Page 3 of 4

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:06 pm
by aphephilia
Punishing Crime-
"The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father..." -- Ezekiel 18:20
"I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation..." -- Exodus 20:5
This one is not a contradiction, if you read them in context. They are talking about two totally different things. In Ezekiel it is referring to legal matters. In Exodus it is referring to how the effects of sin can effect generations.

I just got a phone call, I'll get to the other ones later.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2004 10:21 pm
by aphephilia
Sabbath day-
"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy." -- Exodus 20:8
"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." -- Romans 14:5
This one is not a contradition either. In Old Testament times the system of "Law" required keeping the Sabbath as part of the overall moral, legal, and sacrificial system by which the Jewish people satisfied God’s requirements for behavior, government, and forgiveness of sins. The Sabbath was part of the "Law" in that sense. In order to "remain" in favor with God, you had to also keep the Sabbath. If it was not kept, then the person was in sin and would often be punished.
But with Jesus’ atonement, and justification by faith, we no longer are required to keep the "Law". We are not under the "Law", but grace. The Sabbath is fulfilled in Jesus because in Him we have rest. We are not under obligation to keep the "Law" and this goes for the Sabbath as well.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2004 10:29 pm
by aphephilia
Temptation-
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." -- James 1:13
"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..." -- Genesis 22:1
This is not a contradiction either. It was a test that God offered to Abraham, not a temptation to sin.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sat May 01, 2004 10:09 am
by looks-too-far
All true, well put. Also, this test which was a test of faith and obedience, moved God to reinforce his covenant with Abraham with a sworn oath that through Abraham's line Jesus would be born. Interestingly, a great prophetic picture was enacted as well...this event also portrayed how Christ Jesus (the greater Isaac) would in due time willingly lay down his human life for mankind's salvation. Which is where this thread started. :0)

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sat May 01, 2004 2:07 pm
by clementine
A beautiful story, but nothing more.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sat May 01, 2004 5:37 pm
by aphephilia
The greatest argument in favor of the Theory of Evolution is that it appears that everybody but a few believes it! Ever hear of the "Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome? Remember the story of the ancient charlatan who convinced the king and his advisors that he could make clothing so marvelous that only those with a perfect moral character could see them? When the clothing was "presented" and neither the king nor his advisors could see them, everyone was afraid to be the first to say that there was, in fact, nothing there, for fear of being found out to be only one with a blemished moral character. Congratulations to the very few among us who dare to admit that it appears to them that there is, in fact, no scientific evidence to support the validity of the Theory of Evolution. Most people who know the fossil record think that while it doesn't contain the transitional forms to prove evolution, the proof is to be found in biology, while those who know that biology has no proof assume that the proof is found in the fossil record. The truth, however, is that neither can provide proof for evolution. Why? because there is No proof! That's why it's called a "Theory". :p

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sat May 01, 2004 9:37 pm
by looks-too-far
If the "theory" of evolution is true, are we still evolving? If so, where are in-between-lizard-alligator-horse-monkey-ape-man-creatures roving around scraping their knuckles on the ground? And don't tell me we have stopped evolving because now it's all perfect! :roll:

Everything "according to it's kind" makes more sense. But that takes faith, and there is a sad lack of that in the world, unfortunately.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 7:32 am
by tinman
Can you hear me applauding you, aphephilia? If not, I'll clap louder. Excellent posts!

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 8:36 am
by aphephilia
Thank You Tinman, :D

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 8:40 am
by Kerry Tobin
I don't know...

Have many of you ever visited old ghost towns in the west? Ever notice that the doors are pretty short? I'm not a very tall guy and I had to duck for a good portion of them.

I believe in general we are slowly getting taller (unfortunately we are also getting wider but that is a whole different discussion). If that is the case isn't that basically a form of evolution?

I don't think you see much inbetween because it is so slow that it isn't even noticed until WELL after it happened.

Also, have you seen the fossil records for horses? The old fossils that have been found are the size of a medium dog, not the large horses we have now.

In addition, remember that if something is happening slowly the whole species can be effected by it over time. For example, if humans are getting taller even though I'm not that tall I'm still a "normal" human. I can still compete and may eventually have children. Over time, and many generations, a dominant trait is likely to make it into my blood line and they may become taller.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 8:57 am
by aphephilia
Kerry, modern horses vary enormously in size. The largest horse today is the Clydesdale; the smallest is the Fallabella, which stands at 17 inches tall. Both are members of the same species, and neither has evolved from the other.

<small>[ May 02, 2004, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: aphephilia ]</small>

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 10:51 am
by aphephilia
If you look up the word "theory" in a thesaurus, you will find that the related words are: guess, guesswork, surmise; feeling, hunch, impression, presentiment, and suspicion.
In contrast to the word "theory?: assurance, certainty, and knowledge.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 3:01 pm
by looks-too-far
If evolution were true, it must be dealt with in a scientific manner. It should be established by the scientific method. Observe what has happened, based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true, test the theory by further observations and by experiments, and watch to see if the predictions based on the theory are fulfilled. Fossil record? If there is evolution or was evolution, where are the missing fossil links? Darwin even scratched his head at this one...after all this time, and the assembling of millions of fossils the facts show that basic kinds of living things appeared suddenly and did not change appreciably for long periods of time and that there are no transitional links between one major kind of living thing and another. There is nowhere in the fossil record that can be found partially formed bones or organs that could be taken for the beginning of a new feature. There are fossils of various types of flying creatures, for example, birds, bats, extinct pterodactyls. According to evolution, they must have evolved from transitional ancestors. But none of those transitional forms have been found. There isn't even a hint of them. Are there fossils of giraffes with necks two thirds or three quarters as long as present? Is there any fossil evidence of fish developing an amphibian pelvis, or of fish fins turning into amphibian legs, feet and toes? The fact is, looking for such developing features in the fossil record has proved to be a fruitless quest. Okay, how about he horse? The Encyclopedia Brittannica comments: "The evolution of the horse was never in a straight line." In other words, nowhere does the fossil evidence show a gradual development from the small animal to the large horse. Eohippus, supposedly the earliest horse, and said by experts to be long extinct and known to us only through fossils, may be alive and well and not a horse at all--a shy, fox-sized animal called a Daman that darts about in the African bush. From a practical point, how about our Sun? It is perfectly and justly placed just the right distance from the earth, just a bit more or less would kill us for the cold or heat. It turns at the right angle and axis and moves at the perfect speed to sustain life, water and temperature. Is that an accident? Scientists even today, are finding NO genetic factors or links what-so-ever with chimpanzees, apes and man. Where is the missing link? :p

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 5:52 pm
by clementine
Well, I don't think there has been any hard evidence for the existence of God either. I'm talking about real evidence, not, "Oh, these beautiful things must have been made by a higher power," or, "The Bible says so." Like I've said before, these things are not enough to prove anything. The existence of God and creationism is a theory too. Just because you believe it in your heart doesn't make it true. Hence the need to have faith-- believing in something you can't see.I don't know why you guys can't grasp my suggestion that creation and evolution can coexist. Besides, evolution does exist. It's been witnessed numerous times on a micro level. (I can't remember websites about this off hand, but if you want I'll try and find them) Our fossil record, though it contains amazing things, is far from extensive. Geology is so vast, and most of our planet is underwater, making much of our Geology untouched and unexplored for the discovery of fossils. There are a few possible existing transitional species: certain birds that have webbed feet but never go in water, other birds that are in water all the time that are just beginning to develop webbing. Looks-to-far, we are still evolving. Evolution happens so slowly that no one could witness it in a lifetime. And like I said in an earlier post, humans, though most likely still evolving physically, have gotten to a point where we are highly evolved and much of our evolution takes place in the brain-- technology, for instance. Think of how our modern day life differs from those of the first Americans or even our Grandparents. Thats evolution. Haven't you heard about girls and boys developing at an earlier age than they used to. That's evolution. Also, the genetic similarities between us and chimpanzees is more than 97%, more than the genetic similarites between a donkey and horse. Chimps are not thought to be what we directly evolved from, but rather, they evolved from the same parent species. Have you ever looked at the similarities between human and chimp embryos? The likeness is absolutely amazing. Plus all embryos of almost all species look very similar in their earliest stages, and they all form in water, which suggests that all life began in water.

<small>[ May 02, 2004, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: clementine ]</small>

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 6:17 pm
by aphephilia
Well, I know one thing for sure. Belief in the God "theory" offers me the hope of everlasting life. Belief in the Theory of Evolution, offers me nothing. I'll pick God.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 6:24 pm
by clementine
I don't think that has to be true. Knowing that we are not superior beings and that we are an important part of nature can be a beautiful realization. No fears or inhibitions. We already have a moral sense, we know right and wrong. It can encourage you to lead a more fulfilling life now. I understand the desire for eternal life, but I think I would be selling myself short if I believed in something only because I was afraid not to.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 6:36 pm
by aphephilia
You're assuming that people who believe are believing out of fear and that simply is not true. We believe out of LOVE! Love of ourselves, love of neighbor, and the Love of God!

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 10:45 am
by humbug
Darwins Theory of Evolution attempts to explain WHY evolution is occuring. That doesn't mean that the evolutionary process itself is a theory. We know that evolution is occuring because there is a vast amount of PHYSICAL EVIDENCE in our posession that shows us evolution has occured. Darwins theory (natural selection) is simply Darwins explanation for HOW/WHY evolution is occuring.

Still noone has had the courage to answer me: Did dinosaurs exist on earth?

The Bible is believable? Could someone explain to me how Noahs Ark is possible? There are over a MILLION species of beatles (yes roaches and lady bugs) on this planet. Many have yet to be discovered. Gathering both sexes for each beatle on earth would take lifetimes.

<small>[ May 03, 2004, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: humbug ]</small>

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 11:13 am
by looks-too-far
If you do any type of research on the ark you will find that it was almost 3 football fields long and had 3 levels. I would imagine, because God had a hand it it, that all went perfectly well within the ark. I can't imagine God submitting poor old Noah and his family to a rampaging elephant or a stampede of some sort. There was order because God made sure there was.

If were are evolving slow, we still need evidence in the fossil record for the existence of the differences. It just doesn't make any sense.

When you take into the entire message and purpose of the bible, you find there is more reason to believe and have faith in God than you think. It isn't a rambling, babbling bunch of verses for your entertainment, there is a message and a purpose. (See one of my earlier posts) and it has to do with a beginning, sin by Adam and a sacrifice by Jesus to buy back that sin for our salvation. There is a purpose for life and a future for faithful humans who chose to listen to God's word.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 11:52 am
by jcg
first of all aphephelia, you're kidding yourself if you think that fear doesn't play a role in your beliefs. I grew up going to catholic school, church twice a week, a childhood somewhat structured around organized religion. The bible stories and church sermons during those years filled me with worry and fear. If you didn't do this, then this would happen (go to **** rather than heaven). I wondered if I was living up to gods expectations (as a child). I think that those feelings are fairly commen when a child is exposed to such extreme spiritual structure at an early age. You just said, the theory of evoloution gives you nothing. But that god offers you hope of everlasting life. You're afraid of not having everlasting life.

Also, the bible contradictions that I noted earlier are a few of many. Look for more on the web. You're anti contradictions are excuses to explain why I should read/interpret the bible like you. The bible is somewhat ambiguous. Why, if the Bible was given to us by a perfect being, is it not a perfectly written book, completely digestible for all that read it?

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 12:39 pm
by looks-too-far
The bible was written by imperfect men, inspired by God. Each different writer had his own style and way different way of composition.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 1:29 pm
by jcg
I remember the bible being described as "the word of god" or "the word of the lord". I don't remember the disclaimer "written by imperfect men but inspired by God".

Also, 3 football fields long and had 3 levels... That's still not gonna do it.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 2:02 pm
by looks-too-far
Imperfect men wrote the bible, it was inspired by God. God didn't write the bible with his own hand per se. He inspired the men to write the bible, it is from God. 2 Timothy 3:16, "All scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight." For instance, Moses wrote the first 4 books of the bible.

You don't need a disclaimer, figure it out.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 2:16 pm
by clementine
Yep, the ark is impossible. Yet another addition to my suggestion that it's all a good story and nothing more. Need I say again that it doesn't really differ from Greek mythology as far as its bizarreness.

Re: the passion of the christ

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 2:19 pm
by clementine
Also, aphephelia, of course you believe in God out of fear. At least partially. Isn't that part of the requirement anyway? Fear of God.