Search Members

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

They are alike, but they are not the same. If you read the Qur'an and the Bible, you will see huge contradiction in between the theologies.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

True Christians should not go with the flow on that, and whole it is hard, it is almost a need.

Take into example this. . .

There is a river, and if the river gets enough pollution it can even catch on fire.

Let's say the church is also a river. If everyone who goes to the river (church) and dumps their garbage in there, (extreme sinfulness) then the river will be polluted.

I will say this. . .

Christianity should be influencing the world, not the world influencing Christianity.

Does this mean we will be 100% perfect in life? No! I think it means that perfection is what we strive for, and yes, we should try and make a difference to make Christianity the influencer of the world, not the influenced.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Inner feeling and such is not the only place for truth, but truth is where the truth is.

I do not think a book is the only way to find evidence, but rather looking at evidence is how you find truth.

According to all the evidence, Christianity is firm and all other grounds are blind faiths. Yes Kejohn, I am sorry to say, but this includes you.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Well Jehovah is God in Hebrew language I think, and I don't think it is used in the O.T. very much. Anyways it doesn't matter if you call praise God in his Hebrew name or English name, just as long as you praise the CHRISTIAN God.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

I will still stay here, Is there a way to turn off posts by a certain member?

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Quote (kejonn @ July 15 2008,14:52)

Perhaps he is leaving here because people no longer accept blind faith as a reasonable alternative?

No, Kejohn, it is because you are throwing empty insults at me. Please stop.

The only argument you have made against me is saying that I have blind faith, I want you to read my report on the miller-urey experiment on the “Do you believe in Evolution?” Thread.

Word hurt, and it hurts even more knowing that you are very stubborn in the will, as in no matter what evidence you will say I have a 'blind faith.'

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Quote (kejonn @ July 15 2008,00:19)

Quote (Theologian-and-Apologist @ July 13 2008,20:33) Ah, a Hindu, I would suggust the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel and some book for the bible… Who is supposed to be Hindu in this thread? Oh, and that book by Strobel is humorous .

Okay then, read the Old Testament prophecy and fulfillments.

I should probably use a bigger book.

Baker Encyclopedia Book of Apologetics,

That book is bigger then my cat.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Okay, I'm not suggesting it for that, I just want you to get a firm grasp on the Gospel at first. (The book I reccomended does prove the Gospels though.)

Anyways Tim, That would basically be God being unjust, because you cannot have forced love, and plus Jesus appeared to around 500 people, way to many people to be a hullucination.

Let us get into some Roman history. . .

Romans when killing a new king would parade the dead king and the rewards they won. The Romans HATED Christianity, and it was a Sanhedrin tomb Jesus was buried in, the Sanhedrin, also HATED Christianity, they would have given the body to the Romans and ended Christianity once and for all.

Oh, and if you tell me Jesus never existed, then you basically are saying the Romans never existed, because there are 140(?) Secular writings mentioning a breif over-view of Jesus and a similiar story line to the New Testament Gospel.

I advice you to read the book I reccomended, it covers Evolution, God, Jesus, and everywhere in between.

(Yeah, my spelling is terrible tonight.)

Before you make any more comments I want you to please accept the challenge and start reading.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Okay, I'm going to un-load a whole packet on you…

Yes, truth is never decided on 'majority vote' or by someone saying 'I believe!' Truth is decided, basically, by trueness, or however you want to put it, absolute truth does exist, like Stu has an avatar, and I am typing this message.

I will now inform you on the Miller-Urey Experiment…

In Miller's experiment he produced amino acids, the basic building block for all life, but this does not make abiogenesis possible.

Miller while in his experiment simulated the described 'old earth.' Except for one crucial thing. Oxygen. The oxygen if put into the experiment would kill the amino acids because oxygen has been found detrimental with amino acids and organic molecules. There is good evidence that if the old earth idea was true, then there would have been oxygen, making Miller's experiment a total flaw.

Let's say for sake of argument that Miller had his way, no oxygen at 'old earth creation time.' He would still not have life because of a few issues, take this little example. . . Let's say you have all the things needed to make a Toyota Priase (popular car on the market, nice fuel economy, right?) and you just dumped it all over the ground, there is a greater chance that the car would assemble it's self randomly then for the amino acids to form and make life, because you don't only need materials, but you need DNA or RNA to create life. The chances of the DNA (or RNA) forming is slim, if not impossible.
Plus, based of the Law of Entropy, which I will say is a definite truth, it only makes it harder. The Law of Entropy is basically that the amount of energy is gradually running low, as in nature disorders, and all energy will eventually end. Now for a DNA and RNA to form naturally, because the Entropy tears it slowly apart, it has to be fed energy. To be fed energy is must have an 'engine' of some sort, if you get my terminology, if not I'm meaning something to get the energy. However, when it comes to the naturalistic formation of DNA and RNA they do not have an 'engine' So according to Entropy, this is a lose/lose situation.

Thank you if you read through all of that, if you want more I can give you more things. The fun part about being religious is you can also be scientific.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Quote (Stu @ July 14 2008,22:00)

Quote (Theologian-and-Apologist @ July 14 2008,13:37) A book called I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FAITH TO BE AN ATHEIST by Norman Guisler and Frank Turek, and a BIBLE BOOK, THE BOOK OF JOHN. Smoking disgusts me. As I am the only atheist posting here I will reply to your 'challenge'.  Of course I cannot speak for the thousands of atheists who lurk. The last book I read on the insistence of a christian was Martin Lubenow's Bones of Contention.  The first bit was genuinely interesting as he got into a heated polemic about the international politics of human fossil remains, a topic he is clearly well versed in.  The rest was tedious strawmen of evolution and bizarre evangelical outbursts.  The few reviews I have read of the book you are advocating indicate it will be a similar experience and so I decline your 'challenge' on that count.  I believe I am reasonably well versed in evolutionary theory, at least at a popular level, and I am not sure I have the patience for a big long rant about the anthropic principle, which has nothing to do with christianity as far as I can see.   Regarding the even more polemical, anonymous non-eyewitness “gospel of John” written 60-70 years after the death of its alleged subject, are these the highlights you would recommend?: 3:18 Those who do not believe in Jesus is condemned. 3:36 The wrath of god is on all unbelievers. 5:14 Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to “sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.”   6:42 The people of Nazareth, who knew Jesus well, did not believe in him.   6:53 Jesus says we must eat his flesh and drink his blood if we want to have eternal life. 7:5 Jesus' family didn't believe in him. And piteously of all is 3:16 in which, as an example to parents everywhere and to save the world (from himself), god had his own son tortured and killed. Stuart

Your theology is not stable. Jesus was God in human form, and I encourage you look at the evidence please. 3:18 – Yes, because if you were not condemned it would be unjust, I mean you have a choice, accept God or decline him, God doesn't want forced love. 3:36 – Same as 3:18. 5:14- How did you get that conclusion, Jesus was telling him to not sin, and God's rules are for our protection.
6:42- The pharisee were just saying Jesus' earthly parents were Mary and Joseph, they didn't realize who Jesus truly was.

6:53- This is a symbolic message for accepting Jesus as your personal savior and Lord.

7:5- My brother doesn't always believe in me. Clearly, they just doubted him, the disciples doubted him until they saw the resurrected Jesus.

Before you take verses to try and destroy Christianity, try interpreting them well next time, please.

To Kejohn-

I do not think you have to, but I'm just saying, aren't you willing to look at evidence? You have every right to decline or accept my offer. I just want what's best for people, to look at evidence and make a choice based of the evidence.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 08 2003,12:27)

Revelation 3:5 He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels. So it appears that your name can be removed from the Book of Life.

Before you post a verse consider that it should also be taken into context, it is not meaning that you can lose salvation.

John 6:37

Anyways, if you could lose salvation, then we have a salvation of works, which is clearly wrong.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Well, I have evidence in my view I say. Truly, it is correct.

There is nothing in the fossil record, not one fossil that leads to 'evolution.'

Evolution, as tried by intelligent scientists, the scientists could only get micro-evolution, which is changing in between types, which is like a cat to a cat or a dog to a dog, but macro-evolution is impossible. Well really I have to say, what evolution do you believe in? I think micro-evolution is possible, heck we can even see it happen. But if intelligent scientists cannot produce macro-evolution, neither can blind nature produce it. I mean as in also, there is evidence against it, but none for it.

For more details on this I want you to read up a bit.

Aw, so sad. I don't agree with you on the Bible part. I personally believe you know, all the evidence, and the prophecy, leads to the conclusion that the Old Testament is true.

It is your eternity, I encourage you to read up on the factor. Try a few books… like God and the Astronomers- – – Where an agnostic astronomer, Robert Jastrow (founder of Goddard Institute of Space Studies), looks at the evidence, and then sums up, 'There are super-natural forces at work.'

I take it you are a scientific mind, are you not? I too am a scientific mind, I find true fact pleasing and joyful, so I encourage you to read a few books.

I think a few of these books should be good for you.

God and the Astronomers – Robert Jastrow

And later if you decide you are interested in figuring what 'super-natural forces' are at work, I encourage you to read this book – – –

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be An Atheist – Dr. Norman Guisler, Frank Turek

I encourage you greatly to at least please skim through the evidence.

PS: I'm not trying for the Nobel Prize, these facts are already founded by a few people.

I say to you, please read some of the books I have put up before you criticize the Old Testament, you might be surprised too see where the evidence leads, I was when I saw the evidence and converted to Christianity.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

A book called I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FAITH TO BE AN ATHEIST by Norman Guisler and Frank Turek, and a BIBLE BOOK, THE BOOK OF JOHN. Smoking disgusts me.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Do you not understand how it would kill them to look at the covenant? Tis' was a very important thing, respected at all costs.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Ah, a Hindu, I would suggust the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel and some book for the bible…

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Well dating and unbeliever is not a sin, it is a great witnessing oppretunity, but I'll keep you in my prayers.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

I'm making a challenge, I challenge all non-believers to go and buy a book of I don't have enough faith to be an Atheist and read the book, and read John chp 1-8. If you decline I understand, you disbelieve not because of the evidence, but because of the will.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

I believe men will go to heaven if they are saved, if no one will be saved, then there was no use for Jesus to die on the cross.

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

Okay, Paul, or actually Saul of Tarsus the tent-maker. Was a Jewish person, he was also stable in his basic theology. He knew about Christ, and he started killing Christians, until he saw that Christ was who he said he was and Paul was then filled with knowledge from above and sound Christian Theology, why would Paul lie? Did you know he died in a prison for his new faith? If he believed it was false why did he die for it?

[Theologian-and-Apologist]

I don't know why people believe strange things, I don't know why people don't believe in God, considering that all other views are impossible and self-defeating.

[Author]

Posts