Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 31 2007,08:39)Hi Mr S,FOR DOCTRINAL PURPOSES little is more important than the fact that Christ is the Son of God. Trinitarians say he was never a real Son but a part of God just CALLED the Son of God. The Word was with God in the beginning. He came in the name of the Father, was filled with the Spirit of God at the…[Read more]

Quote (Stu @ July 28 2007,14:24)All scientific theories are waiting to be replaced. What replacement do you propose, and how is your explanation better?I am not proposing the new scientific theory that will replace evolution, I simply am making observation from history. History shows that all preceding theories were superceded by a new one. You…[Read more]

To Stu.Quote (Stu @ July 28 2007,03:22)t8 I presume you are happy to discuss science, as it was you who asked a scientific question to start the thread way back when. Given that at some point you will have been comfortable with evolutionary theory, how have you reconciled your previous knowledge of the undisputable fact of evolution with your…[Read more]

Quote (Stu @ July 28 2007,02:59)I am curious to know what made you give away your rationality.I didn't. Belief in God is completely logical and rational. If God didn't exist, nothing would exist.

Quote (Cult Buster @ July 25 2007,10:06)There is no question that YHWH has been seen….If I am to believe John and Paul as well as you, then YHWH isn't God.1 John 4:12No one has ever seen God; ….1 Timothy 1:17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.Amen.1 Timothy 6:15-16 15 which God…[Read more]

The earth is YHWH's and yet the world is our enemy. The world is a system. We are in it, but not of it.It is often meant as humankind too.I would have thought that there were places on earth that were not populated in those times and therefore were just natural places. The world didn't exist there.

Quote (acertainchap @ July 27 2007,23:56)I mean no offense to anyone, but, it was pretty obvious from the beginning that atheists do indeed exist. As is the same with “agnostics” or skeptics and believers.An honest atheist will admit that he doesn't know if God exists or not because he doesn't possess 100% of all knowledge. That is the…[Read more]

Stu, I was an atheist for most of my young life, so I know exactly where you are coming from. I too argued with Christians and even talked one Christian/Catholic out of his faith. The truth was, I knew more about how and nothing about who.The thing is that not all people are privy to truth. If you seek you will find. But if you do not seek, you…[Read more]

Quote (Stu @ July 24 2007,21:08)There are some pretty bright scientists out there, remember!Is Sir Isaac Newton bright enough for you?He believed in God too.Science and faith worked in harmony for him.Newton's study of the Bible and of the early Church Fathers were among his greatest passions. He devoted more time to the study of the Scriptures,…[Read more]

Hi Stu.Quote (Stu @ July 24 2007,21:08)I can’t agree that your analogy shows the limits of science.  Science is as limited as humans are in general.  There are some pretty bright scientists out there, remember!  “Who baked the cake” doesn’t really explain anything, does it?But you obviously love science and yet you never asked who created th…[Read more]

Hi A4J.The point is that it is a lot harder to disprove the existence of something than to prove it.E.g., If I was to say that there are no square planets in existence, I would have to check the whole universe (approx 1 billion stars x 1 billion galaxies x 9 planets) to be able to state for sure that there are no square planets. Even if there were…[Read more]

If it was the whole earth, then God must have given Noah a pair of Kiwis and some Moas too.Or did God create new species outside of those that were on the ark?Pretty basic questions I know. The sort of questions you hear all the time though.

Quote (kejonn @ July 23 2007,10:06)Well smack my head!OK.Are you from New Zealand?

If Christ is the offspring of David, then it stands to reason that he is a descendant of David.If he is the root of David, then I would think that David is a descendant of him.But how?John 1:3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.He is also called the first and the last. That is what I tend to believe,…[Read more]

Quote (Cult Buster @ July 23 2007,13:39)God certainly is ONEJoh 10:30 I and my Father are one.Joh 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Joh 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee…[Read more]

Quote (Casiphus @ July 24 2007,23:52)Not explicitly. But when we Hi write for an audience (as the prophets and apostles did), there is always going to be some assumed knowledge.Hi Casiphus.Assumed knowledge is one thing, a foundational doctrine that if rejected leads a man to Hell, and yet is not mentioned in either the Old or New Testaments is…[Read more]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 29 2007,18:55)Hi W,. So how has the trinity theory evolved lately?Ooh ooh, let me take a guess.It started of a Binity and changed to a Trinity.mmmmmmmmmmmmmWhat would be the next logical step?mmmmmmmmmmmmmDunno.

Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 24 2007,19:49)Yes. Both of these statements are scriptural.1. No one has seen the Father of Yeshua.2. YHWH has been seen by men.How you reconcile them is up to you.God isn't YHWH is the only logical way to reconcile this, if you hold to both statements. Problem is that it happens to be incorrect and a contradiction, so…[Read more]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 21 2007,09:29)Hi Stu, Is not science a poor tool for measuring life? Does science explain everything? Darwin did not offer his theory as the final answer as to cause but only raised questions as to the means of change yet it is now worshiped as undeniable fact and foundational truth. It seems men were longing for an…[Read more]

To Stu.Quote (Stu @ July 19 2007,19:11)Not3in1: Thanks for the welcome. I'm afraid I will have to differ with you on the “whose research” thing. The fact is that so called young-earth creation scientists actually do pretty much no original scientific research but spend their time reinterpreting the work of others. There are three…[Read more]