The worst Christian ever

[Jon-Marc]

That's what I was called in another Christian Web site by a non-Christian because of my stand for creation and against evolution. I was also told by that person that I was "insighting (inciting) violence" by being that way. She said that I had called her a satan worshiper by calling evolution a "lie of the devil." Many who believe in evolution don't worship the devil--just as many who believe in the creation don't worship God.

I recently left one "Christian" Web site because of all the anti-Christian, anti-Bible nonsence being spewed out there. That Web site had become way too argumentative for me.

Why do non-Christians come into Christian forums just to try to convince us that we are wrong in what we believe? Do they really think it will accomplish anything--other than with those who are weak in faith and Bible knowledge who can be easily swayed with lies? I have no problems with non-Christians who come here or to other Christian Web sites seeking answers, but I do have a problem with them just wanting to cause doubts by telling us we are wrong inour beliefs.

I called evolution a "lie of the devil" (which it is), and the young lady in question sent me some very angry PM's. Personally, I thank God that He has counted me worthy to be called names for my witness.

While I believe in lifeforms "adapting" to their environment, that is not the same thing as evolution. Evolution is changing from one species into another entirely different species. Some Christians speak of "micro evolution", but that to me is just compromising the truth. Evolution is a LIE of the devil. Nothing evolves. It might adapt or bring a new species to life by two compatible but slightly different species mating. I've seen that before, where a cat mated with a rabbit. The offspring looked really strange, with attributes of both parents--the head and back legs of the rabbit and the body of the cat. Who would have thought that cats and rabbits were compatible?

I'm sorry if I offend some people with my "black and white" stand on the word of God and His truth. I will continue to do so as long as I'm able. The truth often hurts--especially when one is convicted by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Johnv]

That's what I was called in another Christian Web site by a non-Christian because of my stand for creation and against evolution.

What kind of site was it? If it was a religious website, I'm wondering why one would take a religious position in a nonreligious environment.

Many who believe in evolution don't worship the devil--just as many who believe in the creation don't worship God.

That's true.

Why do non-Christians come into Christian forums just to try to convince us that we are wrong in what we believe?

They fail. Likewise, I wouldn't go to a nonchristian website to convinve them of what I believe.

I called evolution a "lie of the devil" (which it is)...

You're wrong about that, but this isn't the place to carry on a C/E debate.

Evolution is changing from one species into another entirely different species.

Speciation has been documented, so you might want to raise the bar to evolution being the changing from one genus to another genus.

I'm sorry if I offend some people with my "black and white" stand on the word of God and His truth.

No such offense here at this site, but don't presume your position is the only correct one for Christians to take.

BTW, simply taking a theological position such as your doesn't in any way constitute being "the worst Christian ever". That said, if I were called that by a nonbeliever, I'd ask myself if my Christian witness might need some realignment. You don't need to compromise what you believe in this, or any topic, but honey draws flies much better than vinegar. And I don't believe the Christian witness should be vinegar.

 

[just-want-peace]

Jon-Marc sez:

Why do non-Christians come into Christian forums just to try to convince us that we are wrong in what we believe?-----I'm sorry if I offend some people with my "black and white" stand on the word of God and His truth.

1. For the same reason that many consumers of alcohol can't stand to be in company of tee-totalers. Specifically they feel guilty for their actions, and if they can sucker you into their guilt-producing activities, they feel justified. While either side can be nasty, which is the more prevalent 1) Smokers, drinkers, gluttons etc who make fun of you for non-participation in their "sins" or 2) NON-any of the above who make fun of you for indulging???

2. Don't be sorry for offending such people; it's their guilty conscience that is driving their actions. What did God tell Samuel whan the Israelites wanted a KING?? "They haven't rejected you, they have rejected ME!"
These folk aren't offended by you, but what you represent!!! Wear that as a badge of honor.

Johnv sez:

--I'm wondering why one would take a religious position in a nonreligious environment.

Why not? Just because it is not a religious board does not mean that you have to avoid "religious" topics/answers/comments!! Aren't you a Christian 24/7/365?? In fact that attitude is what has the masses thinking that virtually any display of faith NOT in a church or home is illegal. (Well for the Christian faith anyway!)

 

[Revmitchell]

That's what I was called in another Christian Web site by a non-Christian because of my stand for creation and against evolution. I was also told by that person that I was "insighting (inciting) violence" by being that way. She said that I had called her a satan worshiper by calling evolution a "lie of the devil." Many who believe in evolution don't worship the devil--just as many who believe in the creation don't worship God.

I recently left one "Christian" Web site because of all the anti-Christian, anti-Bible nonsence being spewed out there. That Web site had become way too argumentative for me.

Why do non-Christians come into Christian forums just to try to convince us that we are wrong in what we believe? Do they really think it will accomplish anything--other than with those who are weak in faith and Bible knowledge who can be easily swayed with lies? I have no problems with non-Christians who come here or to other Christian Web sites seeking answers, but I do have a problem with them just wanting to cause doubts by telling us we are wrong inour beliefs.

I called evolution a "lie of the devil" (which it is), and the young lady in question sent me some very angry PM's. Personally, I thank God that He has counted me worthy to be called names for my witness.

While I believe in lifeforms "adapting" to their environment, that is not the same thing as evolution. Evolution is changing from one species into another entirely different species. Some Christians speak of "micro evolution", but that to me is just compromising the truth. Evolution is a LIE of the devil. Nothing evolves. It might adapt or bring a new species to life by two compatible but slightly different species mating. I've seen that before, where a cat mated with a rabbit. The offspring looked really strange, with attributes of both parents--the head and back legs of the rabbit and the body of the cat. Who would have thought that cats and rabbits were compatible?

I'm sorry if I offend some people with my "black and white" stand on the word of God and His truth. I will continue to do so as long as I'm able. The truth often hurts--especially when one is convicted by the Holy Spirit.

:thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Johnv]

For the same reason that many consumers of alcohol can't stand to be in company of tee-totalers.

Talk about painting with a rather broad brush. A good portion of posters on the BB consume alcohol periodically, and could care less if the persons they're associating with are teatotalers or not.

Johnv sez: Why not? Just because it is not a religious board does not mean that you have to avoid "religious" topics/answers/comments!!

You make a good point, but that's not what I was referring to. To everything there is a season, and that includes religious discussions. If I'm on in a chatroom discussingm say, matchbox cars, and someone comes on telling everyone matchbox cars are of the devil, I'd think the guy was nuts, when in fact he probably isn't. Christian speech calls for being of flavor, nor of bitterness. If our speech is bitter to someone, our message might be fine, but how we're delivering it might be bitter. Scripture says to hold fast to the former, but to change the latter.

 

[grahame]

Don't worry my friend, rather rejoice and remember the words of our Lord,

If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?

They unfortunately are the ones who are deceived, which they will one day find to their cost if they do not repent and believe the gospel.

 

[just-want-peace]

Quote:
Originally Posted by just-want-peace
For the same reason that many consumers of alcohol can't stand to be in company of tee-totalers.

Johnv sez:

Talk about painting with a rather broad brush. A good portion of posters on the BB consume alcohol periodically, and could care less if the persons they're associating with are teatotalers or not.

John, you do have a habit of reading "INTO" statement! You will notice that I said "MANY", not "all", or even "most".

And I stand by this statement as it is from personal experience; and that "good portion" you mention OBVIOUSLY fall outside that "MANY!!

 

[Johnv]

Johnv sez: John, you do have a habit of reading "INTO" statement! You will notice that I said "MANY", not "all", or even "most".

Granted, but it's still a rather baord brush you're painting with.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Sorry, I saw the title and thought this was a thread about me

 

[just-want-peace]

Granted, but it's still a rather baord brush you're painting with.

:BangHead::BangHead:

Okie-Dokie, John!

I'm sorta like "Burger King" --have it your way!

 

[saturneptune]

Sorry, I saw the title and thought this was a thread about me

It was. I begged them to change the subject before you saw it.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

It was. I begged them to change the subject before you saw it.

Whew - thanks. I know I qualify though.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Jesus did not mince His words and sugar-coat what he siad for fear of offending people. That was why he was hated--for speaking the truth. Yes, people will flock to someone who preaches nothing but "God loves you just the way you are, and you don't ahve to change anything." However, Jesus didn't preach that. He said to one man (which was meant for all of us), "Ye msut be born again." That means a change in attitude, beliefs, what we say and do, and how we live.

If people are offended by my behavior, then, yes, I need to take a close look at myself. However, if they are offended by the gospel or any truth from God's word, then they need to take a close look at Jesus.

"in the beginnging God created the heaven and the earth." Nothing is said there about evolution, which had nothing whatsoever to do with the creation. No Baptists I have personally known believe in evolution since it denies the creation, or it adds evolution to the creatin--as in theistic evolution.

If I am called a "bad Christian" because I won't compromise the truth and appease the unbelievers with sweet words and tell them "I respect what you believe" (even though it is contrary to God's word), then I can live with that. Jesus was called far worse things.

 

[Johnv]

Jesus did not mince His words and sugar-coat what he siad for fear of offending people.

No, but we're not Jesus. Scripture says to speak the truth in love, to let our words be of flavor, and admonishes the harsh tongue.

If people are offended by my behavior, then, yes, I need to take a close look at myself. However, if they are offended by the gospel or any truth from God's word, then they need to take a close look at Jesus.

Good point. May we all do the same, and may we all be able to discern between what is the truth and what is our behavior.

No Baptists I have personally known believe in evolution since it denies the creation

Christians who have no problem with evolution and scripture would disagree with your conclusion there. But that difference in and of itself does nto make one or the other a bad christian, not does it mean that one is speaking the truth and the other not.

 

[ashleysdad]

No, but we're not Jesus. Scripture says to speak the truth in love, to let our words be of flavor, and admonishes the harsh tongue.

Good point. May we all do the same, and may we all be able to discern between what is the truth and what is our behavior.

Christians who have no problem with evolution and scripture would disagree with your conclusion there. But that difference in and of itself does nto make one or the other a bad christian, not does it mean that one is speaking the truth and the other not.

I am sorry, normally I just read and don't really respond a whole lot but I am going to respond here. Christians who have no problem with evolution in the typical sense that says humans are descended from apes and that line of "logic" most definitely have a real problem with scripture. Both points of view cannot be correct. You either believe "In the beginning God" or you believe that we are descended from monkeys, the two points cannot be reconciled. I would also say that denying scripture would definitely be a classic sign of being a poor christian and would also be an indication that one is not speaking truth.

 

[Victorious]

I recently left one "Christian" Web site because of all the anti-Christian, anti-Bible nonsence being spewed out there. That Web site had become way too argumentative for me.

Don't feel bad. I was banned from a "Christian" web site for quoting scripture! The funny part is, when they removed my post and banned me, another veteran poster thought this unfair and reposted my comment! She was banned too! LOL!

***Even funnier is that after about 6 months, the site has been sending me e-mails as if I was never banned!

Black and white is good on the essentials. Grace and pliability on the non-essentials. On that, leave room for error, but don't hesitate to be a Berean.

 

[Johnv]

Christians who have no problem with evolution in the typical sense that says humans are descended from apes and that line of "logic" most definitely have a real problem with scripture.

That's your two cents, and you're entitled to it, but to accuse others of having a problem with scripture based on one's view of genesis, or on one's view of arminianism, or one's view of the tribulation, or millenialism, or any other non-essential topic is categorically out of line. These are nonessentials in scripture, and therefore subject to liberty (that baptist distintive we frequently preach but seldom apply). Victorious said "Black and white is good on the essentials. Grace and pliability on the non-essentials." That is very true, and very important.

 

[ashleysdad]

That's your two cents, and you're entitled to it, but to accuse others of having a problem with scripture based on one's view of genesis, or on one's view of arminianism, or one's view of the tribulation, or millenialism, or any other non-essential topic is categorically out of line. These are nonessentials in scripture, and therefore subject to liberty (that baptist distintive we frequently preach but seldom apply). Victorious said "Black and white is good on the essentials. Grace and pliability on the non-essentials." That is very true, and very important.

No, again, I am sorry but this is NOT a non-essential. Either Gods word is true or Gods word is not true. Paul said that "all scripture was given by inspiration of God". This includes the Genesis record. Either we believe in the infallibility of Scripture or we do not. The Bible says "in the beginning God created" mankind comes along and attempts to change the truth of God into a lie (Romans 1). I firmly believe in Grace and pliability in non-essential areas. Questioning the truthfulness of scripture is not a non-essential item. The other issues that you raised are not in the same catagory as creation. In those areas there is room for disagreement. With creation either God created or He did not, either the Bible is true or it is not. It cannot be both or a mixture of the two. Having said all this I also know that it is very unlikely that I will change your mind and even more unlikely that you will change mine. I respect you, while completely disagreeing with your position. I would rather end the debate than risk tempers flaring and having harsh words exchanged. I am not here to exchange hot tempered words with anyone else.

 

[grahame]

No, but we're not Jesus. Scripture says to speak the truth in love, to let our words be of flavor, and admonishes the harsh tongue.

He also said, "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets."

 

[Johnv]

He also said, "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets."

That's a bit out of context. The passage it was lifted from referrs to loving those who don't love you (and not just those who love you), and is followed by "Love your enemies". To lift the verse from the whole passage is a misapplication. Like I said, scripture says to speak the truth in love, to let our words be of flavor, and admonishes the harsh tongue. Doing so is consistent with showing love to our enemies, the context of the passage from which you lifted that verse.