Hawkins

Yes iit does and every major proponent of Evolution says so. The attraction of evolution to atheists is the very philosophically naturalistic explanation that the TOE provides. The entire debate would have been over a long time ago, had the TOE not been viewed by both sides of the debate as a competeting theory over not only Divine origin of the universe but the method by which life developed. Your assertion is simply false and denies decades and decades of history. Evolution is never about evolution. Even from his statement one can tell that ToE is a product of deception. And I guess the "Origin of Species" never says anything about the origin of species.

To go a little bit further. what implication is valid regarding to the evolution of bacteria "The evolution of bacteria is observed" such that... 1. human is a result of evolution? 2. dog is a result of evolution? 3. bird is a result of evolution? 4. frog is a result of evolution? 5. .... (list all the species you know of..) This way, you'll notice that "the evolution of bacteria is observed" actually proves nothing but only "the evolution of bacteria" itself!!! "the evolution of bacteria" cannot be used as a proof of "human evolution", otherwise the logic will lead to "because the evolution of bacteria is observed" such that "the evolution of human eyes, hearts, lungs...(and so forth)" is already known to humans. But it is not known to humans unless you apply another straw man argument similar to the "bacteria evolution" effect.

What would constitute "hard evidence" for you? The "hard evidence" people nowadays are talking about can be really deceptive. Let me show you this way, say, A represents a single cell B represents a monkey C represents a human Now I say that "I have strong evidence that C is evolved from B". Even when I assume this is true. Now what this implication could mean? Does it mean that C is evolved from A too? Logically speaking this is a deception! As even when it is true that C is evolved from B, it says nothing about if C is evolved from A. However ToE is trying hard to implicate so and even claim so to be the "hard evidence". Even when it is proven that C is evolved from B, it only shows a possibility that C can be evolved from A, you need faith to believe so though. So whenever "hard evidence" is involved, things can go truly deceptive. And ToE is full of such a kind of deceptions. Similar to the example above, when "evolution of bacteria is observed", does it support the implication that "humans are of a result of evolution". The evolutionists are trying hard to relate them as "because the evolution of bacteria is observed" such that "it is proven that humans are a result of evolution". Here "evolution of bacteria observed" acts as a "hard evidence" of "human evolution". If you buy into this, you are an evolutionist. However, is it true that "the evolution of bacteria (assuming it's true)" can be used as an evidence for "human evolution"? Let me hint you this, Because "the evolution of bacteria is observed (again assuming it is true)" such that "it is possible that humans are a result of evolution" <---------- this is a reasonable and logical statement Because "the evolution of bacteria is observed" such that "humans are a result of evolution" <--------------- this is a fallacy and a deception (which the evolutionists buy into) There's a gap between the two statements where faith needs to fill it up!

That almost has nothing to do with His all-knowing. It's all about our freewill to sin. We sinned to our own death. And thus by Law we are the dead already. Now the problem is how will you be able to legally save someone who is sentenced to death? So just think over this question seriously, how will you be able to legally save someone who is sentenced to death? You can change the Law by lowering its standard such no one will be subject to the death penalty. But that doesn't seem to be God's choice. What God offers is Jesus Christ's death such that everyone's sin is atoned for. And I think that by God's Law itself only God's sacrifice will be able to atone for human sin. That left the only solution is that Jesus Christ offered Himself for such a sacrifice. Foreknowing makes a difference from interfering. When you know for sure that tomorrow is a raining day, it by no means says that you need to do anything to stop it. You may well choose to let things go. And what God did is just to let things go in accordance to our freewill. If you want to dig deeper, actually freewill means humans will divide in front of choices. If none of us chooses to sin by our own will, then it only means that either we don't have freewill or that we don't have true choices. In front of real choices, humans with freewill will certainly divide. Earth is a middle ground, a right place, for such a division to occur. So God just let go the division and to finally bring His sheep with Him.

I don't view it this way because I don't think that eating a meal to survive should be called a duty. On the other hand, I think that humans duty is to preach the gospel to other humans.

I seldom start topics. I am curious to know what your choice will be. When a friend of yours obvious speaks something untrue, what will you do? 1. Protect him by giving up truth 2. Protect truth by pointing out what's wrong Now how about Bible truth? 3. Protect him by giving up Bible truth 4. Protect truth by pointing out your friend's fault 5. Lieing to pretent that the truth is not true in order to protect your friend Now in the above choices, which one should be the best choice. And more importantly, can you always stick with this 'best choice'?

Lucid dreamimg is simply knowing that you're dreaming. Is that bad? Sometimes people, out of their own pride, would like use the term 'mystism' to launch attack just because they don't want others to be better. Sometimes, out of their pride again, they even choose to deny the Bible directly. Acts 2:17 In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Moreover, I don't think Jesus Christ has ever taught about remaining silent about what is untrue then sided with the untruth to attack those who try to speak the truth.

Congrats then. But still I feel that people here in these forums have a strong "no others can be better than me" notion, so mind your words.

We have trials sometimes because we choose to sin. But that's not all. John 15:18-19 If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. We, as God's sheep, are persecuated simply because the world hates Jesus Christ. The wolves will thus be fully exposed to be eradicated.

The Bible says that it's a scratch or mark on or in your hand or forehead Our education influences our mind (forehead) and behavior (right hand). I already mentioned that. And it remains your own opinion to insist on hte the mark must be physical. No, it's approaching the Bible with no filters and just letting it talk too you. I see no reason why it should be spiritual. Being spiritual doesn't even make sense considering it's use. Actually, Bible prophecies go no fixed rules. To define that a prophecy must be spiritual or must be physical is kind of arrogance/pride by putting yourself above the Bible itself. So, to say that.. "the prophecies in revelation must be physical and can never by spiritual" is this your own opinion by your own will, or is it Biblical and by God's will? Ask yourself. BTW, I never mean to say that my version of interpreation is correct. Yet I question that the attitude that "the prophecy must be physical/must not be spiritual" notion itself is a problematic issue.

Whoever he is, he is entitled to his own opinion but by far I don't think that any modern man is authorized by God to be the "correct" interpretation of the Book of Revelation. Especially when "Dr." is secular title granted by men.

The Bible says that it's a scratch or mark on or in your hand or forehead Our education influences our mind (forehead) and behavior (right hand). I already mentioned that. And it remains your own opinion to insist on hte the mark must be physical.

The blood of the lamb, in Egypt, was not spiritual, but physical. Exodus 12 tells us of this time in History. The blood of lamb in Egypt is physical, as result the prophecy in Revelation must be physical<------- there is no such a rule of prophecy ever escribed/defined in the Bible. Sorry to tell you that. In the contray, the physical saving by water in Noah's case has all to do with the saving by water baptism spiritually (read Peter).

Yes, you can though it could mean more that just that. It provides necessary hints for later on people to reconcile what they see. For example, if Paul saw the same/ or similar creature with similar characteristics as Ezekiel described. Paul will know for sure that it is not his dream but he's called by our Lord. A form of prophetic encounter such that even Paul was born, say, 1000 years later than Ezekiel, he still benefits from Ezekiel's experience. To comprehend that correctly is not a requirement to be a Christian. Humans have to admit that they don't (and don't need to) understand everything. It is possible that other species exists, such as the Neanderthals, what do you say. Jews are God's chosen people as a message carrier to bring forward the message of His salvation. I am not surprised that they may have special rewards. And I am not surprised that when the rewards may not reach everyone of them. The bottomline is, the Jews carried forward the message of salvation such that modern people can read the Bible. Quite a success, right. To harden one's heart simply means God knows everything before hand but decided not to wake up someone when he makes a bad decision. During that part of history, all other religions (and people other than the Abraham branch) in middle east (surrounding Abraham) were practising the sacrifice of children. God thus tested Abraham's faith by telling him to do the same. He stopped him at last to show him that God actually doesn't like human sacrifice. At the same time, God hinted that His only Son Jesus Christ will be a human sacrifce to save the world. Some rumors: the fallen angels heard the prophecy that a son will be sacrificed. Thus they spread the rumor all around that God likes children sacrifice till some religions asinfluenced by the evil spirits started to practise the children sacrifice. God simply told Abraham that this is not the case. He only mean that His own son Jesus Christ will be self-sacrificed for saving humans. It says that both angels and humans have the freewill to choose to be with God or not. So God just let it go such that who is who will be fully exposed then eradicated. What left will be those qualified to be with God in eternity. Such that people later on will know Jesus was sacrificed like a clean lamb. All the Jews' ritual practices are actually acting as a witness for the coming of their Messiah Jesus Christ. The Jews' ritual practices are Christ centered, they failed to realized though. Jesus can thus preach Baptism by example. Nowaday, Christians practise water baptism and realised its importance not because John the baptist baptized anyone, but the fact that Jesus Himself was baptised. We are not greater than our master, Christians thus know that baptism must be something important or else Jesus Christ may not do that by Himself. Peter's case is not a willful betrayal. He denied Jesus because he's afraid. Judas is just for the money. That's the difference. Moreover, personal judgment should be left to our Lord.

Finally, the atheists' voice will out number. They are like sands, attacking Jerusalem (figuratively God's Church on earth). The church will compromise. They legalise homsexuality inside the Church, it declares that allah is the same God as ours. See that?? They compromise with men (the pale horse) and finally the abomination causing desolation will enter the Church, abomination like the denial of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit's work in a hidden form. Like this...

The mark is more likely a spiritual mark. This extends the prophecy in Egypt where God's mark (as Lamb's blood) is given to all the Jews when the angels are going to kill the first born sons of the Egyptians. Only those with the mark of the Lamb will escape. Similarly, in Revelation it also says that only those with the mark of Lamb (God's mark) will be saved. The beast's mark is more likely stamped through our education system. Our education system stamps every person a mark. "Buy and sell" may be something related to money, trading and making a living. You sell your labor or knowledge to get money to buy food, something like that. Nowadays (end time comes), people can hardly make a living without the basically education from the government. Anyway, education is forced upon everyone without exception. And a child starts to fight God with his knowledge is obtained from education. His forehead (mind) and right-hand (action) is stamped with the mark from education which not only allows him to find a job (to do his buy and sell), but also fight God (unless he received God's mark to be a Christian). The third round of my 2 cents.

My another 2 cents. The four horses represent how power flows when end time approaches. The mark is a many fold (at least 2-fold) complicated puzzle about what would happen when the end time comes. The white horse (can actually be represented by English the White House, i.e. America), represents the power of whites and how they started to conquer the world and became a dominated power. Say, the 2 super power, a group of developed countries are all of a result of the conquering of the whites since 18 century(?not sure about the year). They (the whites mainly) kept conquering the world to get hold of this world's power and money. Then it came the red horse, which is the communism power headed by a beast named USSR. This Red Power grew like a plague. Then the dark horse, a non-white power which is incapable of militery conquering but very much capable of economic conquering. China, India, Brazil are arising. The white power is weakened. Finally the pale horse, it represents the whole secular world. The Chritianity centered white power will phase out and the world power will fall to the hand of the secular/atheistic people. All government will adapt a much more secular approach to rule. By far, all US presidents declared themselves as Christians. But this may no longer be the situation. Anyway, the kings/Caesers will finally repsent those secular people (US presidents may be more and more the secular presidents, whether they call themselves Christians or not).

Ok, my 2 cents. A prophecy acts as witnessing of truth. Truth (including scientific truth) is usually witnessed by prophesying. Biblical prophecies act as witnessing of the truth that the Bible is actually the Word of God. Scientifc laws are figured out by human brains through prediction (prophecying). Once you can predict correctly, you will be able to realise that there is rule/law/truth over there. That's fundamentally how humans discover the existing truth. As long as I can predict water will resolve into oxygen and hydrogen (no exception when your lab setup is correct). I thus can conclude that there is a rule/law/truth there (this time it is there is a chemical formula there). This is the so-called predictability of science. Humans discover rules/laws/truth this way. To make sure you are actually in reality (not in a dream), you can clap your face to feel the pain. Because pain is predicted and realised that you "know" you are in reality instead of a dream. The truth here is "it is proven that you are in reality because the expected/prophecied pain occurs when you clap.

Science is about how things "normally" work out in our realm. By far science has never discovered the absolute law. All the laws for the 4 known (not to mention the unknown) field forces are working only separately but still waiting to be united. People (scientists or not) just religious believe that they know all things to judge that miracle shall not occur. For example, people religiously judge that "walking on water" shall not occur. But on the other hand, science itself never claimed that gravity is fully understood (noone actually knows what gravity is, in the new string theory it is assumed that gravity is the only "material" which can penetrate multi-dimensional spaces).).

Bloodshed refers to God's own bloodshed, in order to save men. Death means being separated from God, an action required to protect the sheep from wolves, or else He's merciless to His sheep. Matthew 5 ... 4 Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. ..... 7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. 8 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. 9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God. 10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

First, "You fool" is a name calling action. While Psalm only generalize that it is foolish to disbelieve God. Second, But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, Raca,[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, You fool! will be in danger of the fire of hell. It seems that the verse is referring to cursing "brother or sister". Matthew 25:40 The King will reply, Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me. Matthew 25:45 He will reply, Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me. You can see here that Jesus and God treasure His sheep very much, cursing them may lead to consequences like the verse just following Mathhew 25:45.

His Trinity, that is, God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Prophets and those very close to God, such as David will notice that. That's why David ever said "the Lord of my Lord". And it's not surprised that Moses wrote it that way.

Couldn't agree more on that.

Who cares. What's that to do with anything, anyway.

My theory is that 'sea' symbolically represents Hades (and thus death). As a result, 'no more sea' symbolically represents 'no more death'. More details about my 'theory'; To me, Hades is such a vast space which is 'air' in nature yet visually more or less like under-water sea. The part near the surface is gloomy (gloomy dungeons), when it goes deeper it is darker and thus can be called the Abyss. To me, Baptism means we are going to be buried in Hades then cleansed and raised later on (resurrection). Moses led the Jews across the Red Sea to the promised Canaan, to save them from being enslaved. It implies that Jesus will lead both the Jews and Gentiles across the sea of Hades to the promised New Heaven and New Earth, to save them from being enslaved. The name Moses means 'pull from water' or 'save from water'. Noah's story means a spiritual ark is under the construction which will bring the saved (Christians as human minority = Noah's family) to prevent them from being buried under water. The ark will bring them to the New Heaven and New Earth. Revelation 20:13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. Revelation 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.