Marcia
Active Member
There are people who do believe in God but not hell. Some believe in a God who takes everyone to heaven. However, it seems to me most evolutionary scientists do not believe in God, or at least one who created the world.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Beliefs
- Thread starter Carico
- Start date
There are people who do believe in God but not hell. Some believe in a God who takes everyone to heaven. However, it seems to me most evolutionary scientists do not believe in God, or at least one who created the world.
I've noticed one thing about your theology Carico. Man is never responsible for anything. If they believe, God made them believe, if they don't believe, then Satan deceived them.
I am beginning to understand why this belief system is so popular now, because you don't have to be accountable or responsible for your actions.
No, the Bible says nothing of the earth being round, the second part of your question is just stupid. The argument from silence doesn't work.So then you think the bible is wrong about the earth being round. Is that correct? if not, then why are you trying to prove that God doesn't know as much as scientists do?
You're giving the arguments that atheists do. So it's no surprise that you're arguing against the bible because your posts have argued with it all along. You're simply trying not to disguise it any more.
I haven't given any argument, Carico. You are so quick to attack me you don't even read. I can't believe the moderators here put up with your personal attacks and question the salvation of so many. It seems to be a recent problem, even after the posts are reported. It's unfortunate.
LAST TIME...when I argue against what YOU say, I'm not arguing against the Bible. You are not God. You are not the Word.
Well, there are those that call themselves Theological Evolutionists, who believe that God used evolution to bring about life as we know it today.
My problem with this is that God says Adam was the first man and he was highly intelligent. He was not some caveman who developed over many hundreds of thousands of years.
And archeology does not support this. Archeology shows man suddenly appearing on the scene about 5000 years ago and being very advanced. Men built cities, had languages and mathematics, practiced trades and so on.
Now, they will dig up some folks who lived in caves and used stone tools and the like and say this proves man was very primitive. But there are men to this very day who live in the jungles or in caves and use stone tools like this. So, this in no way proves they lived many hundreds of thousands of years ago.
Well, there are those that call themselves Theological Evolutionists, who believe that God used evolution to bring about life as we know it today.
My problem with this is that God says Adam was the first man and he was highly intelligent. He was not some caveman who developed over many hundreds of thousands of years.
And archeology does not support this. Archeology shows man suddenly appearing on the scene about 5000 years ago and being very advanced. Men built cities, had languages and mathematics, practiced trades and so on.
Now, they will dig up some folks who lived in caves and used stone tools and the like and say this proves man was very primitive. But there are men to this very day who live in the jungles or in caves and use stone tools like this. So, this in no way proves they lived many hundreds of thousands of years ago.
There are so many problems with "theistic" evolution that it's hard to say which is the biggest problem with it. :laugh:
First of all, animals can't turn into people or breed human descendants whether over 9 months or a gazillion years.
Secondly God tells us how he created man, from the dust of the ground which is precisely why the flesh and bones of humans decay into dust when they die.
Thirdly, there are exactly zero accounts from any ancient people of our ape ancestors.:laugh: yet scientists want us to believe that these creatures they made up from their imaginations lived for over 4 million years on this earth which is almost 100 times the amount of time that "modern-day" humans have lived and yet no accounts of these creatures?
One would think that the first speaking humans would have had marvelous tales about their half-ape, half human parents, but not one account of these creatures.But that's what happens when one tries to reconcile the beliefs of Satan who rules the secular world with the bible; stories so impossible and contradictory that it makes the events in the bible seem like ordinary events!
So no, one can't both agree with Satan and God; it's one or the other. that's why John tells us in 1 John 4:5-6 that beliefs that come from the world are the spirit of falsehood and the beliefs that come from God's word come from the spirit of truth, and the Spirit of truth is the Holy Spirit.
One may believe in a "god" and even think that the god that he or she believes exists is Yahweh, but may not believe in the true Yahweh of the Bible. Just because one does not believe in the God Who is, does not mean that person is an atheist.
Yes it does because Jesus is the only way to God. So if people don't come to God through Christ, they aren't coming to the real God. Those people call themselves "deists" because they believe that some higher power exists but they're just as much in the dark about who he is as atheists are. That's why Jesus brought a sword. He divided the world into believers and unbelievers. those who believe him and those who don't.
With the number of personal attacks you have accumulated and this: the attributing of a lie to a fellow poster, is against the rules which you agreed to abide by when you registered, when you pushed that key that said "I agree."
If you don't agree, you may find yourself on the outside looking in. Please abide by the rules you agreed to and stop with the personal attacks, the innuendos, the lies, etc. You can find the rules of posting at the bottom of each page if you need to refresh your memory.
Take heed:
3. Show grace to the other posters. When someone disagrees with you, discuss it; but be slow to offend, and eager to get into the Word and find the answers. Remember, when discussing passionate issues, it is easy to go too far and offend. Further, if we are "earnestly contending for the faith" it would be unrealistic not to expect at times to be misunderstood or even ridiculed. But please note that your words can sometimes be harsh if used in the wrong way. The anger of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
4. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. The board has an edit button enabled. We encourage you to use it and edit your own words. Moderators and Administrators will be visibly proactive in dealing with potentially offensive situations. Posts of a violent or threatening nature, either implicitly or explicitly, will be deleted, and the poster's membership revoked. We encourage personal problems with other members be resolved privately via email or personal messaging.
Webdog did try to prove that the bible wasn't true. That's not my fault. But unlike many, I overlook personal attacks as you can see. Maybe i should be less forgiving in the future. But the fact that i have "accumulated" many personal attacks shows that you are allowing them. So maybe you should stop them, especially since you claim they won't be tolerated, and I won't have to rely on merely defending myself. Or are some people allowed to attack others and people like me are not? Apparently so.
Last edited by a moderator:
Carico, I went back and Webdog did not attack the Bible. He said that "circle of the Earth" in Isaiah 40, does not mean a 3 dimensional sphere.
Unbelieveably, I am actually in agreement with you on this point. But the Bible also speaks of the corners of the Earth.
Isa 11:12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Now a sphere doesn't have corners, but that doesn't mean the Earth doesn't have corners. We know we have the gravitational poles, so perhaps there is also some sort of pole running east-west through the Earth. Or perhaps this verse is simply speaking of the four directions, North, South, East, and West.
But Webdog did not say the Bible is wrong, he said YOU are wrong.
Unbelieveably, I am actually in agreement with you on this point. But the Bible also speaks of the corners of the Earth.
Isa 11:12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Now a sphere doesn't have corners, but that doesn't mean the Earth doesn't have corners. We know we have the gravitational poles, so perhaps there is also some sort of pole running east-west through the Earth. Or perhaps this verse is simply speaking of the four directions, North, South, East, and West.
But Webdog did not say the Bible is wrong, he said YOU are wrong.
Hi OR,
I think you are misunderstanding the intent of my post to carico.
I was not trying to prove that the earth is flat but that the word carico used "circle", does not mean a sphere.
In addition, the passage does not say "are grasshoppers" but "are as grasshoppers" clearly indicating a metaphor. But for the record, the absence of the word "as" or "like" does not automatically make a biblical sentence a literal non-metaphorical statement.
e.g. Genesis 49:14 Issachar is a strong ass couching down between two burdens:
Context decides in this case.
Actually, as far as I know, the Bible does not teach that the earth is a sphere. Therefore it is not that important to God for us to know what it is in reality. But we found out anyway that it is indeed a sphere just as we found out how to make a minuture sun on the earth called a Nuclear fusion.
In a way, carico is correct because of the limited space between out eyeballs (binocular vision) and the massiveness of the earth we do not have the depth perception to sense the spherical shape of the earth from any distance. Just as we look at the moon and only see a 2 dimensional "circle" of light in the sky on a full moon.
We don't see it as a 3 dimensional sphere.
We come to the logical conclusion of the earth's spherical shape because as we pass over the earth in a spacecraft the "circular" shape of the disc of the earth is retained.
Besides, I remember seeing my teacher's globe of the earth in grammar school and it was spherical.
Even in a spacecraft or on the moon, the earth appears to be a two dimensional circle to us, like a plate, because our depth perception does not work that far away when we look down upon the earth. How do I know? I saw a 3D IMAX movie made in space
I have forgotten the distance (if I ever knew, I believe I did at one time) where depth perception ceases to function for those creatures such as man who have binocular vision. It depends on other factors as well including the ability of the human mind to create an illusion of depth.
Anyway I've blathered on about those things which carico rightfully claims God could care care less IMO.
Also, he is correct concerning those metaphysicians who will argue that the earth is indeed flat and is in reality a planar mobius strip which we are not equipped to fully perceive. You know, like a nightcrawler cannot perceive forms and images as we do because they have no eyes.
These people are dead serious.
BTW I don't have a problem with the phrase "the four corners of the earth" (which could have rightfully been translated the four "quarters" of the earth.
Personally, at this point in my life, I also could care less about the shape of the earth. But I thank God for the beauty of the parts of the earth I can see but even more imortant the ability to appreciate that beauty.
However, the fact remains that only God and angels at the time of the writing of Isaiah would know that the earth would look like a 2 dimensional "circle" to man from outer space.
Good evening OR.
HankD
Actually you are wrong, strictly speaking. The word "chug", while translated in some Hebrew-English Lexicons as "Circuit" or "compass" is not precisely correct. Hebrew has a word for this, and it is "Sabib", not "chug".
"Chug" can mean either a literal circle (two dimensional) OR a sphere (three dimensional). In fact, several languages have words for "sphere" or "ball" which etymologically are derived from this word, such as German.
Strictly speaking, Ancient Hebrew did not have an exact word for "sphere" in a strictly three dimensional sense. If they would have wanted to call the earth a "sphere" the only word they could of used is "chug".
We, in fact still do this today. We say "Christopher Columbus discovered the earth was round". We don't say "Christopher Columbus discovered the earth was spherical". "Round" is generic, meaning two or three dimensional: so is "chug".
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
I know you were not trying to prove the earth was flat. I just think that sometimes we get caught up in useless arguments because we don't interpret Scripture properly. I suspect that if we reread Jacob's dying words to his sons we would see a lot of metaphorical expressions.
Actually I believe that at sea you can discern that the earth is spherical. You see the horizon and then see the top of another ship below the horizon and as the distance is closed the ship appears above the horizon. This is particularly apparent when you are elevated above sea level such as the crows nest on the type of ship I served on.
This may be the reason that people like Columbus and Magellan did not believe in a flat earth when others did.
Tom Butler
New Member
You may defend yourself until the cows come home. You may argue that the moderators are not being consistent. But you cannot win this argument.
I share many of your views. But a softer tone will keep you around here a lot longer.
Yes, I believe it's 17 miles on a calm sea where a ship will "disappear" below the horizon.
I believe Columbus also drew that conclusion from the lunar eclipses.
True, the spherical quality of the earth can be discerned at sea, my point is that from a distance which would allow you to see the whole earth in a panorama, it would look like a 2 dimensional circle as human depth perception doesn't work at that distance.
And yes, the Bible is full of metaphors, similes, figures of speech, etc...
Somewhat unsettling to a few folks.
HankD
Last edited:
From my posts I believe you can see that it can be both a 360 degree compass view or a circle, from which we use the word "compass": that which draws a circle.
The Hebrew functional word for "sphere" or "ball" is DUG pronounced like "dude" but with a "g" on the end.
HankD
Hi again Havensdad,
Here are the other three places in the Scripture where Chug pronounced KOOG is used:
Job 22:14 Thick clouds are a covering to him, that he seeth not; and he walketh in the circuit of heaven.
Job 26:10 He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
Proverbs 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
HankD
Job 26:10 He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
Proverbs 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
HankD
There are so many problems with "theistic" evolution that it's hard to say which is the biggest problem with it. :laugh:
First of all, animals can't turn into people or breed human descendants whether over 9 months or a gazillion years.
Secondly God tells us how he created man, from the dust of the ground which is precisely why the flesh and bones of humans decay into dust when they die.
Thirdly, there are exactly zero accounts from any ancient people of our ape ancestors.:laugh: yet scientists want us to believe that these creatures they made up from their imaginations lived for over 4 million years on this earth which is almost 100 times the amount of time that "modern-day" humans have lived and yet no accounts of these creatures?
But that's what happens when one tries to reconcile the beliefs of Satan who rules the secular world with the bible; stories so impossible and contradictory that it makes the events in the bible seem like ordinary events!
So no, one can't both agree with Satan and God; it's one or the other. that's why John tells us in 1 John 4:5-6 that beliefs that come from the world are the spirit of falsehood and the beliefs that come from God's word come from the spirit of truth, and the Spirit of truth is the Holy Spirit.
I think the biggest problem with theistic evolution is their denial of the fall.
If we are to believe that there was sin and death in the world for millions of years before Adam, this would mean that sin entering the world is one big lie! We find fossils of dead animals which are claimed to be much older than Adam. Now either as creationists believe those fossils are dated incorrectly and are in fact younger than Adam, or the fall, death, sin and therefore Jesus whole purpose of salvation is a lie. I'm sorry but I cannot believe evolution on those grounds (as well as the lack of evidence).
No. It is also generic, just like chug: it can mean a two dimensional circle (such as a disc) or a sphere. Either one.