /><br />jason d.Jason and Vanessahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406412654100300608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-5255097491001526512009-04-22T16:21:00.000-07:002009-04-22T16:21:00.000-07:00Jason and Vanessa.
Atheists are not some collect...Jason and Vanessa. <br /><br />Atheists are not some collective with a collective 'message' or 'truth' to sell. People disagree all the time, the label only applies because we don't believe in some any sort of active deity. <br /><br />Basically the entire atheist label, note I am specifying label, is a response to what your selling and it's 'well you just aren't very convincing'. The reasons why, and the outcomes of that are as individual and different as each person is. <br /><br />Now on the 'Christian' side, you do claim to have 'the truth', an all knowing, all powerful God who has decided to give you 'the truth' to share with everyone else. <br /><br />If only this same God could have seen that there would be disagreement over 'the truth', and present it in a clear unambiguous fashion. <br /><br />Every little thing you argue over about the nature of God, the bible, Christ, Salvation, simply compounds how unconvincing the whole thing is. <br /><br />Now it doesn't disprove it, but it doesn't help convince an outsider looking in that you know what you are talking about.<br /><br />Besides you cannot be serious that 'Christians' agree on the fundamentals. People disagree on the nature of the Trinity. People disagree on the divinity of Christ. You fall into the 'no true Christian' issue here. You are drawing your own line in the sand 'the people who agree with me, they are the Christians'. <br /><br />I think it's possible that Christianity is more fragmented than Islam is.<br /> <br />There is a poster on Rays blog, Mofi I think (I could have the name wrong) who simply doesn't believe in hell. Jesus is the son of god, died, resurrected, believe in him, be saved, go to heaven. But otherwise you die. <br /><br />Is he a Christian?BathTubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14198295395639562763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3329408579460570583.post-79371712904458448302009-04-22T14:59:00.000-07:002009-04-22T14:59:00.000-07:00Jason:
Please refer me to Trishs rules about wha...Jason: <br /><br />Please refer me to Trishs rules about what this blog is supposed to be, and do you speak for Trish in all honesty? <br /><br />RyanThe Murphy'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11117103831437991496noreply@blogger.com