kwikphilly Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 96 Topic Count: 307 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 18,134 Content Per Day: 4.63 Reputation: 27,815 Days Won: 327 Joined: 08/03/2013 Status: Online Share Posted January 27, 2014 Blessings Alpha! I just want to share with you & I think you especially have a clue about my background in the sciences.......I don't need to tell the world I have this & that degree & a masters and everything else that never lent a red cent to any Wisdom I received-LOL(I was quite stupid when I was very smart????? ) Anyway,I want to say I understand,I sit on the other side of the fence but a lifetime ago I was convinced of the "evidence"that supported evolution,OEC etc.....and Jesus was my Lord & Savior.........I stood in my own way,I am not saying that you will ever think differently than you do right now or that you are prideful as I was once & boasted of my GPA......not at all,that was me What I am saying is I respect your position,I understand how you could come to your conclusions(or are coming to)but I think if you really sink your teeth in trying to refute the Genesis account told by God Himself (and play fair for both teams)you may change your vote,but this is your quest .....mine took many years & I got alot of criticism on my journey which has long since ended........But let me encourage you by saying once again,I understand & I love you In Christ-Kwik as I was writing this,12 posts were added,i do hope they were kind-lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 27, 2014 I have faith that Jesus is the resurrected Lord of the universe. That doesn't translate into a denial of what appears to me to be outright and nearly obvious facts about the world. That's as much faith as I have been given. What else can I say? The point was that you believe Jesus selectively. You accept Jesus where He is useful and convenient to you. The greater problem is that faith in Jesus is incompatible with rejecting parts of the Word of God in favor of a secular, untested hypothesis like Evolution. I believe that Jesus saves me from the consequences of my sins. I'm not sure what else to say abou tthat. Aside from that, I believe what actually appears true to me. If you think I'm being selective, it's not a conscious effort on my part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 27, 2014 Blessings Alpha! I just want to share with you & I think you especially have a clue about my background in the sciences.......I don't need to tell the world I have this & that degree & a masters and everything else that never lent a red cent to any Wisdom I received-LOL(I was quite stupid when I was very smart????? ) Anyway,I want to say I understand,I sit on the other side of the fence but a lifetime ago I was convinced of the "evidence"that supported evolution,OEC etc.....and Jesus was my Lord & Savior.........I stood in my own way,I am not saying that you will ever think differently than you do right now or that you are prideful as I was once & boasted of my GPA......not at all,that was me What I am saying is I respect your position,I understand how you could come to your conclusions(or are coming to)but I think if you really sink your teeth in trying to refute the Genesis account told by God Himself (and play fair for both teams)you may change your vote,but this is your quest .....mine took many years & I got alot of criticism on my journey which has long since ended........But let me encourage you by saying once again,I understand & I love you In Christ-Kwik as I was writing this,12 posts were added,i do hope they were kind-lol Thanks for sharing kwik. Maybe I will simply get hit by the bus tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 683 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 11,128 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 1,352 Days Won: 54 Joined: 02/03/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/07/1952 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Quote The integrity of the Bible is unnecessary to being a believer. Wrong. it is essential because if God can't be trusted, we can't be sure if we are saved. I believed that I could find forgiveness in Jesus because of *parts* of the Bible. I didn't have to have confidence in the entire thing. This is about one of the saddest and wrong assumptions I have heard in a long time. If every believer started nit picking what they preferred to hear in God's Word, where would we be? People, hundreds of thousands of people, all of the disciples except one, died for the Word. Blood has been spilled, and is still being spilled for the Word. If we as believers could have said/will say to our persecutors, OK I will agree with the parts of the bible you feel safe with and ignore the rest, then Jesus died for nothing. And if we feel we can say this to God, to ignore the parts of His Word we are uncomfortable with, we walk a perilous line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 27, 2014 Quote The integrity of the Bible is unnecessary to being a believer. Wrong. it is essential because if God can't be trusted, we can't be sure if we are saved. I believed that I could find forgiveness in Jesus because of *parts* of the Bible. I didn't have to have confidence in the entire thing. This is about one of the saddest and wrong assumptions I have heard in a long time. If every believer started nit picking what they preferred to hear in God's Word, where would we be? People, hundreds of thousands of people, all of the disciples except one, died for the Word. Blood has been spilled, and is still being spilled for the Word. If we as believers could have said/will say to our persecutors, OK I will agree with the parts of the bible you feel safe with and ignore the rest, then Jesus died for nothing. And if we feel we can say this to God, to ignore the parts of His Word we are uncomfortable with, we walk a perilous line. This is how I started fez, not my position now. When I first became a believer, I believed precious little out of the Bible, but it was enough to accept the core of the gospel. Since then I have developed, via the Spirit, a view of the Bible as inspired and authoritative. Please don't cherry pick *my* words . I don't want to be misrepresented here when I have clearly stated the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 You can't seem to accept that Genesis is all about Jesus from start to finish. This is an odd statement. I believe Genesis is about Jesus. I do not believe it is about science, nor a scientific account of thing. If anything, I believe trying to integrate science into Genesis 1 takes away from seeing Jesus in it. Which is exactly what OEC does. It attempts to force science as the standard by which the Bible is interpreted and trying to make the Bible agree with Evolution, the Big Bang, and trying to make the days of creation to be on epochs of time to make one's interpretation agree with what scientists claim. I have to disagree there, Shiloh. Genesis 1 was never about science. Unless you have evidence that the ancient people cared beans about the age of the earth? Or classifying living things? Or studying the migration habits of a flock of birds? I never said it was about science. How many times do I have to repeat that??? It is the OEC positon that is trying to make the Bible agree with science. OEC affirms scientific claims about the age of the earth has offered multiple theories about how to fit 15 billion years within six days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Belief. Job 39 13 Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks ? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich? 14 Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust, 15 And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them. 16 She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers: her labour is in vain without fear; .... If I look to the Bible to interpret science, my view of the mother ostrich would be that an animal that lays eggs on the ground, forms the dirt around the eggs for incubation, and then forsakes them. Scientists who spent the time to observe ostriches (something the ancient people had no reason to), have found that a group of female ostriches lay their eggs into one large nest and the dominant female cares for them. The eggs on the outskirts, which are the most vulnerable, belong to the female(s) at the bottom of the heirarchy. When the ostrich(es) run away from the nest, it's an attempt to draw the predators away from the nest. So, do I "believe what the Bible says and re-interpret the scientific evidence accordingly"? Or do I believe what the science researchers determined and try to figure out the discrepancy? I chose the latter. God did not lie. However, He used Job's incorrect understanding of the ostrich in order to prove a point. Would you call that trusting in science over trusting what God said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Quote The integrity of the Bible is unnecessary to being a believer. Wrong. it is essential because if God can't be trusted, we can't be sure if we are saved. I believed that I could find forgiveness in Jesus because of *parts* of the Bible. I didn't have to have confidence in the entire thing. This is about one of the saddest and wrong assumptions I have heard in a long time. If every believer started nit picking what they preferred to hear in God's Word, where would we be? People, hundreds of thousands of people, all of the disciples except one, died for the Word. Blood has been spilled, and is still being spilled for the Word. If we as believers could have said/will say to our persecutors, OK I will agree with the parts of the bible you feel safe with and ignore the rest, then Jesus died for nothing. And if we feel we can say this to God, to ignore the parts of His Word we are uncomfortable with, we walk a perilous line. This is how I started fez, not my position now. When I first became a believer, I believed precious little out of the Bible, but it was enough to accept the core of the gospel. Since then I have developed, via the Spirit, a view of the Bible as inspired and authoritative. Please don't cherry pick *my* words . I don't want to be misrepresented here when I have clearly stated the above. But based on your posts here and on conversations I have had with you, your view of the Bible as inspired and authoritative is conditional and selective in terms of the subject matter the Bible is addressing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted January 27, 2014 You can't seem to accept that Genesis is all about Jesus from start to finish. This is an odd statement. I believe Genesis is about Jesus. I do not believe it is about science, nor a scientific account of thing. If anything, I believe trying to integrate science into Genesis 1 takes away from seeing Jesus in it. Which is exactly what OEC does. It attempts to force science as the standard by which the Bible is interpreted and trying to make the Bible agree with Evolution, the Big Bang, and trying to make the days of creation to be on epochs of time to make one's interpretation agree with what scientists claim. I have to disagree there, Shiloh. Genesis 1 was never about science. Unless you have evidence that the ancient people cared beans about the age of the earth? Or classifying living things? Or studying the migration habits of a flock of birds? I never said it was about science. How many times do I have to repeat that??? It is the OEC positon that is trying to make the Bible agree with science. OEC affirms scientific claims about the age of the earth has offered multiple theories about how to fit 15 billion years within six days. If YEC isnot about science, then why do YEC's try to make it so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted January 27, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 27, 2014 Quote The integrity of the Bible is unnecessary to being a believer. Wrong. it is essential because if God can't be trusted, we can't be sure if we are saved. I believed that I could find forgiveness in Jesus because of *parts* of the Bible. I didn't have to have confidence in the entire thing. This is about one of the saddest and wrong assumptions I have heard in a long time. If every believer started nit picking what they preferred to hear in God's Word, where would we be? People, hundreds of thousands of people, all of the disciples except one, died for the Word. Blood has been spilled, and is still being spilled for the Word. If we as believers could have said/will say to our persecutors, OK I will agree with the parts of the bible you feel safe with and ignore the rest, then Jesus died for nothing. And if we feel we can say this to God, to ignore the parts of His Word we are uncomfortable with, we walk a perilous line. This is how I started fez, not my position now. When I first became a believer, I believed precious little out of the Bible, but it was enough to accept the core of the gospel. Since then I have developed, via the Spirit, a view of the Bible as inspired and authoritative. Please don't cherry pick *my* words . I don't want to be misrepresented here when I have clearly stated the above. But based on your posts here and on conversations I have had with you, your view of the Bible as inspired and authoritative is conditional and selective in terms of the subject matter the Bible is addressing. That's not my intention, shiloh. I admit that the ramifications of all of my beliefs is something that is a work in progress however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts