Actually, it's not "uncomfortable." We just don't give a rat's ass. Your projections of how we think is the most arrogant and illogical assumptions on a2k. Get over it; god won't harm you.
Perhaps I owe you an apology, real life; in saying all you've brought to the discussion are circular logic and appeal to emotion, I overlooked your considerable contribution of straw men and red herrings. Forgive me for under-assessing your forensic achievements.
Jesus our Redeemer/acknowledgement of our sin
Hello-
I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior and Redeemer from my sins, because it all makes sense to me.
I truly believe that Jesus Christ is our Savior, the Son of God who came down to Earth to live as a man, and who died for our sins. He rose again, he spoke to over 500 of his followers for 40 days, and then ascended into heaven in view of his disciples. There were promises that he would be sent written throughout the Bible, even in the third chapter of Genesis.
But, you ask, why do we even need a Savior?
God created everything-the heavens and the Earth, and everything that is in them. He pronounced them all "very good", at first. But Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate of the fruit of one forbidden tree. He told them they would die if they ate of that tree. Their disobedience brought death into the world. Please remember, there was no death until Adam sinned - no death of anything. Their disobedience changed everything in the world, because even animals would now have to die.
We have all inherited sin from Adam, and I would dare say that we have all committed some kind of sin or another. If you do not believe that you have inherited and committed any sin, then of course, you would not believe that you would need a Savior, but the signs of a fallen world are all around us. Of course, so are the signs of God's awesome power - just look at the stars!
The first step in this matter is realizing, acknowledging, that we have inherited sin and/or committed sin.
But once you understand that we have all inherited sin from Adam, then you realize that we, as sinners, could not go be with God after we die, because He cannot tolerate sin and unrighteousness near Him. He is a (the one and only) holy God. A blood price had to be paid, but only a sinless blood price would do, and that's why God sent his Son Jesus to live on Earth and die for our sins. Jesus was obedient to God's will even unto the cross, unlike Adam's disobedience. Adam brought death, but Jesus brought eternal life. Jesus is the payment, the propitiation for our sins. If we will repent of our sins and believe in Him, he will acknowledge us before God on judgment day. Jesus is our Redeemer.
The disciples ran when Jesus was arrested by the Sanhedrin and the Romans. After he rose again and ascended into heaven, they would die for their beliefs, for they would not renounce Him.
You may think I am naive, but I sincerely believe everything I have told you.
I wish you would look at Ken Ham's web site called "Answers in Genesis" - there was no death until Adam sinned - most of the fossils we find are from the great worldwide flood of Noah's time. Also, look at Creation Evidence Museum's website (Glen Rose, TX). I have seen in person the human footprints and dinosaur tracks in the same layer. I have seen them excavated myself. The creationists believe the dinosaurs and the humans were running from the flood. Human footprints are different from ape footprints. Ape footprints have a big digit like a thumb, not like a big toe.
I am convinced of the truth of the book of Genesis. I think God wanted us to know the truth of creation, and he spelled it out for us there. I know that it is a matter of faith, but it all makes sense to me.
We needed/need Jesus to save us from our sins. This way we can be redeemed and spend eternity with God. Jesus sits at the right hand of God the Father now.
I was taught evolution in school, but I no longer believe in the day-age theory (I always believed God created everything, no matter what). I believe what God revealed to us in the Bible.
Please read from these web sites: Answers in Genesis, Institute of Creation Research (John Morris), and Creation Evidence Museum.
And I wish you blessings from Jesus Christ in your search for the truth.
kaclark
Re: Jesus our Redeemer/acknowledgement of our sin
kaclark wrote:
You may think I am naive, but I sincerely believe everything I have told you.
Oh brother......
kaclark wrote:
most of the fossils we find are from the great worldwide flood of Noah's time.
OH BROTHER..............
kaclark wrote:
I have seen in person the human footprints and dinosaur tracks in the same layer. I have seen them excavated myself. The creationists believe the dinosaurs and the humans were running from the flood.
OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!
kaclark wrote:
And I wish you blessings from Jesus Christ in your search for the truth.
kaclark
I wish you blessings in your search for the real truth........because what you've stated is just plain ignorant. Good luck.
What Maporche said.
In spades.
No wonder religion is so dangerous. It should be treated as a sickness.
cicerone imposter wrote:Actually, it's not "uncomfortable." We just don't give a rat's ass. Your projections of how we think is the most arrogant and illogical assumptions on a2k. Get over it; god won't harm you.
If you didn't think the Gallup and Barna information was germane, perhaps you shouldn't have brought it up.
But don't misrepresent the surveys, Imposter. They are not my projections of how people think. They are statistics gathered by the Gallup and Barna polling groups.
timberlandko wrote:Perhaps I owe you an apology, real life; in saying all you've brought to the discussion are circular logic and appeal to emotion, I overlooked your considerable contribution of straw men and red herrings. Forgive me for under-assessing your forensic achievements.
Oops, sorry Timber. Someone forgot to cue the laughtrack when you said that. You really should give warning before you attempt humor so we are ready for it.
Since we can't hear your inflection on these jokes, help out a little. Is your voice more like Mr. Mooney on the old Lucy show, or more like Ralph Kramden?
kaclark
Brain implant complete. Next!
Once again for serious seekers I advise the following site for its maturity:
http://www.shareintl.org/
Re: Jesus our Redeemer/acknowledgement of our sin
kaclark wrote:Hello-
I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior and Redeemer from my sins, because it all makes sense to me.
I truly believe that Jesus Christ is our Savior, the Son of God who came down to Earth to live as a man, and who died for our sins. He rose again, he spoke to over 500 of his followers for 40 days, and then ascended into heaven in view of his disciples. There were promises that he would be sent written throughout the Bible, even in the third chapter of Genesis.
But, you ask, why do we even need a Savior?
God created everything-the heavens and the Earth, and everything that is in them. He pronounced them all "very good", at first. But Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate of the fruit of one forbidden tree. He told them they would die if they ate of that tree. Their disobedience brought death into the world. Please remember, there was no death until Adam sinned - no death of anything. Their disobedience changed everything in the world, because even animals would now have to die.
We have all inherited sin from Adam, and I would dare say that we have all committed some kind of sin or another. If you do not believe that you have inherited and committed any sin, then of course, you would not believe that you would need a Savior, but the signs of a fallen world are all around us. Of course, so are the signs of God's awesome power - just look at the stars!
The first step in this matter is realizing, acknowledging, that we have inherited sin and/or committed sin.
But once you understand that we have all inherited sin from Adam, then you realize that we, as sinners, could not go be with God after we die, because He cannot tolerate sin and unrighteousness near Him. He is a (the one and only) holy God. A blood price had to be paid, but only a sinless blood price would do, and that's why God sent his Son Jesus to live on Earth and die for our sins. Jesus was obedient to God's will even unto the cross, unlike Adam's disobedience. Adam brought death, but Jesus brought eternal life. Jesus is the payment, the propitiation for our sins. If we will repent of our sins and believe in Him, he will acknowledge us before God on judgment day. Jesus is our Redeemer.
The disciples ran when Jesus was arrested by the Sanhedrin and the Romans. After he rose again and ascended into heaven, they would die for their beliefs, for they would not renounce Him.
You may think I am naive, but I sincerely believe everything I have told you.
I wish you would look at Ken Ham's web site called "Answers in Genesis" - there was no death until Adam sinned - most of the fossils we find are from the great worldwide flood of Noah's time. Also, look at Creation Evidence Museum's website (Glen Rose, TX). I have seen in person the human footprints and dinosaur tracks in the same layer. I have seen them excavated myself. The creationists believe the dinosaurs and the humans were running from the flood. Human footprints are different from ape footprints. Ape footprints have a big digit like a thumb, not like a big toe.
I am convinced of the truth of the book of Genesis. I think God wanted us to know the truth of creation, and he spelled it out for us there. I know that it is a matter of faith, but it all makes sense to me.
We needed/need Jesus to save us from our sins. This way we can be redeemed and spend eternity with God. Jesus sits at the right hand of God the Father now.
I was taught evolution in school, but I no longer believe in the day-age theory (I always believed God created everything, no matter what). I believe what God revealed to us in the Bible.
Please read from these web sites: Answers in Genesis, Institute of Creation Research (John Morris), and Creation Evidence Museum.
And I wish you blessings from Jesus Christ in your search for the truth.
kaclark
Welcome to a2k, kaclark. I'm sure you will find a variety of interesting opinions here. Don't be discouraged by the negative comments. Several of our more mature members have been having trouble with bowel irregularity.
You will find me a true bible believer. But don't ask me to visit other websites you think will make your point. Just make your point in as few words as possible and wait for the fallout. :wink:
Frank Apisa wrote: No wonder religion is so dangerous. It should be treated as a sickness.
You'd feel right at home with the Soviet Inquisitors, Frank.
Re: Jesus our Redeemer/acknowledgement of our sin
Welcome onboard, KA!
And get ready for a buffeting from this crew. The gentleman before you summed up their attitude quite well a few days ago: "None so blind as thjose [sic] who will not see." One could add, none so deaf as those who will not hear. They are riddled with the Positivist mentality, which is the most Up-To-Date religion (albeit not admitted to as such). Mr. T. admits that even an ace apologist like C.S. Lewis doesn't make a dent in his hard-liner Positivism. They've all "been there" and "done that," so it's really a matter of MATTHEW 7:6 and 10:14. :wink:
shiyacic aleksandar wrote:
Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many." (Matthew 24:4-5)
At that time, if anyone says to you: "Look, here is the Christ!" or, "There he is!" do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appearÂ… (Matthew 24:23-24)
Â… and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. (Matthew 24:11)
He [Jesus] replied: "Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not follow them. (Luke 21:8)
Lessee here - straw man and implied ad hominem in reply to Frank, followed by a welcoming post to a n00b, combining the above 2 faults (which by themselves invalidate the presenter's argument) with circular reference/internal validation, proceeding from an unestablished major premis, along with explicit (albeit externally referenced) ad hominem. Quite an accomplishment - a classic exersize in the art of sinking one's own boat. Mind the dogs and hogs, and try to avoid the dust there, diagknowz - you're really stirring up the irony.
Now then - lets see what -if anything - else you've got. Don't parrot, don't preach, don't proselytize; set forth your own logical, validly structured, intellectually honest argument for the proposition you champion. I don't attack the central proposition, merely the manner in which it has been presented and defended. Do not proceed from unverified assumptions, assume no givens, avoid circular logic, anecdotal hearsay, and internal reference, eschew panegyric; set forth a rigorous, objective, proper argument, not a paean. It can be done.
"None so blind as thjose [sic] who will not see."
See what? That you may have a bigger imagination to be able to see god from reading one book called the bible is rather ridiculous, because you can't prove that god exists. Proof is required by the person claiming something; not the other way around. Study a little about logic; it might teach you to stay away from circcular logic.
timberlandko wrote:Lessee here - straw man and implied ad hominem in reply to Frank, followed by a welcoming post to a n00b, combining the above 2 faults (which by themselves invalidate the presenter's argument) with circular reference/internal validation, proceeding from an unestablished major premis, along with explicit (albeit externally referenced) ad hominem. Quite an accomplishment - a classic exersize in the art of sinking one's own boat. Mind the dogs and hogs, and try to avoid the dust there, diagknowz - you're really stirring up the irony.
Now then - lets see what -if anything - else you've got. Don't parrot, don't preach, don't proselytize; set forth your own logical, validly structured, intellectually honest argument for the proposition you champion. I don't attack the central proposition, merely the manner in which it has been presented and defended. Do not proceed from unverified assumptions, assume no givens, avoid circular logic, anecdotal hearsay, and internal reference, eschew panegyric; set forth a rigorous, objective, proper argument, not a paean. It can be done.
Timbeerrrr! I showed your post to Joe Sixpack and he started twitching. I can't get him to stop. What should I do?
timberlandko wrote:Lessee here - straw man and implied ad hominem in reply to Frank, followed by a welcoming post to a n00b, combining the above 2 faults (which by themselves invalidate the presenter's argument) with circular reference/internal validation, proceeding from an unestablished major premis, along with explicit (albeit externally referenced) ad hominem. Quite an accomplishment - a classic exersize in the art of sinking one's own boat. Mind the dogs and hogs, and try to avoid the dust there, diagknowz - you're really stirring up the irony.
Now then - lets see what -if anything - else you've got. Don't parrot, don't preach, don't proselytize; set forth your own logical, validly structured, intellectually honest argument for the proposition you champion. I don't attack the central proposition, merely the manner in which it has been presented and defended. Do not proceed from unverified assumptions, assume no givens, avoid circular logic, anecdotal hearsay, and internal reference, eschew panegyric; set forth a rigorous, objective, proper argument, not a paean. It can be done.
ZZzzzzzzzz......I have yet to see it here at the site.
diagknowz wrote:Frank Apisa wrote: No wonder religion is so dangerous. It should be treated as a sickness.
You'd feel right at home with the Soviet Inquisitors, Frank.
And you with the Spanish?
Now that we're all assembled, have I told you about the latest Starbucks promotion?
Neo, just pop open another brew for Joe - he'll be fine.
diagknowz, I imagine it is futile to point out you've handsomely confirmed the criticisms I directed toward your earlier statements. Now, if you really feel stongly about your proposition, if you're loyal and committed to it, respectful of it, why continually demean, discredit and disparage it?
I'll say again - your core premis may be valid. I do not, and never have, denied that possibility (nor, for that matter, its converse, but thats another argument altogether, so nevermind that for now). Demonstrate that your core premis is valid, then develop the remainder of your argument from that one core, key, central, foundational, proven proposition. Otherwise, you have nothing, and yourself condemn the proposition.
