1Cor6:11Man

Simon Greenleaf is not the man responsible for the foundational principals of legal evidence. Evidence in the US came from British common law. It has developed through case law and statute. There is no ONE person responsible. There are many of unimpeachable work and character who would not conclude that the resurrection is real. There is no reason for me to believe Greenleaf over anyone else. So what you're telling me is that you simply prefer to believe the works of person's with whom you naturally agree. Frankly that's no better than Christians believing the Biblical account of Genesis because we prefer the Bible over science books. With regard to Greenleaf, his treatise on Evidence was foundational in American Jurisprudence. That's simply a fact. Another fact is that there is no credible work in existence disproving the resurrection of Christ. There are plenty that simply doubt the resurrection, but none that disprove the resurrection. Greenleaf's work has yet to be successfully impeached. But there is no credible evidence supporting it either. The testimony of the evangelists would not hold water in a court room. They are unavailable for cross examination. Their testimony is hearsay. Doesn't get in. With or without Greenleaf. Really? I would have to say the same thing of Darwin then. I would also like you to consider this website: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageSe...podcasting_main

I still am not sure why you are posting, Jukia. Why would an evolutionist actively seek out a board such as this if he already has settled the issue for himself? Plus, you still haven't answered any of my previous questions; specifically regarding world-view and existential relevancy. And in regards to my earlier comment about evolution being an intellectual reason, I think my statement still stands. It may satisfy the intellect, so to speak, but man is more than intellect. Which is why there are far more reaching questions an evolutionary world view still has to answer. These are deep things that no world-view, regardless of it being religious or not, cannot escape from. What is the response to the existence of evil? How does an evolutionary world view explain objective morality? These are the deep questions that an evolutionary world-view still has to respond to in order to make that world-view coherent. And might I add that Kari20 has started the deep level questions that the evolutionary world-view still has to answer. It's the metaphysical question, so to speak, of the origin of the Universe. Some may say, "Well, the Universe is just there." Why can't I say that about God..."He's just there." We are talking about the deeper question of causality that an evolutionary world-view rarely, if ever, touches on.

I think at this point, I must break away from this discussion. For one thing, my brain is fried, and I don't want to frustrate myself by responding without giving enough time to look at what has been shared. It's only fair. However, so far as I have read, there is still no more evidence to suggest evolution as there is Intelligent Design. Looking at the phylogenetic tree has been interesting. It's interesting how "genetic similarities" (ie, we all have eyes, or some have vertebre where others do not) is equated to common to ancestry. Which is about the same amount of proof, at least to me, that common design is evident. So really, I think I personally feel we must agree to disagree, at least for now. I must say though, for an evolutionist, you at least have more to bring to the table than most I have heard. But I think my last point still stands. Even if you continued to believe in evolution, you would still need to deal with greater issues that stem from that view-point (ie, morality, origin of the universe, probability of Universal cohesiveness, etc.) At least in a Theistic World-view, all of these are answered coherently. But I must ask you also, have you been on any Islamic website asking these questions? Or any Buddhism websites? I mean, they have to answer these questions just as much a Christian does, right? Why is it the Christian that only gets these questions thrown into its face? Personally, I believe it is the overall general hostility the world has towards the True God of Creation. Otherwise, you'd been on other religious blogs as well, hammering them with the same questions as us.

I appreciate the info Agape, and Ovedya. It is interesting. But I think that maybe in this debate, something is lost. And I think it is this: Evolution, if believed, may offer an intellectual reason for life. But begging your pardon, Jukia, humanity's issue is not intellectual, it's moral. And evolution cannot offer a satisfactory explanation for objective morality, moral duty, and the violence, hatred, greed, and the such. Not to mention the evil and hurtful things that you and I do to each other, in the grand scheme of things. That is why, the natural logical outworking of evolutionary thinking, is violence, moral relativity, suicide, and evil. If everything is just evolving, than mankind has no set point of reference (to use a biological term) for morality. It's all relative. You are no more right or wrong than I am. But if I were to take your wife, or daughter, and take a sword and cut them up into tiny bits (hypothetically speaking, of course), would you think I had done something wrong? Because in an evolutionary world-view, all I did was take a person out of the gene pool who could have contributed to it. But that still doesn't make it wrong. But if I were to do that to your wife, or child, something deep within your person would resonate that I had done something wrong. And you had better find out why. Otherwise, you will live your life in cruelty, seeing everything as "tooth and claw."

I have a question for you, Jukia. Did you used to be a professing Christian at one time?

There is a book, which discusses this in great detail, both from a cultural but also archeological view. The name escapes me, but if I can find it, I will post it. I would recommend that you take a look at Bob Cornuke's video on the Ark of the Covenant and the Real Mount Sinai. Great video footage of the evidence of the Exodus. Not to mention what's underwater. But look at it this way, Let's say you lived 4000 years before Christ. You wrote down your "scriptures" on a scroll. Now, think about it.... You open that scroll every Saturday to read from it, and what happens to it over time? It crumbles, or begins to weather. So you carefully make copies, not only to preserve what you have, but to make sure that trascription problems don't happen. But I'm sure you know about transription as it relates to biology, so you have the idea.

#1. I know that The Oddessey is factual. I'm talking about the translation silly, not its factual-ness. #2. What difference does it make if its Old or New Testament? Besides, these are Original copies none the less. And Jesus Himself testified of the Old Testament, so really what kind of argument is that? What date is it today? Oh, yeah. December 13th, 2007 AD. Only Jesus Christ had the power to split time (B.C. vs A.D.) when it came to His influence in human history. #3. You've never spent time with a Jewish scribe, have you? Do you even know the laws and conditions and regulations the Jewish people have over making copies of Scripture? You really need to bone up on this, because stoning would have been kind to one who purposely changed one jot or tittle of the Manuscripts. Would you doubt the accuracy of the Translation of the Oddessey? It's pretty clear in what it has to say, and look how old it is. Why is that any different of the Old Testament? Your argument doesn't make sense to me.

If you would like to see some originals without having to travel there, try this site: http://biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html Again, you would have to travel to other places if you wanted to personally view the originals.

Got a cite to an original copy? I think not. Your reasoning is circular. Just so you know, there are more copies/originals of the New Testament in the original Greek than there are references to Homer's Oddessey. But you don't doubt the accuracy of The Oddessey, do you? Again, just more hostility towards the Bible, rather than real investigation. By the way, orginial copies are available, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, and many others. We just don't keep them in the US. Get ready to travel to the Middle East, Britain, and other places if you wish to see some orginals.

Jukia, could you give a reference to this Darmyple person? I must be spelling it wrong, cause I can't find it. Plus, I don't know what title to be able to find it to read/watch it.

Sorry, I have yet to see a reliable creationist website. At the very least they are misleading, at worst dishonest. I have 2 biology degrees, taught bio and chem for a bit. One daughter is an MD, the other a PhD in genetics. Lots of science even around the dinner table. OK, so WHERE are they misleading, and why? Degrees don't prove that evolution is right; do you see what I'm asking? I'm also pursuing a nursing degree. And the one thing that makes me laugh is Form/Function. Evolution is sloppy and progressive by nature. Oops, basically. And yet, in the human body, there is a complex system of form and function, homeostatic balance through negative feedback operations, selective active sites for amino acids and hormones so that one hormone doesn't trigger every possible response in the human body. The complexity and beauty of it all is staggering. And yet, I'm sure everyone would laugh if I told them my pencil evolved, which is only wood and graphite; lacking any biological significance as the human body. I find myself chuckling to myself, even now. You don't even get a pencil by accident. And yet look how much simpler an object that is. On top of this, evolution is supposedly a progression upward, yet that defies the very Law of Entropy as well as common sense that information can be supposedly added; but from where? If you would like, I would suggest that you read Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behee, professor of biochemistry at Lehi University. I have to admit, I have never read Darmyple, I will have to examine it. But I will mention this, that Dr. John Polkinghorn, Professor at Cambridge University, who is one of the leading Quatum Physicists in the world, who wrote the book "Quantum" which was acclaimed by Physics Bulletin as one of the best in its genre, he said basically this: "That the ratio between the expansion and contraction of the Universe had to be so precise, so exact, and the margin of error so small, that it would be compared to taking aim at a one square inch target all the way on the furthest side of the Universe, 20-billion light years away, and hitting it bullseye." You can check that out in his book "One World". He actually said this in a lecure class. And then in typical anticlimactic humor said, "There's no free lunch. Somebody has to pay." In other words, you don't get a Universe so densly textured, and information rich by accident. http://www.amazon.com/One-World-Interactio...6571&sr=8-4 Granted, I may not agree with EVERYTHING he says, but you'll get the basics of what is being said when you read the book. Plus, you still haven't even commented on the 300 list either. (Which, by the way has been growing, I think its up to 324 so far. But that's only considering those who have actually heard of the list; but look who is on the list.) Basically, this: #1. Evolution is not proven. It's a theory, and peope claim to have evidence that suggests evolution is correct. But we will both agree that it's not a proven theory. That's why it's still called a theory. #2. That still doesn't answer the bigger question about the origin of the Universe. Again, evolution is a process after the origin, not the origin itself. So, I must ask: Have you ever seen The Priveledged Planet, Unlocking the Mystery of Life, Dating Fossils and Rocks by Mike Riddle? There are others, but I can't remember the name of one that talked about the expansion of the Universe, Time, and star position. And yes, there is evidence of a Noachian flood. Numerous cultures world-wide have stories or legends, plus rock layer evidence. Up here in Alaska, we have an old coal mine that is no longer in use in a town called Sutton. In that small instance, one could see 3 poly-straight logs (sp?) in the area where miners had dug over 200 feet in depth. They were about 30 feet below the surface, and clear as a bell. Plus, they were at the top of a hill, not in a valley. So when a tree dies, it falls over, or decays within a few decades. But if you watched footage of the Mt. St. Helen eruption, you would have seen what happened to all the logs that were floating in the new lake created by the landslide. They were standing upright in the water. The video clearly shows this, which is evidence of poly-straight logs occurring in flood conditions. Furthermore, if you happened to catch Planet Earth the series, you would have seen that trees get taller in areas further away from the North Pole. I know, because I live relatively close to it. :-) Trees also disappear in places like Barrow, which also never sees the actual sun for 2 months out of the year. Hmmm, maybe that's why there are few trees up there. But I say this to show that these poly-straight logs could not have occurred during the "ice-age", because of the weather being too cold, and also something called permafrost, which every home owner in Alaska is highly familiar with. Permafrost is a layer of ice only about 6 or more feet under the ground, which prevents roots from going as deep; which prevents the trees from reaching such heights as the Redwoods, for example. So the question is, how did these logs get the way they did? It had to happen in a flood condition that pre-dated the Ice-age.

Oh, yeah, by the way, maybe scientists should stop nitpicking about the anomaly of HIV. (I'm being satirical here to make my point.) Or maybe we should stop nitpicking about the worse anomaly of faulty Radio and Carbon Dating, which no one so far has given any resources to show it's accurate. And yet the resources we mention here are dismissed, which clearly show, with a 10 year old intelligence level needed to understand when you watch it (DVD), that it's not. (Whose the one really checking their brains out at the door here?) Or maybe we should stop nitpicking about the fact that no human skeleton has ever been found apart from evidence of current intelligence (ie, tools). Or maybe we should stop nitpicking about the fact that no human skeleton has ever been found that supposedly supports evolution, more than six to 10 feet underground. I mean, that's a lot of time for dirt to pile up, you know. ( Again, I'm being satirical here.) Yeah, I agree. The nitpicking should stop. Let the evidence prevail in truth. And so far, I have heard nothing, and I mean nothing, when it comes to resources, references, or scientific data that has shown otherwise. Again, whose really doing their homework here? I know I have. I've got posts to prove it. Still in Love, 1 Cor. 6:11 Man.

By the way, Jukia, you still haven't directly responded to any of my post #29 on page 3. I gave you quite a bit of neutral references. Or do I have to mail you one of the videos myself? (Which I really don't mind doing.)

Then it is simple. Dont bother to post on any boards relating to science. That way you dont even have to try to learn any. Too bad for you. After reading more of your posts, are you saying that you do not believe that the Bible is true? OneLight Genesis is not literal. Not sure of the rest. What do you mean by that? What support do you even have to make such a statement? Just because you don't think it is? Give us something a little more than opinion please. The reason I say, is because Genesis is literal. It assumes the reader is going to take it literally when it speaks. Now, whether you believe it is true or not is another matter all together. But it is a historical, literal book. You may not believe that it is literally true, but that doesn't mean that it is not written to be taken literally (Two different things). It's not poetry, it's not wisdom literature, it's not didactic (teaching), it's not prophetic. It's history, and it's meant to be taken literally. What I think is funny, is that everyone seems to take Genesis literally, except the very beginning. Which is the silliest thing I've ever heard. Genesis is still a piece of literature, and doesn't change genre less than halfway into the book! Another classic example of literary/grammatical sloppiness. C'mon folks, this is English 101.

Ollkiller, I am not accusing your character. I'm only weighing your and my soul against the Word of God. And you can accuse me of the same things. It doesn't matter to me, because even though I have lied, and was a liar, I have received the forgiveness offered to me through Christ. If God's Word has judged you incorrectly, please show me. But let me ask you a question. How many times does someone need to murder someone before they are called a murderer? Answer: 1 How many times does someone have to lie, before being called a liar? Answer: 1 How many times does someone have to rape, before being called a rapist? Answer: 1 The point is, is that we all are liars, blasphemers, adulterers, etc. All of us, not just you, but me as well. You see, James 2:10 says, "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all." - James 2:10 So it doesn't matter if you have never murdered, but only lied. We are all guilty of breaking the Law, that is the main point. It doesn't matter if you broke one, or all of them, we broke the law period. If you are taking this personally, then I'm really sorry, but the truth is that God has weighed all mankind, including myself, against the measure of His law. Don't think for one moment that I am judging you in any different way than what God would judge me by. It's always been by the standard of God's Word, plain and simple. I don't have to know anyone to assume that of anybody either, because God's Word declares that about everyone. I'm sorry that it seemed like a personal attack, because it wasn't. I was merely pointing out that our character is defined by what we do. In fact, I don't need to call you a liar. God's Word does that for us. All I'm doing is pointing out the fact that we all are liars before God. Basically, we are all sinners. I too, was a liar condemned by God's Word (Romans 3), but I received Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins. That's the difference between you and I. By the way, Blasphemy is taking the Lord's name in vain, as well. It's not just disbelief. So don't think that you're off the hook with that one. ;-) But if anything I have said is untrue, then show me in scripture where you can defend your character as being acceptable before a Holy God without the cleansing and forgiveness of Christ. Look in God's Word, and show me where you're going to be OK before God without confessing your sin, and receiving Christ. You won't find it, because there is no other name by which man must be saved. (Phil 2:9-11)(John 14:6) This is what you posted: Why not. If your is god is as powerful as you say he(she) is he(she) could have done it easily. To life quest i though that was an excellent post. Especially your point about when jesus returns will it matter if you believe in young or old earth. I'm not a believer myself but if Jesus existed and did return i think it would be whether you were a good person and teated others as you would treat yourself that would matter not how old the land you are standing on is. Your assumption is that someone on this planet is considered good enough to deserve God's favor. The only point I'm making is that: "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;" - Romans 3:10. That's the point. No one gets into heaven because they are good. Because no one is good. All fail in regards to the Holiness of God. (Romans 3:23) Jesus put it this way in Mark 10:17-18: "As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. So if you believe in a God that is not going to judge you according to what the Bible says He will, then you have created a different God in your mind, that is different than the God of the Bible. That's called Idolotry. Basically, its fashioning a God that suits your desires, rather than the true God as revealed in the Bible. I hope that clears up my post. I'm sorry if it felt like an attack. It really wasn't meant that way. But it is meant to awaken your conscience to your condition apart from Christ as revealed by God's Word. In Love, 1 Cor 6:11 Man

I think that says it all. Why bother with any science if you already know it is true to begin with? And if I have I earned the credibility and integrity with you to say so, I would like to gently add this.... I know that in this forum, we are having a conversation. And either one of us can say whatever we like, but when you quote me, and then make the above statement without anything else, it can look as though you are just wanting to argue rather than discuss. And I'm not saying that's truly the case. And I'm not the type of person to be offended by it either. But it kind of reminds me of two people who are in a conversation, and the other person isn't really listening to what the other person has to say; they are just thinking about what they're next response will be. Try not to be that person. Try to truly investigate all that is offered you. I only give what I can to you, because I believe that it can make an eternal difference. I care about you, and value you, because I believe you are created and valued by God. And what God places a value on, who am I to devalue it?

Because, Jukia, we can still take joy, as Christians mind you, in the beauty and creativity of God. Plus, science is still helpful. Just because we believe in God, doesn't mean that the theory of Gravity is useless. Or the principles that make us able to fly airplanes is worthless. All of the scientific discoveries we have, have made our world incredible in regards to what we can accomplish today. Television, Radio, X-Rays, Ultrasound, Computers, Telephones, Cell Phones....all of this because of scientific discovery. I doubt you would find a Christian (unless they're truly a little disturbed :-) ) that would deny that these things exist as a result of scientific discovery. But only for the Christian do we have faith that no matter what science brings to the table, it always is going to affirm what God teaches. And yes, that is the faith part of it. But science is just as much God's business, as is faith. I mean, God has to make the universe work somehow, right? And discovering how is not going to be blasphemous in and of itself. But rather, we are at least willing to put the evidence to the test, and come out even more affirmed of our faith. Think about it. If God really exists, then that would truly be the case, right? Everything scientific would only validate him, right? I'm just saying, IF He exists. In Love and Kindness, 1 Cor. 6:11 Man

Also, even if it comes from the bible, and you call it "religion", still puts the scientific burden of disproving it on you. It's still a scientific explanation which does not contradict the scientific method, investigation, or conclusion. All it does is support what we already knew to be true to begin with. In other words, Prove to us that it is scientifically wrong, despite the fact that it is defended by "religious" people. Just because the information is tied into faith in God, doesn't automatically make it SCIENTIFICALLY wrong. You still have to disprove it scientifically in order for your argument to have validity. You may not agree with the conclusions as they relate to God, but that still doesn't mean that its scientifically wrong just because we believe it to be of Theistic origin. If you can, please share with us what you disagree with in regards to AiG or other sites, and share with us WHY. I personally would like to know your thoughts.

Jukia, you still haven't faced the music. Just because it comes from a creation website, doesn't make it any less reliable. Which, I must say, only makes it more apparent that you are unteachable, and not open to anything that may put pressure on your trust in radio carbon testing, or even test your belief in evolution a little. What are you afraid of? I don't dismiss what people on evolutionary sites say about radio carbon dating, but rather I have placed the method under intense crutiny, solely relying on the facts and data, unlike you who won't even buy or rent the video and watch it to see for yourself. There's no point discussing any further with you because of your pride and lack of humility in possibly being wrong. At least I have done my homework. You, on the other hand, are dismissing this information, only because it possibly leads you to a conclusion you don't want to hear. So what! If it's true, it's true! But you are committing intellectual suicide. You would rather believe what you want, and I believe you are scared that scientific data may point you to God, so you deny it. But rather, you should view it, and let the truth take you wherever it leads. That is the heart of scientific discovery. You lay out ALL the cards on the table. The book of Romans is correct when it speaks of such people: Romans 1:18-25 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen I'm not saying you have to believe in God after watching the video. But to dismiss it without even watching it only makes you look more foolish. I must add though, that your response is not surprising. The reason? If radio Carbon dating is faulty, then evolution goes down the toilet. What other explanation are you left with? Creation by Intelligent design (ie, God). But that is exactly what you don't want to accept, so you just deny everything without any true investigation. You come into this chat room, and tell everyone not to give you anything that comes from a creationist site; but that is exactly what we are defending. Plus, that is also the only other option to the origin of the Universe. If you want to see something a little more on the neutral side, try watching Unlocking the Mystery of Life, and The Priveledged Planet, by Illustra Media. I've seen those as well. Here's a link. http://www.discovery.org/ Also on this website is a list of over 300 WORLD-RENOWN scientists, ranging from biologists, to astrophyisicists, to astrobiologists, who have dissented from Darwinism as the explanation for the origin of the Universe, and life. They are not necessarily saying that they have become Christians, but rather they have conceded to the fact that Darwinism is not sufficient for the origin of Life and the Universe. Here is a link, and at the bottom of the page, you can download the list yourself, and see the names and field of study of these scientists yourself. http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/in...iew&id=2114 Hope that gives you some stuff to look into. And really, I don't believe that you are stupid. I don't believe that just because you haven't accepted the Bible, that you are dumb, or a moron. I believe that we can have intelligent conversation without us checking our brains at the door, name-calling, or being offensive to each other. But you need to be willing to explore the evidence presented to you, otherwise, why post? Just so you can get some thrill at bashing people, who by the way, have actually done some scientific leg-work and have presented it to you? In all gentleness in Christ, 1 Cor 6:11 man

To Jukia, I would recommend a video called "Dating Fossils and Rocks" by Mike Riddle. It will clearly, and easily demonstrate why radio carbon dating is worthless. And I mean worthless. That's not necessarily my opinion, it's just the simple fact. I'm not saying the method is stupid or even unscientific in nature..., just that it doesn't work. It's a neat principle, but it lacks what is necessary to make it accurate and useful. The video shows that it is worthless for more than one reason, but basically one main reason is because dating using the radio carbon method is only useful if you have a point of reference to measure from. Unfortunately, no one knows the radio carbon levels of what they are measuring on the moment of death. Not only this, but it is also flawed in its various measurements from one to another. Here is the main website page: http://www.train2equip.com/ But also, here is the link to the video itself, which I have seen: http://www.amazon.com/Dating-Fossils-Rocks...9250&sr=8-2 You will see that its not the radiometric dating method, or nuclear physics is different, but rather with no point of reference, you don't know what you have. For example, [And this is a very crude example, so humor me] you could say that there is 500 grams of carbon in a fossil. But if you don't know how much carbon there was when it died, then you don't have a point of reference to refer to in order to establish an exact age of biological material.

Again Ollkiller, you have broken the First and Second Commandment: Thou shalt not committ Idolotry. Idolotry can be creating a graven image, but it boils down to creating a God that is contrary to the one as revealed in the Bible. You believe that God will judge you based on your present condition, which is still unchanged, if you read my post. When you tell a lie, what are you called? Answer: A liar. When you take God's Name in vain, what are you called? A Blasphemer When you steal, what are you called? A Theif. The size of the object stolen doesn't matter. If I open your walled and steal $1, I'm still a thief. Also, killing someone physically verses hating someone is still sin to God. And Jesus Christ himself said the two are the same, because of the evil intention of the heart. Matt: 5:21-26 Just because you've done these things in the past, doesn't mean you're off the hook in regards to punishment from God. For example, if I steal something, but then run away to Mexico for 20 years and come back, I'm still a thief. I still am deserving of punishment. Time doesn't change the fact that the act has been committed. And God is not man that he should forget the sins of men. [by the way, you may choose not to believe all this, but that doesn't mean that the Bible doesn't teach it. And if you choose to beleive something different, don't use the Bible to back up what you beleive. God is clear about His plan of judgement, as well as the salvation of mankind. The God you refer to (as possibly being a "She", as well as judging you based on something other than your sin) is not the God of the Bible.] My point is that you consider yourself to be a good person, when in reality, you are a liar, blasphemer, and Theif. Are you going to be found guilty or innocent of breaking God's Law? Plain and simple, you would be found guilty. Rev. 21:8 "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." Also, Rev. 21:27, and Rev. 22:15 All immoral persons will take their part in the lake of fire. Judgement. Plain and Simple. My favorite, which is also my screen name, is 1 Cor 6:9-11 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." 1 John says this, "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us." Also, 1 John says, " My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." You think that God is going to let you slide into His presence with sin, just because you are relatively more good than the rest of the population. But God does not grade on a curve. He grades according to His Holines. That's why Romans 2:23 says that "All have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God." Before that in Romans, God says " "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE." "THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING," "THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS"; "WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS"; "THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN." "THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES." The reason this is all in capital letters, is because it is a reference to the Old Testament Scriptures. Check out Hebrews chapter 1-9 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. For to which of the angels did He ever say, "YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU"? And again, "I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME"? And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, "AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP HIM." 7 And of the angels He says, "WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS, AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE." But of the Son He says, "YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM. "YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS." Jesus Christ is God in Human flesh. That is the miracle of the Christmas Story. Emmanuel, God with Us. Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. John 14:6 1 John 5:10-12 " And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life." My prayer for you is that you would confess your sin before God, and receive the offering of forgiveness that God offers through His Son Jesus Christ, as I did 13 years ago. I only post this, because even though I can't see you face to face,...I care about your eternal soul. It's only out of love that I bring this to your attention.

Redwing, I must take pause and consider what you just said. First of all, if you don't believe in the God of the Bible, then you pretty much can believe whatever you want. Skies the limit. I mean that...because according to the Bible, you could believe in the tooth fairy as your god as much as a lump of coal; it's all the same. According to the Bible, when you believe in a God other than the true God as revealed through His Word, it is called Idolotry. Basically you have created a god that suits your own desires. But just because I want to believe the light is green when I cross the road, doesn't make it so. Not only this, but Jesus Christ Himself testified to the God of the Bible. So if you take Jesus at His Word, the God of the Bible is the only true God, and Jesus Christ is His Son whom He sent (John 17:17). Let me also ask you a question. Should God let murderers, rapists, thieves, and liars enter into heaven? Your assumption that God is just going to wink at our sin, and not let it go unpunished is appauling. We don't even do that here on imperfect earth! Try watching someone tell a judge that they don't want to be punished for murdering someone. Ridiculous isn't it? And yet with a perfect and Holy God we think that He will? Only because eternity is at stake, is man willing to delude himself that God will overlook his sin. But rather, according to the Bible, all have turned away from God. None come to Him. (Romans 3:10-18.) Ollkiller, I must ask you a question. Are you a good person? Have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen anything, even something small? Have you ever taken God's Name in vain? Have you ever committed adultery? (Jesus said that whoever looks at a woman with Lust has already committed adultery in his heart) Have you ever murdered? (Jesus said that whoever hates someone is a murderer.) Now, God says that he will judge according to His law on the day of judgement. He will, according to Jesus, judge every idle word that a man speaks. Every hidden thing is in complete daylight and open before Him. So if God judges you according to His law, as He will with every soul, would you be innocent of breaking His law, or guilty and sentenced to Hell? Only a good god will see that justice is provided. For example, should God let a man go unpunished if he killed your mother? Would that be justice? No, it wouldn't. So therefore, why should God let you off? The good news, is that God provided His Son, Jesus Christ, to bear the judgement of God on himself, so that through faith in Him, we could be saved from His judgement. By the way, no other religion in the world gives a sure, secure knowledge of forgiveness and entering into eternity. Every other religion in the world is not certain of your eternal future, until you get there. God's Word makes it plainly clear that we can KNOW that we are forgiven and destined to heaven. ............... Also, let me clarify something. Believing the Earth is old, is one thing. Believing in evolution is another. Evolution, by its very inception, is a way to explain life devoid of God. Only those who play to the piper try to mix evolution and the Bible, and try to make them fit together. But sadly, it perverts the purity of God's Word. Only since Darwin (mainly) has the age of the earth ever been in question. And yet, if Darwin knew about DNA, he would have quit writing. Anyways..... #1. Why would God use a sloppy and imperfect method as evolution to create life? Is God not smart enough to create it the way it is? On the contrary, reading God's Word as it is will always bring the reader to the common sense and clear understanding that in 6 literal days creation was completed, and on the Seventh day, God rested from creating. #2. Why would God use evolution as His method of creating man, and then go on to say that they were created in the image of God? The only logical explanation is to equate the fact that God must have evolved as well. But the Bible clearly states that God is perfect (Matt 5:48), unchanging (Deut. 33:27)(Romans 16:26)(1 Tim. 1:17), etc. There is more I wish to share, but I don't want to take up a whole page of thread, sharing some of the deep things that those who are truly weighing these two sides should be coming to by themselves. As for Jukia, you may want to check out this post: http://www.worthyboards.com/index.php?show...6407&st=630 http://www.worthyboards.com/index.php?show...6407&st=610 Especially this one, for my resources. http://www.worthyboards.com/index.php?show...6407&st=590 We've already given plenty of resources to check out that clearly show that science continues to find evidence that mostly supports a young earth. And most evidence that science brings to the table that supposedly supports an old earth is evidence that is either ambiguous, exagerated, faulty, or unchecked with other known facts which makes their conclusions incomplete and incorrect. Also, you might want to add some proof or evidence of your own since you seem to have a strong view towards evolution. I mean, if you know so much about it, please enlighten us. If not, go do the searching yourself, and quit slamming Christianity, and those of us who have done our homework. And I mean that in the most gentle, kind, but seriously firm way.

I don't know a whole lot about the economy, but there are a few things that ring true for me. #1. I agree with Justin about the pregnancy being a moral issue, not an education issue. To say that its education is to fly in the face of where our country has gone morally and spiritually. You cannot separate the two. The only reason we have such issues such as these, is because our country has lost its moral point of reference. Everything is relative, and I don't think that education is really going to help a whole lot. On a side note, how long do you think it would take before we put an end to teen pregnancy? Like every moral issue, it depends on moral training. Keyword: Moral, not ethical. Which means it's wrong, not just unhealthy or unwise. #2. I personally view illegal immigration as the downfall for our country. I say that in 2 parts. First, it is not their culture that I am opposed to. Primarily, it is their illegal status. From the financial view-point, illegal immigration is a drain, and I believe will be a breaking point for our country. Unless we get illegal immigration under control, we will find it to be one of the things that bankrupts this country. But its not only the money in regards to illegal immigration, it is also the attitude of those who come to this country illegally. Illegal immigrants are so because from the get go they don't want to assimilate into US Culture. Just take the picture of those kids in California who flew a Mexican flag above an UPSIDE-DOWN american flag at their school. The problem is far more reaching than people are willing to admit. I encourage you to read this article: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1172085 #3. My mother worked 3 jobs to keep my sister and I with a roof over our heads, and food on the table. My mother took personal responsibility far beyond what we expect of people today. The problem with handouts is that no one is satisfied. We just want more and more public assistance (which, by the way, my mother grew up with public assistance in the 50's, but vowed never to have to go there unless she had to....which as far as I can remember, we never did.) #4. Forrestkc, you have a lot of good points though. However, I think when the question was asked about how much goes overseas, I don't think it was in reference to the war...although that is still legitimate. I would encourage you to look at how much we spend on foreign aid, which is what I think the question was more pointed to...although I could be wrong...I didn't write it! #5. I hate statistical information such as teen pregnancy rates. The reason? #1. People only look at one, maybe two sources. #2. The reason for the pregnancy is never truly addressed, it is just assumed (ie, abstinance only programs) - Not that I'm saying it couldn't be a factor in some way. #3. Stats are always qualified. Ie., "we only surveyed 1000 people, we surveyed only girls from ages 10 -15, etc.) #6. Even if the pregnancy rates did go up as a result of abstinance only programs, that, in my opinion mind you, is a clear indicator of what happens when you have a generation of kids that are raised in families where those strong moral/religious values are not taught, emphasized, and valued. If the book of Romans tells us anything, it's that the Natural Man will become more likely to break the law, when the law is revealed to him. Romans 7:7-14. So then, IF teen pregnancy is on the rise in the midst of abstinence education, that would be it. But you will still see an increase in it, even if "safe sex" were practiced. How do I know? Let's look at the last 50 years and see it for ourselves.

Very interesting. Not many people know about the history of the Arab/Hitler alliance, myself being one of them. But as for all of us, it doesn't surprise us. Especially since both the Nazis and Islam call(ed) for dominance through violence, which is the very antithesis of Christianity and Jesus Christ. It boggles my mind how Islam claims Jesus Christ for themselves, when they deny the very teachings of Jesus in this area, as well as ignore the New Testament Scriptures which were written well before Islam came on the scene. It is interesting to note, that although Islam claims it will (would) dominate through force, one must ask why Islam failed in its alliance with Hitler. The last verse you quoted Shiloh says it all. God will not be mocked. Isaiah 43:13 "Even from eternity I am He, And there is none who can deliver out of My hand; I act and who can reverse it?"