Lekcit

Charlie, While I appreciate you not wanting to rehash old material, I do not feel that it is my responsibility to wade through mounds of information here to get the answer that I seek. Further, you say it's not in the Bible and I disagree because the things that I believe can be supported by as much Scripture as you can present to the contrary. Thanks for refusing to have an honest open discussion with one that would seek to understand your position a little better. In Him.

OK. So maybe my presentation was a tad harsh or abrasive, and I do recognize that Charlie is a Christian. I just have a hard time with people that label doctrine as "false" without giving anything to back it up. While I may disagree with 99% of what you say SA, at least you provide documentation to support your viewpoint rather than saying, "That's an incorrect viewpoint just because I said so. Nana nana boo boo." That's the only point I was trying to make. In Him.

Charlie, Thanks...for nothing. I asked you for something and you failed to provide it. As I figured you would not provide the proof that I asked you for, you just continue in your diatribe that it is false doctrine without providing evidence to the contrary. In Him.

Charlie, I'd like you to point to some definitive proof that will back up your claim that the Left Behind Series is based on false doctrine. While I understand that you may not *agree* with the eschatological viewpoint that Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye put forth, it is a valid viewpoint and based in years research and study done by not only the authors but others as well. Take great care in what you label as "false doctrine" because the fact that you disagree doesn't discount those that believe that it is a correct assessment of Eschatology. In Him.

The fact that the title has witch in it is irrelevant and holds no bearing to the ulimate theme and underlying message of the movie. In case you didn't know, that movie is based on a wonderful piece of allegorical fiction by the same name. It was written by one of the greatest Christian writers of the 20th century, CS Lewis. And before anyone gives any commentary, I would ask that you educate yourselves on his life and works, both fiction and non-fiction. In Him.

Glad I could help...

Why? Where can I get a copy of the rules?

Sheya, Go to Narnia Web They have a link to the trailer. Also try: Narnia.com That is the official site and the trailer can be seen there.

Also, while he does not have any authority necessarily, Douglas Gresham has been pleased the entire way through. He even had a chance to review the screenplay before filming began. For those that don't know, Gresham is a preacher (Presbyterian I think) and is one of CS Lewis' stepsons. If I recall correctly, he is the one in control of the Lewis estate.

Paul, I would like to get your thoughts on the following statement: "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become." I would also like your thoughts on the infallibility of the Bible and the Book of Mormon. In Him.

Why So Blind? I need to use your user name as the question I ask of you. Why are you so blind that you fail to see the ignorance in your statement. Will someone get saved by reading LoTR or the Narnia books? Never. If they do then I would seriously question them about the experience. But that doesn't make them the devil's work. Why is it that you want to speak from a position of ignorance when you discuss something. If you want to have an honest, open discussion about LoTR or the Narnia books then I suggest you go read them and then come back here ready to have a real discussion because you can't discuss something that which you know nothing about. Go read. You might be surprised what you'd learn. In Him.

JRR Tolkien never intended for the LoTR to be allegorical. He said so himself several times. Do those themes present themselves in his writings? Of course. It is difficult to live the lives they did and believe what the believed and that not extend into your writings, fictional or otherwise. Now to this business about witchcraft, where in the Chronicles of Narnia or LoTR is witchcraft primary or prominent? I so happens that CS Lewis and Tolkien were two of the best Christians of their time. In fact, it was Tolkien that led CS Lewis to Christ and it was Lewis that first developed the idea that Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or Lord. So, were LoTR and the Chronicles of Narnia allegorical? Probably not intended as such, but as I mentioned before, a lifestyle is a lifestyle and extends to every aspect of what you do and who you are. In Him.

No Aslan is to be played by a real lion with a voice over, to the best of my knowledge. Also none of the Narnia books are what you would call a parable but rather an allegory. Also I'm not sure there is any evidence to show Dr Suess' intent was such when he wrote any of his books. I just thought they were silly nonsensical children's stories.

SA, Again you speak from a position of ignorance about that which you really do not understand. There are plenty of scientific creationists. Have you taken the time to do as I directed and check out Answers in Genesis and look at works by Dr Gary Parker, Dr Jonathan Sarfati, Dr Henry Morris, et al? I think not because if you had you would see that your statement is grossly illogical and incorrect. Also your statement about creation not being able to explain most of the evidence, on this you are also wrong. In fact the reason Ken Ham, Dr Parker, and the others at AiG do what they do is because they have honestly examined the evidence and have determined that creation explains the evidence far better and far more competently than evolution would ever hope to. In Him.

Sorry Shiloh, but I'm afraid you are incorrect. Go check these articles to understand this issue. Days of Creation Also how do you come to the conclusion that the 7th day is not complete? The other thing is one verse from Hosea may use the word yom in conjunction with a number that MAY not mean a literal day which is debatable anyway but in Genesis 1 that is not the only thing. If you would have read my entire previous posts you would see that it is the fact that the word yom is used not only in conjunction with a number but also the phrase night and the phrase evening and morning. It seems that God knew that we were thick skulled and needed to use the language to over emphasize the fact that He meant a literal day and not ages as you suppose it to be. In Him.

Shiloh, The context DOES demand a literal day. Go back and read my previous posts and you will see that it does. And, surprisingly enough, it goes back to an understanding of Hebrew. In Him.

Using the thief on the cross an example of not needing to be Baptized is not false teaching and I fail to understand why you would say such. What is baptism? It is how believers publicly identify with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. The Bible teaches that this must be done via complete immersion. Did the thief on the cross do that? No. Did he go to heaven? Absolutely. What is false about that? In Him.

DIME, If we are saved by grace and God supplies the grace, show me the scriptural evidence that shows that God takes away grace from an individual once they make that "life changing decision". In Him.

SA, I cannot speak for Old Timer, but no, I am not interested in such a discussion because for every point you make, there is a point to the contrary. You have only what imperfect man has observed and thought up in his own mind about the age of the earth and interpretation thereof. I have the statement of a perfect, holy God, who cannot lie, that tells me the earth was created in 6 literal days with nothing to suggest otherwise. You tell me, who am I supposed to believe? Man, who cares nothing for my well being and eternal home or a holy, loving God who, even though He holds the universe in the palm of His hand, cared enough to send His only son to die so that I don't have to... In Him.

SA, I, like Old Timer, will not take the time to answer your questions because I think your questions serve to cloud the issue. If you want a treatment of radiometric dating and the like, feel free to look at AiG and search for radiometric dating. Radiometric dating, at its core, is flawed. This is because to get any consistency out of the dates, all of science would agree that you need a closed system to insure that nothing affected the breakdown. Also you would need to know how much of the second element existed in the rock, or animal, or tree branch, etc, that you were dating and how much existed in the outside environs. None of these things exist. No one knows how much argon was in a particular item prior to it beginning its breakdown. Further no one knows how much potassium or argon might have been introduced into said item during its breakdown, thus skewing the results. Also outside forces such as weather changes, tidal changes, atmospheric changes, sunlight, changes in gravity, changes in the magnetic field of the earth (there is evidence of such and over a short amount of time no less) ad nauseum... And this is just one example of how "science" is flawed when coming up with dates for rocks and such that is dug up or discovered... All I am asking is that you approach this topic with an open mind rather than looking for ways to shoot holes in what we say. In Him.

If someone can do something to lose their salvation then how is that not works based? If, by your actions, you determine your salvation, how is that not works based? I also would like to know how you began believing in Eternal security and now do not. It usually goes the other way around. Please help me understand this. In Him.

SA, I really only want to address this only the one time. All your "knowledge" don't hold much water because for every piece of information you present as "proof of evolution" can be turned around into "proof for Creation". The simple fact is that evolution is a theory. There is no definitive proof of such. Only man's interpretation of data. Data which I might add is flawed in many ways and most is even outdated but is still put forth as evidence of evolution and an old earth. For example, radiometric dating has been shown to produce as many "wrong" dates as it does "right" ones. What's the point? No consistency. But we never hear the wrong dates. The scientists keep working at it until they get to a date that they want and forget the scores of wrong ones that came before. Furthermore, I have heard testimonies from scientists that could not explain certain things and in their search discovered that, when understood from a Biblical/ young earth perspective, that things make more sense. If you are interested, I would direct your attention to Dr Gary Parker. He used to teach at Clearwater Christian College in Clearwater, Florida. I don't know if he still does but he does a lot of writing for AiG. I encourage you to check him out and see his story. It will greatly interest you, provided you approach it with an open mind and desire to know the truth, regardless of what it might be or where it might lead you. In Him.

Nebula, You asked the following: Well, whatever happened to Genesis 1:1? There it says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth..." I'm not sure how you take that, but to me it looks as if the heavens and the earth were created before let there be light. In Him.

Do you go to hell if not baptized prior to dying? Absolutely not. There is only one story that I need to point to in Scripture that will clear this up. The thief on the cross said to Jesus, "Remember me when you enter your kingdom." What did Jesus say back? "TODAY you shall be with me in paradise." He did not come down off of the cross to baptize that man but when I get to Heaven, he will be there. Remember, baptism is like a wedding ring. It is an outward sign of our inward relationship. The Bible does place great importance on baptism by immersion into water, but I have been unable to find any evidence that would give rise to it being required for Salvation. In Him.

Nebula, What questions do you have? I'll do my best to answer them. In Him.