Ego-eimi’s got his own blog and he’s posting his replies there; I thought I’d paste his response here to make things easier and to add to the continuity:
ok I’m here so lets get it on.. before I get into talking about Genesis.. I guess I need to address these comments you made in the Great Debate.
You said:
You were the one who first called me ‘arrogant’. Yes, you were judging my character when you’d only met me on the internet once, and I was naught but a name witha message beneathit. So, in fact, you are saying, “Don’t judge me, but I’m free to judge you all I want because it’s the right judgement.” Yeah, that shows you’re a truly born again Christian with the mind of Christ.
My Reply:
The defining the different meanings of arrogance first:
arrogant implies a claiming for oneself of more consideration or importance than is warranted <a conceited and arrogant executive>. haughty suggests a consciousness of superior birth or position <a haughty aristocrat>. lordly implies pomposity or an arrogant display of power <a lordly condescension>. insolent implies contemptuous haughtiness <ignored by an insolent waiter>. overbearing suggests a tyrannical manner or an intolerable insolence <an overbearing supervisor>. supercilious implies a cool, patronizing haughtiness <an aloof and supercilious manner>. disdainful suggests a more active and openly scornful superciliousness <disdainful of their social inferiors>.
When I see #1.. evolutionist attacking Christians for their belief in creation when #1, they don’t have to believe it.. just state way you don’t believe it.. but don’t start insulting people and think that you are more superior an individual that is arrogance. If you notice the video is an evolutionist attacking the idea of the Creation Museum.. if neo’s were simple saying why without resorting to saying we are ignorant, etc, etc.. then I wouldn’t call them arrogant… If you had been around awhile, every neo faith believe has always, always 100% resorted to name calling, saying someone is ignorant, stupid, a moron, and the list go’s on and on.. for what? You have shown that you are no different.
You said:
You are so certain that every word of the Bible is the word of God. Have you any proof? You say our theoretical proof for evolution isn’t proper proof, so where’s your proper proof that the Bible was actually dictated to humans by God? You have no such proof. You must think the ancient world was Utopia, Ego-eimi, where people didn’t lie and didn’t use God to justify their evil acts. Did God really tell the Israelites to massacre the Canaanites, down to the very last child? I doubt it, especially he’d just given them that simple commandment which said, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’
My reply:
I can’t believe you claim to be a Christian when you ask how do we know that God dictated the what He wanted said to those who followed Him.
#1.. Let me quote what Peter said: 2 Peter 1:16
We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
#2 Let me quote more of what the Apostle Paul said in his letters to the Apostle Timothy:
1 Timothy 4:7
Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives’ tales; rather, train yourself to be godly.
IN Titus:
13This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith 14and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the commands of those who reject the truth. 15To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted.
Now if you look at that text.. if doesn’t prove nothing yet.. but I will add.. based on the science of archeology… it’s a fact the bible is a historical text.. King Herod verified… the pool of Besadaalong with thsi also
Jesus would be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.”
Fulfilled in Matt. 1:18,25, “This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary…was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit… But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”
To not take up more and more space.. I ask you.. Peter. .was an eyewitness of what Jesus did.. it’s a fact that people they mentioned in the Gospels existed.. the Apostles recorded what Jesus said about Scripture.. Paul wrote that All Scripture is God breathed.. Jesus told them not to lie.. the Prophecies which I only mentioned one.. the fact that archeology has never contradicted the bible and has only continued to verify it.. that proves that it’s inspired, because they witnesses the Jesus that you are suppose to believe and have faith in.. so my premise is simple
1. Jesus existed
2. Jesus preformed miracles
3. Jesus had eyewitnesses to the miracles
4. Even Jesus enemies saw the miracles and didnt’ write against it as false
5. Jesus said and talked about the Word of God and living by the Word of God
6. Therefore the Bible is the Word of God
Because Jesus Himself.. demonstrated who he was in front of real people.. told them to go and preach the Gospel.. and validated them by giving them power to do miracles just like the pattern has been thru out the bible OT Prophets and Apostles were given power to demonstrate..
So u tell me how it’s not Inspired when they witnessed the one prophecied about.. saw Him do miracles as was prophesied that Jesus would do, they died for it.. when they simply could have denied all of it to live, and Jesus Himself gave them Authoirty, which u think ordaination means nothing.. well when Jesus does to someone, it suppose to mean something…
You said..
If the words of every prophet was actually written down correctly and validated by God, then perhaps I should believe every single word of the Qur’an as well, because Mohammed was a prophet.
My reply:
No Mohammed isn’t a prophet by biblical standards.. and u are suppose to know this.. how long have u been a Christian? The rules for a Prophet are laid out in Scripture.
OT Prophets.. this is another thing that validates them as speaking the very words of God, and I already gave you an example u didn’t address.. If a Prophet said anything that God said would happen if Israel for example didn’t repent.. if it didn’t come true 100% they didn’t hear from God, but if it did then they did speak the words of God. The prophecies about Jesus like His virgin birth, Jesus was born of a virgin, His mother was looked upon as unclean because she was preganant before marriage.. and Jesus was called a bastard if you don’t know what is said in Jewish history. And how do we know she was a virgin.. well it’s simple.. it was prophecied coupled with Jesus’ miracles.. if Jesus wasn’t born of a virgin, that would make God a liar which the bible says God can’t do.. and the miracles validate that He was indeed the one.. and people friends and foes saw Jesus doing the miracles… so what am I suppose to reject it.. give me a good reason to reject it.. again, when there were eyewitnesses to the miracles which validate Jesus and if He wasn’t virgin born, then He would be invalidated as the Messiah..
So to say.. Mohammad wasn’t a Prophet.. not by the biblical standards He didn’t do Miracles like the Apostles.. and the Quran speaks against Jesus as Resurrected.. therefore why would u a so called Christian even try to use it to make your point against the Bible?
You said: How do you know that every single prophet spoke the absolute truth and that they didn’t somehow misinterpret information?
My reply:
Already addressed it.. if they spoke for God it had to happen 100%, if they didn’t it was false. Anyone who exams the Scripture the Dead Sea Scrolls and see the verses mentioned in Isiah about Jesus.. knowing those things were written hundreds of years prior and they happened the way God said it.. then it’s from God.. and if you read the OT and what the Prophets said.. it’s consitent all the way thru.. God doesn’t change.. how He validates people…
You said:
You must think the ancient world was Utopia, Ego-eimi, where people didn’t lie and didn’t use God to justify their evil acts. Did God really tell the Israelites to massacre the Canaanites, down to the very last child? I doubt it, especially he’d just given them that simple commandment which said, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’
My reply:
I never said people don’t use God to justify their behavior.. why didn’t u quote so everyone could see the verse I quote about people thinking they were doing things in the name of the Lord when we were talking about the Crusades? Why did u leave that out? You give the appearance that I didn’t address that in your forum..
About Moses ordingthe Israelites to go to war with the Canaanites. Yes God would order that.. remember.. God sent the Flood that killed more people than that.. so why would I not think that? Second.. the people of the day like Israel lived under a ban.. which means that when they went to war in those times tribes would often kill who villiages.. and secondly from what I have studied about the Cutlureof the day Jewish people.. God always gave nations time to repent.. God never, ever sent Israel to war without giving a nation a chance.. and thirdly, you don’t know either that.. the only ones killed when it says Israel killed all.. it’s not talking about all in the sense u are thinking.. it’s all those who choose to fight Israel.. you do realize that woman and young children went withIsrael.. but also that children there are also several views.. some see those children as of fighting age the ones that died. some see it as if God chooses He can take life at any age, b/c He created it..my view is there were woman and very young children who were not corrupted were spared and lived as aliens with Israel.. ever heard of Rahab? A non-Jew… God took in those that accepted Him. and those that rejected Him in that time period when Israel was going to the Promised Land.. that was that time period..
And why are you trying to defend God.. God is well aware of what People would say reading the Old Testament? God needs no defending.. the Gospel message is offensive… and that needs no defense.. so if you are trying to say your God is mercyful, not Vengiful, then you are ignoring a whole lot of what is to happen on Judgement day.. when God will judge the wicked.. I”m not worried about what people think of God and what God ordered.. why are you?
You said:
Jeremiah might have been telling the truth, but would every prophet be like him and tell the absolute truth? And Paul was simply writing down his views. They could be wrong. How can you prove anything? Are you going to say that you know Paul was completely right because you have the mind of Christ, and since you think he’s right, then Christ must surely agree with you? Just because someone is ordained doesn’t mean that they don’t make mistakes. They’re still human.
My reply:
You are making an assumption which you can.. asking question that could have someone been wrong.. of course.. but when it comes to God telling those who He selects as when they Prophecied.. or said what God will do if someone doesn’t repent.. that isn’t wrong but truth as long as if it happened as they said God said it.. that eleminates error. Same thing with Paul it applies, if he said anything that God said, it has to happen 100%, that is how you eliminate the Jim Jones and the David Koresh’s. And I didn’t say Paul was completely right.. Paul got into arguments with other Apostles they had disputes.. but that doesn’t remove the fact that God can use ordinary people, and it is you that sounds like an unbeliever lacking faith in God’s abilities to use people? Do you doubt God can use people since you have claimed to be a Christian? Can God exercise the use of people if they are willing to be used by Him?
and yeah.. ordaintion doesn’t eliminate make a sinful mistake.. why do you think 1 John 1:9 is there for all Christians to see? Peter denied Jesus 3 times.. but Jesus still used Him.. your problem seems to be that yes we are mistake prone.. but that doesn’t mean we can’t communicate God’s truth, one has nothing to do with the other.. it doesn’t mean just because you tell a lie at one moment that you can’t ever speak truth…. God commanded repentance, but God also commanded being truthful to your neighbor, and they were truthful when it came to communicating things about Jesus, God, Faith, the Holy Spirit.. why would they lie about Jesus? Why would they lie about God? When there is warnings of misleading people like Jesus said about misleading children? There is a consiquence.
You said:
If Christianity means discriminating against people of other beliefs, and universalism means getting along with everybody and spreading peace, then I’ll gladly be a universalist, Ego-eimi
My reply:
Then what are you going to say or what would you say to Jesus when He clearly said that He is the truth, the way and the Life, no one comes to the Father except thru Him? Are you going to say John lied then about what Jesus said, when John was an eyewitness to Jesus? Does that mean Jesus is a bioget? Does that mean Jesus isn’t peaceful? No.. but Jesus Himself, said He came to bring division, do you know where that is even written in the Bible? Jesus came to seperate the sheep from the goats.. meaning the wicked from the richteous, Jesus came to get those who will and are willing to repent.. that is what it is weater I like it or not. But what would you say to Him, because Jesus isn’t a universalilst.. and that makes me question your faith, why would you go against Jesus. unless you are going to call people lies without justification, u are assuming that Prophets or Apostles lied, withproving it.. so why don’t you prove John lied.. I believe John told the truth about Jesus being the only way to Heaven, because He too witnessed miracles done by Jesus so what’s the justification for lying?
You said:
A religion which spreads dissension, discrimination and hatred is not one which I want to be part of. And how is your attitude spreading Christ’s love?
My reply:
LOL.. if society was all atheistic, guess what there will still be dissension, discrimination and hatred. Look you have got to be kidding if you think that Christianity is the cause of any of those things.. you can look to the late communist country of Russia, and see that there was dissenstion in that country. I have been discriminated against for several reasons, by non-religouspeople… so if you are saying you don’t want to be a part of a faith because of those things, then where are you giong to go live? Because those things weather a person is white, black, green, a Muslim, a Buddist, an Atheist, there will always be someone out there with a population of 6.5 billion people that is non-religousthat will do one of those things.. heck, I’m married, and me and my wife have experience dissension between each other.. i had that withmy sister growing up, u can’t avoid it, and faithsometimes or not has nothing to do with it.
You said:
Yes, I’m a broken record for declaring that evolution makes more sense than creationism. However, I’m at least not quoting anyone, and adding my own arguments as to why I believe that evolution actually happened and is compatible with religion. Which brings me to the ‘correct way’ to interpret historical texts, whether they are secular or religious. Just because someone has a Ph’D doesn’t mean they’re smarter than me. If we all just deferred to people with Ph’Ds, then no one would ever get new ideas. We’d still be living in the dark ages, believing that ”God has revealed the truth through religion. Reason can be used to prove the truth. However, if reason contradicts religion, then reason is obsolete.” Wait, you still believe that twelfth century teaching, don’t you?
My reply:
Are you serious.. just because someone has a Ph’D doesn’t mean they’re smarter than you? Really.. so does that mean that a Doctor who has a Ph’d in cardiology isn’t smarter than you in that context? How about oncology? You need to make a comment when it comes to Ph’d’s in proper context.. yes they are smarter than you which ever the context.. Yes an evolutionary Ph’d in genetics is smarter than me.. that’s why I quote a ph’dcreationist with the same degree from a major university against it.
But I do come up with my own ideas and see that creation makes more sense than evolution. I asked you the other day a question you didn’t even answer based on your own words that you like to think for yourself, but you didn’t address in the context of evoution of why it’s explained in the context of it better then creation. So I’ll ask again.. explain in your own terms how red bioluminescent light isn’t seen prior to what we see today which it’s something an animals has to have deep in the ocean where there is no light.. explain to me. how it survived, what was it’s way of getting food while this was developing,, where is the animal it came from that had this feature in development.. if you are going to walk the walk, then talk the talk and explain to me how evoution explains this better than evolution?
What 12th century teaching are you speaking of?
And if that is how you interpet historical text.. then that is why you are in much error.. about Genesis.
You say Adam is symbolic.. or that Genesis is symbolic when it comes to creation.
Ok..
Then tell me how this is symbolic when there is no appearance of symbolic language used and I’ll quote several verses and by the way.. u didn’t address the sin question… If Adam is a symbolic person, then that means sin is symbolic, and Jesus had no reason to die for sins.. or do you not know why Jesus came?
Here are some verses:
Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.
The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.
Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man.”
I quoted a few verses referencing to Adam.. now how is it that Adam lay with his wife symbolic? It’s the same Adam that God created in the verses preceding it.. Why would God makes garments for a symbolic person? ARe you going to call Moses a liar without justification? Adam named his wife Eve, how is that symbolic language compared to your misuse of Jesus answering Matt. question about seventy times seven in the proper context of forgivness which they were talking about..
And in ending..
What is your purpose.. to entertain yourself.. I notice that your comment in the end and I quote
“So come on, defend your faith. You said in your last reply that you’re never a coward when it comes to defending what you believe. So come and defend it now, or you will be a coward in front of the world. I won’t even have to say it.”
What? is this a game to you? A teenager having fun? Seeing how many people will jump on your bandwagon? See how many people like it has been as I have read some comments from onlookers the same old thing of mocking a Christian for believing in the Bible which that is what a Actual Christian does in comparison to you which you are misleading people away from the bible, which there is warnings against.
I didn’t come here to show the world I”m not afraid.. i’mnot. but if someone gets some help, weather it be one person that turns to Jesus.. I’m happy withthat.. because I already been there and done that.. being mocked and laughed at makes my faithstrong, because I’m experiencing what those who put their faith in Jesus prior the same thing.. Jesus said to rejoice and if you are not being persecuted for your stand for Jesus.. then what does that make you?
First, I thought that the Creation Museum was misleading even when I first heard of it in 2007; my brother and I laughed ourselves silly over it. Since the video was correcting the scientific mistakes…well, I can hardly attack the video maker for that. I might not agree with her views entirely, but she wasn’t attacking Christ, simply those who claim to follow him but fail to exercise their common sense and then try to force others to believe exactly what they believe as well. I told you to read more information, as it was pretty obvious by then that you knew nothing about evolution (not that you know anything now).
At any rate, as that screenshot proves, you were simply judgemental and assumed I was arrogant after I told you to read more.
You think calling someone arrogant is not an insult? Conceited, condescension, intolerable insolence; those terms were from the definitions you posted. How are those not insulting? Forget the science textbooks. You’d be better off with a dictionary. Once you’ve managed to figure out what words you can use and what words you can’t in a certain situation, then you can argue.
Must you resort to quoting? Firstly, Peter was human. His memory could have been faulty, and although he was an eyewitness to Jesus’ miracles and teachings, Jesus often refuted the teachings of the Old Testament. Remember the handwashing incident? So, as ArianneG summed up nicely, I believe in what came out of Christ’s mouth, not Paul, Peter, James, Timothy etc. If they can make up the idea of Purgatory to get people to go and fight in the Crusades, then they can make up a lot of other stuff.
You’re right, the Bible is a historical text, and as a history student, we’re taught to treat every text with some degree of skepticism. I, for one, do not believe that the God of Love told the Israelites to massacre the Canaanites. How do you justify that, Egoeimi? You keep on telling me that my interpretation of the Bible is wrong. So tell me, how can God, who had just given the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’, tell His people to massacre the Canaanites, down to the very last child?
No, perhaps an atheist society wouldn’t be all that peaceful, but you are using your religion to say that you are better than others. That simply spreads more dissension amongst us, and I tell you this; we don’t need it. As I’ve said over and over again, I don’t care what a person believes as long as they don’t ram their beliefs down my throat and can respect me for what I am. Maybe by your standards, Mohammed was not a prophet, but since he turned the whole of Arabia to God, I say he is. I might disagree with him on some aspects, but I respect him and the religion that he set up for God.
I used to believe that Mohammed was not a prophet, but then I changed my mind after reading about and studying Islam. I’ve been brought up with the Christian faith, but it doesn’t mean I have to accept everything that my elders tell me. Jesus never accepted all the traditions.
No, a person with a PhD might be more knowledgeable, but knowledge does not equal wisdom or intelligence. I have the potential to get a PhD. Just because I haven’t gotten one yet doesn’t mean I am less intelligent. It just means I have less experience in the area. Once again, I recommend a dictionary with clear concise definitions.
In evolutionary terms, the red bioluminescent light might have developed because of mutations in the creatures’ DNA, which caused some changes in their chemical production. These creatures use this light for communicating with each other and identifying others of their own species since most other sea creatures cannot detect such a light, which is important for their survival. Perhaps the creature with the best light gets the best mates, thus passing on good genes for the next generation. The lights can also attract prey that can detect the red light, and that aids the survival of the species as well. This feature evolved because the first one to show this mutation in its phenotype managed to survive and mate with others of its species, thus passing on the beneficial mutant gene onto the next generation. It might not have shown up immediately in the next generation, as the gene could have been recessive, but over a great many years, more of the creatures with bioluminescent red light in their phenotype (meaning that, if the gene for red light was a recessive gene, they were homogenous), more and more of their offspring began to show this trait in the phenotype, and the ones without the red light now have an evolutionary disadvantage, so they began to die out because they couldn’t compete with their counterparts with red light. Give it a few million years, and every single creature of the species has inherited the gene for red light.
There, I hope you understood that, Egoeimi, because that’s the sort of answer a high school student has to write for their biology exam, and it might be too confusing for you.
I believe in free will. All the prophets are free to choose what they want to say and do. They might have to live with the consequences afterwards, but they made choices. They weren’t God’s puppets. You do know that ‘different beliefs’ does not automatically make someone wicked, right? The ‘proper’ beliefs don’t automatically make someone a good person either. It’s what you do that counts. I don’t see how the sheep and goats lecture has anything to do with our present topic.
The way Adam lay with his wife is symbolic of marriage and what happens after it. This is God saying that such an activity is right for a man and a woman who are completely committed to each other, and that people should reproduce for the sake of the species’ survival. There were those who believed in abstinence in those days, and that was not good for survival. Or, it could be a Hebrew myth.
You think I have not been persecuted for my beliefs? Look in the mirror. There stands one of my persecutors. I practise the Christ’s teachings of rationality, love and acceptance, and people persecute me for that.
And here are some random quotes from Egoeimi: I’m in bold.
Experimental Observations Only Yes, Egoeimi. And since creationism cannot be proven by experimentation, what exactly are you trying to say?
”Some lame defenders of evolutionism claim that one needs a degree in biology to refute the origins of life by chance.
All evolutionists need to do is demonstrate how life can naturally come from non-life. Ambiogenesis is not evolution. Get it through your head! That’s why I’ve always said that God created life, and then let the living organisms evolve into the organisms we see today. But only experimental observations please. Leave your imaginations and dreams at the door.” Yes, Egoeimi. Leave your daydreams at the door.
Patrick D. McGuire,
From an amazon.com review of ‘Not by Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution’ by Lee M. SpetnerThe Big Bang and Guano
”On July 12, an abandoned ranger headquarters at Tahquamenon Falls State Park blew sky-high, sending debris a hundred feet into the atmosphere and alarming campers fourteen miles away.
The explosion now has been traced to bat manure that for decades had been generating methane gas until in mid-July it became highly volatile and – kaboom!
Scientists believe that a similar cataclysm 15 billion years ago gave us the beginnings of the universe, though even scientists cannot account for those early bats, There are possible explanations for how the bat evolved. It was a land mammal to start off with. Mutation created a gene for webbed fingers. This gene got enhanced over millions of years and now code for the wings you see today. and for those of a religious disposition a world created by bat dung is too depressing to contemplate.” You know, no one ever said the world was created by bat dung. What is this argument trying to say?
‘The American Spectator’,
Sept. 1993, pp. 8,9
Ego-eimi, are you still trying to say that you have your own opinions? This random quoting makes you look:
a) too lazy to formulate your own arguments
b) lack the language to formulate your own arguments
c) love the copy and paste function or
d) all of the above
Tel. You need to answer all the questions being asked. I believe you expect me to reply to all the things you say, I expect it in return.
What a reply.. very insuffienct when you read it in detail.. let me break down this reply while ignoring the insults on my intelligence yet again.. really sounds like a true Christian. If I can understand it comment.. oh, yeah, that’s very good! So here we go.
(Pauls memory could have been faulty) This acutally is honest, but Pauls memory isn’t faulty based on the promise Jesus made that the Holy Spirit would bring to rememberance all things He said to the Apostles… plus we are not talking about the if Paul could remember what he ate 20 days ago.. but people remember very big things. I remember the birth of each of my daughters why big event. I remember when I got married to my wife 5 years ago and what we did on our honey moon, big event. Big events is what we are talking about here, not small events. And Jews practice using their memories more than what is seen today.
(Jesus refuted handwashing remember) Oh my gosh, go’s to show you this young ones lack of biblical iterpetation.. wonder why she likes to say think for yourself.. I see why, when Jesus wasn’t refuting handwashing, but refuting the Teachers of the Laws extra rules and regulations they added to the already things put in place that God had Moses institute for His people. That is where dangerous doctrine comes from, when people don’t know what they are talking about concerning biblical hermenutics.
(If they can make up the idea of Purgatory to get people to go and fight in the Crusades, then they can make up a lot of other stuff. )
The idea of Purgatory as a Catholic you should know where that idea came from, it’s not made up, but came from the books in the Aprocropha. And if this is to say Paul, or Peter made things up, again, go’s to show how people really don’t know what they are talking about when they are claiming to be a Christian.. i question. Jesus gave them Authority, which part to you not understand? Do you not understand Jesus gave the Apostles the ability to “bind and loose” do you know what that means? Paul said Love is Kind, it doesn’t Evny, Boast or is Proud, Love isn’t self seeking.. and I’ll stop there.. where in that quote Jesus wouldn’t say? That agrees with what the Love of God is all about.. in fact Paul also said Love doesn’t delight in evil? Why would Jesus not agree with that? And obviously you don’t know what being lead by the Spirit means do you. Do you have the Holy Spirit in you? I question that, because you dont’ even sound like a person who is being lead by God.
And I want people to notice.. I asked in the past this young one.. how does one get saved? I also ask this, and don’t avoid answering, because as I’m reading you don’t answer quesitons point by point but skip over some of them. like the one I asked about getting saved. Would you die for Jesus? And another question you avoided. Did Jesus Resurrect? I like to see your reply on that.
(You’re right, the Bible is a historical text, and as a history student, we’re taught to treat every text with some degree of skepticism. I, for one, do not believe that the God of Love told the Israelites to massacre the Canaanites. How do you justify that, Egoeimi? You keep on telling me that my interpretation of the Bible is wrong. So tell me, how can God, who had just given the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’, tell His people to massacre the Canaanites, down to the very last child? )
You can have your doubts, that’s ok, and the bible does say “test every spirit to see if it precedes from God or not” so that is biblical, I wouldn’t tell you not to question.. but God did order the war with the Caanites, and I notice u didn’t even bother to look at what I explained.. not all children died, or woman.. Historians who studied the Jewish history of the day, and I mean Jewish Historian, Messianic Jews would tell you that God allowed those that were willing to not fight to come into the camp.. I mentioned Rahab. God shows mercy to those that repent. Now the ones that died.. they fought back, and there is debate on the age of the children. But you would do well to know #1, thou shall not kill in the Hebrew translation of the word is murder. Murder is associated with pre-meditated.. hatred is the underlying cause of murder, when someone commits it, or they have a sinful motive, like someone breaking in to stell someones goods, they murder a person, because their motive was wrong.. killing isn’t a sin if it is for the right purpose. LIike for example, I don’t think you realize that Islam like Al-Queda they teach children as young a 5-8 years old to kill, and if you corrupt a child that early, it’s better that a few die because of what they will do in the end. And in this war with Iraq, children are put in the middle of the road to stop convoys, and teenage girls and men are blowing themselves up. So lastly, God created life, He can take it as He pleases, weather u or I or anyone likes it or not.
(No, perhaps an atheist society wouldn’t be all that peaceful, but you are using your religion to say that you are better than others. That simply spreads more dissension amongst us, and I tell you this; we don’t need it. As I’ve said over and over again, I don’t care what a person believes as long as they don’t ram their beliefs down my throat and can respect me for what I am. Maybe by your standards, Mohammed was not a prophet, but since he turned the whole of Arabia to God, I say he is. I might disagree with him on some aspects, but I respect him and the religion that he set up for God. )
I’m using my religion.. first off, Christianity isn’t a religion in the same sense as others, and i’m shocked that u who claims to be a Christian, u really speak like you are anti-Christian. You didn’t address Jesus’ statement “He said He is the only way” in fact Jesus said people will be condemned if they do not repent and turn to Him. The Apostles taught what Jesus preached. So why are u ignoring that? And please awnswer that. And forcing someone to believe something.. that doesn’t happen LOL.. a person either chooses to listen or they dont. Last I heard no one is being tied up in America to listen to christians preach. Go to Christian chat rooms and atheist are there arguing with the christians, why, forcing their beliefs on christians. I don’t make it a habit to look for trouble, but I do defend my faith as God equips Believers to do. Paul spoke to Greeks who were people who love to reason with their minds, Paul was the Apostle to them.. and he practice apologetics. so that’s what I do. And you to say Mohammad was a prophet is based on your reason, not what the bible says.. Mohammad doesn’t qualify. But if that is how you approach it, then that means anyone can become a prophet if they bring peace.. that isn’t the definition of a prophet. And mohammad lead people away from the God of the Bible which it came b/4 the Quran, and Muslims deny the Resurrection.. so why would he be a prophet when he didn’t lead people to the correct Creator, there is only One Creator.
Jesus didn’t accept the traditions of men.. but Jesus accepted the Word of God. Jesus made it clear that God’s Word supercedes mans words. Your calling Mohammad a prophet isn’t acceptable in Gods eyes.. because that would be your qualification for a prophet is based on them bring peace.. God’s qualification is they speak for God, and what they say that God said will happen in the Future has to happen 100%. You ignore that this is more valide then someone bringing peace. And the Anti-Christ is going to be a man of peace, that doesn’t mean this person whom is yet to come is a prophet because of that quaility.
(No, a person with a PhD might be more knowledgeable, but knowledge does not equal wisdom or intelligence. I have the potential to get a PhD. Just because I haven’t gotten one yet doesn’t mean I am less intelligent. It just means I have less experience in the area. Once again, I recommend a dictionary with clear concise definitions. )
Who said you were less intelligent? That isn’t the issue.. the issue is that you are taking your knowledge and saying that theoligians who study the text, the Hebrew, Greek, Aramiac they don’t know what they are talking about compared to you. That is the feeling a person gets when they speak to you about Genesis. You outright pretext a verse and apply it to the wrong verse in the OT. That isn’t how it works. Because of your lack of theolgical training, u are apt to doing this, which is dangerous. The Paul told Timothy to show himself approved when handing the Word of Truth.. when speaking and teaching people about God, u have to be well versed in understanding, and being lead the HS first and foremost. God set up teachers to teach. That is how God does it, until a person matures enough.. then they are suppose to go out and share and spread the Gospel.. do Ph’d within their respect contexts is important, u just can’t fly by the seat of your pants and wing it, and think that it’s correct. God has a order and gifts people accordingly. And u do know gifts of the Spirit is a real thing.
(In evolutionary terms, the red bioluminescent light might have developed because of mutations in the creatures’ DNA, which caused some changes in their chemical production.)
Now I want you to notice what u just said, and this is a common thing that evolutionary believers do. This one statement sets up the rest of what you said. when u say “might have developed because of mutations” you are repeating what u told me not to do. You have a presuppostion for mutations as if it were true.. and you snuck that right into the introduction to your explinatin for bioluminescent light. There is no truth to that at all, because you were not there to observe if it was mutation that caused it. That isn’t science.. that is faith. Science is based on testing, observation and repeating theories. We know asprin hinders blood clotting.. now we can test, observe and repeat that.. u can’t test what u said that mutations might have caused this in animals in the ocean that far down.
(These creatures use this light for communicating with each other and identifying others of their own species since most other sea creatures cannot detect such a light, which is important for their survival.)
Is this rehearsed? Is this a repeat from someone else? How do you know they used it for communication? Did you ever read up on this somewhere in a nature magazine? B/c if you did, then u are breaking the very thing u told me not to. I didn’t get this question or idea from an article about how something like this developed.. i thought about it.. but this statement you made seems to be right out of a science magazine.. because I don’t know if it was used for communications…. no one does for something that we didn’t witnessed. It could simple be there for an animal to see that deep, or to attrack a mate, or to catch prey.. or it could be a mutation, something wrong in the gene… but this seems to be rehearsed.
(Perhaps the creature with the best light gets the best mates, thus passing on good genes for the next generation.)
Perhaps indicates another guess, because this agian isn’t based on watching the animal millions of years ago.. or are u basing this on what they know now about animals with this? B/c that would again, not be u thinking but repeating what science says is going on today.
(This feature evolved because the first one to show this mutation in its phenotype managed to survive and mate with others of its species, thus passing on the beneficial mutant gene onto the next generation.)
How do I test that? What was the phenotype animal? What does it look like? This is pure assumption to say this feature evolved b/c the first one to show this mutation in it’s phenotype managed to survive. By the way.. how did it manage to survive without light? Did it have special eyes? Which u wouldn’t know, neither would I. But this feature as evolution would lead you to believe started slowly.. no features pop into existence that would be special creation.. evolution teaches slow change.. so prior to this special light some underwater creatures have, how did they see? How did they eat? How did they find a mate to mate with? Were they asexual first? You see I ask question, and u give pad answers like most evoutionist as if it’s that easy without filling the gaps.. i don’t like gaps.. i like completeness.. u are giving me the same old gap theoried evolution like the fossil record full of gaps..
(You said this: more and more of their offspring began to show this trait in the phenotype, and the ones without the red light now have an evolutionary disadvantage, so they began to die out because they couldn’t compete with their counterparts with red light. Give it a few million years, and every single creature of the species has inherited the gene for red light. )
What proof they began to die out? Give it a few million years? All assumption based.. u don’t know when a feature will show up an any animal.. u speak in the presuppostional assumption of long age.. when no evolutoinist knows when the next change will come, no one.. in your faith, it’s guessing that it will take a million.. just like it’s assume millions of years prior.. your answers still begs the question.
(you said: There, I hope you understood that, Egoeimi, because that’s the sort of answer a high school student has to write for their biology exam, and it might be too confusing for you. )
Yeah.. another ad hom attack that was unnecessary.. for what?
(You said:
I believe in free will. All the prophets are free to choose what they want to say and do. They might have to live with the consequences afterwards, but they made choices. They weren’t God’s puppets. You do know that ‘different beliefs’ does not automatically make someone wicked, right? The ‘proper’ beliefs don’t automatically make someone a good person either. It’s what you do that counts. I don’t see how the sheep and goats lecture has anything to do with our present topic. )
“you do know that ‘different beliefs’ does not automatically make someone wicked, right?
You need elaborate. And by definition all are wicked from the start. U must not believe in Origanal sin? The two have nothing to do with anything.. a person is born with a sinful heart, that is why everyone must repent as everyone has that charge according to Acts 17:30. You can be a good person in the worlds standards but in God economy, everyone can’t get to heaven without Jesus. Do you deny that? If you do, then it will continue to make me doubt that u really experience true converstion.. because u can’t say u are a Christian, but then say a person or everyone doesn’t need Jesus. Why don’t u start posting everything I said, so those that follow when u answer the question can see what I brought that up.. it’s simple.. I believe I said that in the context of peace.. but in it’s direct application, sheep represent those that repented and turned to Jesus.. goats are those who choose not to.. Jesus will return to take what is His, and to send those who are not Away. Two differnt Eternal destinations.
(You said:
The way Adam lay with his wife is symbolic of marriage and what happens after it. This is God saying that such an activity is right for a man and a woman who are completely committed to each other, and that people should reproduce for the sake of the species’ survival. There were those who believed in abstinence in those days, and that was not good for survival. Or, it could be a Hebrew myth. )
Very weak answer.. or it could be a hebrew myth. Your job was to show why they wouldn’t be literal people, and that the verse I quoted was equal to the seventy times seven verse u so easily pretext to say that Genesis is a symbolic account when it comes to creation. All moses did was give an account of Adam laying with his wife.. there is not teaching intended.. but an account of Adam and Eve procreating.. this isn’t symbolic or a myth… prove it’s a myth.. or i take that back, it could be a hebrew myth as you say.. so why or how could it be?
And I like how u didn’t answer all the questions.. u do know this is considered to be interllectually dishonest. I asked a lot of things, and I make an attempt to answer every one of your points or attacks. It took me approx. 1 hr to read and type going thru what u said. So give the people who are witnessing this.. everything that is said.. don’t cherry pick what u want to answer and what u do not.
I asked about sin b/4. Sin is a real thing, it’s disobedience to God. Adam sinned, it’s a fact that it’s taught that Sin came thru one man Adam.. but the Second Adam which is Jesus dealt with Sin and defeated it for us who are being Saved. Jesus talked about Adam and Eve when the Divorce issue came up.. that isn’t symbolic people… and I said b/4, if sin didn’t come thru real people but symbolic people then that means sin doesn’t really exist so why would we need Jesus? The Adamic Covenant was insituted with Adam… that isn’t made to symbolic people.
So in all fairness, u are not answering all the questions.. I asked way more.. and I have responded to the best that I can spending hrs on this computer answers your quesiton.. at least return the favor, and not take what you choose.
Ego-eimi, are you still trying to say that you have your own opinions? This random quoting makes you look:
a) too lazy to formulate your own arguments
b) lack the language to formulate your own arguments
c) love the copy and paste function or
d) all of the above
LOL.. i asked about bio lights in sea creatures.. . And second. quoting is appropiate.. what’s wrong with quoting?
I quote Jesus.. Jesus said “Love your enemies and pray for those who mistreat you”
What something wrong with that.. of course not. If I quote my 3 year old daguther’s words “I love you” what something wrong with that.. give me a break.. nothing wrong with quoting, and it doesn’t mean someone doesn’t think.
I hope you never in your life ever quote someone else.. that would mean the very things you say apply to you.. man nothing better to do then ad hom all day.
Oh great. Did you see that new post of egoeimi’s? He’s not only a bigot, but a Conservative, possibly Catholic bigot, which is the worst. He’s still trying to deny evolution. He says evolution means slow change–well look at the fruit fly experiments, and things like Down’s syndrome and Angelman’s syndrome! Evolution happens all around us; our genes are changing from generation to generation. Jut because said mutations are ’silent’ (non-expressed mutations) doesn’t mean that they aren’t there, or that they can’t produce great effects within a single generation. Whenver genetic content changes, whether radically or minor fashion, evolution and change is ongoing.
TR, when you reply, PLEASE do quote me on that. I think I’ll put this up over on his blog anyway.
You might also want to add that it’s highly possible that mutations occur in nature, and that the animals and plants and bacteria we see now are all likely successful mutations of previous strains because said mutation allows a greater chance of survival in the prevailing environmental conditions. It’s not guesswork, it’s fact. When two or more organisms are involved in a competition for survival, say a bacterium, and one has a selective advantage over the other, the one with the selective advantage thrives and breeds faster and is able to better survive its environment than the other without the ability. That’s how antibiotics work, or are rendered useless, and forms the underpinnings of modern genetic research: Bacteria with a gene to resist a certain antibiotic may arise as a result of deliberate mutation in the lab, or in the wild as a random mutation. It competes with other strains without the resistance gene. However when the aforementioned antibiotic is introduced to the bacteria colony, it will kill those without the resistance gene. The ones with the resistance gene however will survive to reproduce. Eventually the bacteria without the gene are selectively weeded out over the generations, and only the resistant bacteria survive, and the original antibiotic is rendered useless.
More ammo available at http://www.religioustolerance.org
BTW, intelligent design is an interesting concept. You might want to check it out sometime.