Evidence for God from Science

Jac3510 makes the same claim, yet I'm the only one pegged as the "promoter of murder."

Jac3510 wrote:I'm with BW on this, zoe. I think that since God stands back and lets people kill each other--since He is "PC" and allows us choice on the matter--it clearly follows that the gov't should have no say in such matters either. Thus, we should legalize ALL forms of death, ya know, just to be fair. We wouldn't want to be partial to one form of death and not another. In fact, now that I think about it, all law should be removed. We should have the right to rape, murder, steal, and whatever else we want to do, because God doesn't stop us. Just let the natural consequences of sin have its way. Hey, in fact, since God GAVE us choice and encourages us to use it, we should GIVE people the ability to do these things. And, remember, it must be ALL things, because we can't go and ban SOME things that are dangerous. Nope. It has to be all or none.

Therefore, BW, you have convinced me. I am now in favor of government funded murder, raper, torture, theft, etc.

I guess you feel the same as "I" do...

Jac3510 wrote:No, apparently, a majority vote does

Hey...you're understanding Democracy! Good for you.

Jac3510 wrote:Sure, so let's apply that logic to everything. Since rape will happen and does happen regardless of it being illegal, we should try and find the "best" possible way to do this while AT LEAST keeping the rapist safe.

This "logic" from a person promoting that we keep 9 of God's 10 Commandments...interesting. Split tongues.

I thought we could stay on the abortion matter, but you keep wanting to include EVERYTHING when clearly rape is not the topic or issue to make legal or not since it's already illegal.

• No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father. ~ John 10:18

Of course...He allowed it, but someone(s) put Him on the cross. Someone flogged Him, someone "crowned" Him, someone nailed Him to the cross...someone split His side.

I never said God murdered...I said God allowed a murder that was a sacrifice between God and Jesus and humanity, but looked like a murder to everyone at the moment or in the least, an unjust capital punishment for no wrong doing. Not even the disciples understood what was going on.
.
.

My agreement with your position was obviously sarcastic. You would agree to promote murder and rape if the people voted for it. You would support it with your tax dollars. And yet, you want me to believe that you keep the 10 commandments?

Ok, Bav. My "split-tongue" says we aren't under the 10. We are under the ONE. You say you are under the 10 and yet justify your support for murder, which is in clear violation of the 10.

You can have the last word, on this thread and every other. I don't care anymore. You've shown your utter disregard for human life, and at this point, it is impossible for me to continue to try to hold a rational conversation any more. Millions of human beings are dead because people like you won't stand up to protect them.

As it hardly does these boards any good for us to continue these discussions, I am through. I have become far to indignant and far to disgusted to be able to make any more positive contributions. Right or wrong, I'll admit my anger here. I don't apologize for my feelings on the matter, but I will apologize for my actions. If I've expressed myself too honestly, too openly, for the board environment, I apologize to the community and especially to the moderators.

Bav, I wish you all the best. We have nothing left to discuss.

Jac3510 wrote:My agreement with your position was obviously sarcastic. You would agree to promote murder and rape if the people voted for it. You would support it with your tax dollars. And yet, you want me to believe that you keep the 10 commandments?

So now you're the only one able to make sarcastic remarks. Interesting how you're not able to catch on my "sarcasm" in some areas when it's convenient for your argument.

I don't want you to believe I keep the 10. See how you misinterpret my words? Amazing that you can be so learned on the rest of the Bible yet not see that I don't claim I keep the 10, I claim the 10 are relevant. God has only written with His finger(s) on three occasions. Once we assume He was writing the sins of some accusers (John 8:3-11) Another time it was the fingers of a human hand (Daniel 5:5) which wrote the words Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin which were a prophecy. And then there are those words inscribed into stone by the finger of God. (Exodus 24:12, Exodus 31:18, Deut. 9:9,10). It is you that disregards God's own words. It was Christ that summed up the Law in one...LOVE...yet you want to take away from the equation that which is inconvenient for your Christianity. You'll gladly uphold and "keep" 9, but that one smack in the middle, the one Christ Himself defended on the proper keeping of the Sabbath many times, who rested in death from sunset Friday to the early hours of Sunday and so even in death RESTED from His work on earth...YOU throw aside and say it is useless. Split tongue is correct as you say below.

Jac3510 wrote:Ok, Bav. My "split-tongue" says we aren't under the 10. We are under the ONE. You say you are under the 10 and yet justify your support for murder, which is in clear violation of the 10.

And again you don't see that I don't support murder...in fact if you've ever paid attention on this forum you'd know that I DON'T VOTE. I have an opinion, that (aside from leaning towards pro-choice) if society as a secular unit (U.S.) decides that abortion should be legal, I have no HUGE issue with it because I would rather there be a safer, regulated method for it since it is a "medical" procedure. It makes no difference what so ever if I'm a huge pro-life activist if society on the whole is pro-choice. We're told to live in this world, but not be of it. So regardless of my OPINION, I don't support EITHER side with a vote because I don't see a vote being worthy of my time. My work and "vote" is with my own children to lead them down the correct path that avoids abortion all together. THAT's my duty.

Jac3510 wrote:You can have the last word, on this thread and every other. I don't care anymore. You've shown your utter disregard for human life, and at this point, it is impossible for me to continue to try to hold a rational conversation any more. Millions of human beings are dead because people like you won't stand up to protect them.

I won't stand up either way. It's a vote for murder either way you look at it. It will either be by legal means or by illegal means...and I'm only talking about abortion here. So don't try and insert rape or whatever else your mind decides is the same thing.

Jac3510 wrote:As it hardly does these boards any good for us to continue these discussions, I am through. I have become far to indignant and far to disgusted to be able to make any more positive contributions. Right or wrong, I'll admit my anger here. I don't apologize for my feelings on the matter, but I will apologize for my actions. If I've expressed myself too honestly, too openly, for the board environment, I apologize to the community and especially to the moderators.

Wow...and I thought I was seen as the "hot-head" here. Maybe abortion is too hot of a topic for you to handle? I've attempted to be civil in this discussion and put forth my opinion on the matter. I can't see why you must get upset. If you're doing what you feel is everything necessary to stop this "crime of hate", then what does it matter if someone else has a different opinion...especially someone like me that wouldn't vote on the matter either way. I wouldn't vote for PL or against it. So in essence other than my opinion, I'm not against your cause.

Jac3510 wrote:Bav, I wish you all the best. We have nothing left to discuss.

Thanks. I wish you the best also...but I disagree, we still have those pesky 10 items God wrote with His own finger.
.
.

BavarianWheels wrote: Thanks. I wish you the best also...but I disagree, we still have those pesky 10 items God wrote with His own finger.
.
.

Just for curiosity,

BavarianWheels at some point in the discussion you brought the fact that Sabbatenians still had, for the moment, the liberty to observe the Sabbath on saturdays. Does this means that you believe one day that this observation of the Sabbath on saturdays will be impossible or considered as blasphemy or so on?

Secondly, you guys talked a lot about the 10 commandments. I guess it has been discussed very often in many topics but I bring my question anyway : BW you said They have been written by God own finger. Great. But then as I recall the 10 commandments have been modified regarding to the denomination they belong. For example the Roman Catholic Church retrieved the second commandment and in a way splitted the tenth in 2 to keep the number adequate.

So, in your opinion (anyone) or from your denomination, what are the ten commandments as a list?

Thanks.

Victor

Zebulon wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote: Thanks. I wish you the best also...but I disagree, we still have those pesky 10 items God wrote with His own finger.

Just for curiosity,

BavarianWheels at some point in the discussion you brought the fact that Sabbatenians still had, for the moment, the liberty to observe the Sabbath on saturdays. Does this means that you believe one day that this observation of the Sabbath on saturdays will be impossible or considered as blasphemy or so on?

Yes. Blue Laws. At some points in history they have been instituted at the government level (seems mostly local) and have restricted the activities on Sunday with respect to the Christian Sabbath. While many have been done away with, many still remain today. There has also been a push for a Family Day. Some of these proponents have made Monday their day, others have made it Sunday as well. Why is it we "Christians" see the need for a day set aside for "family" but cannot see THE day God set aside for Him which would include family? It seems to me (and other Christians) that these small laws are just precursors to the inevitable route these will take. I believe that it will be just as Christ said, "If they persecuted me, they will persecute you on account of me." (John 15 & 16) In essence, it is believed that history repeats itself and so a day will come when my religious freedom, to worship on God's holy day (Isaiah 58:13,14) will be challenged. To some a small degree it has already come. Because I believe the Sabbath remains as God's Law and part of what all claiming Christians should hold valuable, I am branded a legalist.

Zebulon wrote:Secondly, you guys talked a lot about the 10 commandments. I guess it has been discussed very often in many topics but I bring my question anyway : BW you said They have been written by God own finger. Great. But then as I recall the 10 commandments have been modified regarding to the denomination they belong. For example the Roman Catholic Church retrieved the second commandment and in a way splitted the tenth in 2 to keep the number adequate.

So, in your opinion (anyone) or from your denomination, what are the ten commandments as a list?

Simply look up any RC commentary on the Commandments and you'll see clearly that they have no problem claiming the changes of the law. (Daniel 7:23-25) There's also a series that was put out by the RC Church in the late 1800's.

Here's a link to that: Rome's Challenge - one of many.

Ask any Protestant what the list of the 10 Commandments are...I don't think any Protestants have issue with the list...the only issue is the relevance of the ONE.
.
.

BavarianWheels wrote: Yes. Blue Laws. At some points in history they have been instituted at the government level (seems mostly local) and have restricted the activities on Sunday with respect to the Christian Sabbath. While many have been done away with, many still remain today. There has also been a push for a Family Day. Some of these proponents have made Monday their day, others have made it Sunday as well. Why is it we "Christians" see the need for a day set aside for "family" but cannot see THE day God set aside for Him which would include family? It seems to me (and other Christians) that these small laws are just precursors to the inevitable route these will take. I believe that it will be just as Christ said, "If they persecuted me, they will persecute you on account of me." (John 15 & 16) In essence, it is believed that history repeats itself and so a day will come when my religious freedom, to worship on God's holy day (Isaiah 58:13,14) will be challenged. To some a small degree it has already come. Because I believe the Sabbath remains as God's Law and part of what all claiming Christians should hold valuable, I am branded a legalist.

Ok thanks for your time to answer my question. Your response is as I had figure it would be. Concerning the Blue Laws, some Christian (I believe you as well) are convinced that this law will occur on a planetary scale. My eyes and ears are wide open.

BavarianWheels wrote: Ask any Protestant what the list of the 10 Commandments are...I don't think any Protestants have issue with the list...the only issue is the relevance of the ONE

Ya right! But unfortunately BavarianWheels I don't know any Protestant living in my area and I am not the type to say Hey dude Protestant, what about the 10 commandments?
But in some way my question was not clear anough I guess... I was referring to the 2nd commandment or part of it... while depending on the denomination it is not written or eaven explaned the same way. Thus

Prohibits the worshiping of God by images, or by confusion of any creature with God, or any other way not appointed in his Word. (According to the traditional presbyterian and reformed view, this commandment also prohibits any man-made inventions to worship, which formed a basis for their criticsm of Roman Catholic liturgies.)

.(from Wikipedia) ...and regarding the Roman Catholic Church, they are using idolised images and forms all over the place. While other denominations, in our modern world, as well are using thoughts images the same way.

Thanks.

Relax, Christ is our Sabbath, our eternal rest. The sabbath day for the theocracy of Israel was for a lesson, a type to teach of the coming Sabbath or permanent rest in Christ. In Christ you may shave any time.

Alex G wrote:Relax, Christ is our Sabbath, our eternal rest. The sabbath day for the theocracy of Israel was for a lesson, a type to teach of the coming Sabbath or permanent rest in Christ. In Christ you may shave any time.

The problem is that the commandment itself gives the What, When, Who, and Why...and interestingly it gives no hint that it is a shadow or that it is temporary or that it's exclusive to any certain group of humans since God created Humanity itself. Please explain this oversight by the Almighty.
.
.

Zebulon wrote: ...and regarding the Roman Catholic Church, they are using idolised images and forms all over the place. While other denominations, in our modern world, as well are using thoughts images the same way.

Now that's a lousy thing to say considering I just came from church on Good Friday after we paraded around carrying a makeshift coffen with a crucifix on it followed by a picture of Mary. I tell ya it was very clear what (or who) we were worshiping.

BavarianWheels wrote:

Alex G wrote:Relax, Christ is our Sabbath, our eternal rest. The sabbath day for the theocracy of Israel was for a lesson, a type to teach of the coming Sabbath or permanent rest in Christ. In Christ you may shave any time.

The problem is that the commandment itself gives the What, When, Who, and Why...and interestingly it gives no hint that it is a shadow or that it is temporary or that it's exclusive to any certain group of humans since God created Humanity itself. Please explain this oversight by the Almighty.
.
.

Or an "undersight" by you? No one portion of Scripture includes ALL OTHERS simultaneously. This is why we study the whole counsel of God, all of Scripture. And when our Lord came he began to reveal the purpose of the law, he fulfilled it and became its satisfaction on our behalf.

Your claim that it is not given to one group, however is a rather miscue here. The context of Leviticus and those ritual observances are specifically for the nation of Israel during the Theocracy of Israel.

That is the exact reason we study the whole counsel of God and do not use the erroneous proof text method of theological development. We learn God's Word in its entirety and discover, for example, that the law, particularly the ritual law and those laws governing Sabbath practices were fulfilled in Christ and he has now become our Sabbath.

Colossians 2:16-17 "Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a SABBATH DAY-THINGS WHICH ARE A MERE SHADOW OF WHAT IS TO COME; but the substance belongs to Christ."

Colossians 2:16-17 "Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a SABBATH DAY-THINGS WHICH ARE A MERE SHADOW OF WHAT IS TO COME; but the substance belongs to Christ."

This verse says let no one judge you in regard to these things. So, if you judge someone for keeping the Sabbath are you judging in regard to a Sabbath day? I think in this thread you have seen two opposite views of the spectrum. Any Christian should know that Christ fulfilled the law. the law is not sin, and the Law doesn't magically dissapear. But its condemnation is cancelled. When I read the context of Col 2, I don't come away with the opinion of some here.

The context of Leviticus and those ritual observances are specifically for the nation of Israel during the Theocracy of Israel.

You have my total agreement here. However the 10 commands are not in Leviticus. The 4th command is quite simple. The levitcal requirements regarding the Sabbath are more involved. Not to mention the ones imposed upon Israel by the oral traditions of the Pharisees.

The whole counsel is the right advice.

Alex G wrote:Colossians 2:16-17 "Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a SABBATH DAY-THINGS WHICH ARE A MERE SHADOW OF WHAT IS TO COME; but the substance belongs to Christ."

Another interesting point that further substanciates mine is that you (generic "you" because many people throw this text out as "proof") conveniently use this verse to do away with the Sabbath of the 10...but conveniently continue to eat and drink of which the 10 makes no mention of. Also notice it is a sabbath and not The Sabbath which is spoken of here. So what is the writer speaking of here. Clearly it is the festival sabbaths and not THE Sabbath of which God "mistakenly" wrote on stone initially, then clarified that the Sabbath was made for man...and so not "Jewish".

Alex G wrote:Or an "undersight" by you? No one portion of Scripture includes ALL OTHERS simultaneously. This is why we study the whole counsel of God, all of Scripture. And when our Lord came he began to reveal the purpose of the law, he fulfilled it and became its satisfaction on our behalf.

He did reveal the purpose time and time again as the NT writers tell us. The law does nothing FOR sinners except point at sin. Of course He fulfilled it. It's His law. When someone fulfills the classes required to be a Dentist...does that make clear the way for everyone from that point on to not have to take Anatomy? No. Likewise, Christ fulfilled the law, yet the law still remains as a beacon unto sin just as Anatomy remains for others to learn from. If in fact the law points at sin, what then does that say about doing the opposite ANY of them in part or in whole willfully? It means you're sinning willfully and knowingly against God's will. It is not our law keeping that saves us, it is Christ's keeping which is perfect that by grace through faith we are counted as DEAD to the law but alive in the Spirit which loves and upholds the law. Read what Paul says when he asks about nullifying the law...

Alex G wrote:Your claim that it is not given to one group, however is a rather miscue here. The context of Leviticus and those ritual observances are specifically for the nation of Israel during the Theocracy of Israel.

Are you claiming you're not under a Theocracy? Do you call yourself a Christian? Who is your king then?

Alex G wrote:That is the exact reason we study the whole counsel of God and do not use the erroneous proof text method of theological development. We learn God's Word in its entirety and discover, for example, that the law, particularly the ritual law and those laws governing Sabbath practices were fulfilled in Christ and he has now become our Sabbath.

True again, Christ fulfilled the law, yet no where does He mention belief/faith in Him is a replacement to the Sabbath. While it is true we can rest in His promise, we are still sinners and cannot (or should not) willfully sin against Him. Christ had many opportunities to clearly state the old law (the 10) is done away with, but you know as well as I that instead He reaffirmed the law and infact clarified that it was not just the act of murder, but hate in the heart that murdered. It was not the act of adultery, but the mere thought which was sin. Similarly, Christ continually clarified what the Sabbath was about since He kept "breaking" it ACCORDING TO THE PHARISEES/SADDUCEES manner of keeping it. Christ said, "Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

Hebrews is quite clear that the law spoken of by Paul is the law of gifts and sacrifices (Hebrews 8:4) and that the shadow of things is the sanctuary itself (Hebrews 8:5) of which is a copy of what is in heaven. Further it also is clear on what the problem was with the first covenant...it's not the covenant, but the sin of humanity (Hebrews 8:8). God says that He took them by the hand, but because they did not remain faithful to His covenant, He turned from them. (Hebrews 8:9). God says he will put His law on the minds and hearts of His people.

Next God calls the old covenant "new" (Jer. 31:31, Hebrews 8:8, 8:13) Why does call it new and the NIV put "new" in quotes? Then in Hebrews 9:1, we're told "the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary." You might say, AH-HA!...there it is...regulations for worship. However the 10 does not have any regulation(s) for a sanctuary so it is clear this law is the code and not God's Law of the 10. Further in Hebrews 9:4 we are told what is put INSIDE the ark of the covenant, the jar of manna (which fell daily, twice as much on Friday and none fell on the Sabbath), Aaron's staff, and the stone tablets of the covenant (the 10). Deuteronomy tells us where these laws and regulations were put and kept. The book is placed beside (outside) the ark. (Deut. 31:26) This book of the law contains sickness and disaster (Deut. 28:61) it contains curses (Deut. 29:21) it contains commands and decrees (Deut. 30:10) it contains plans on how to build the sanctuary (Joshua 8:31) it contains laws and decrees from Joshua (Joshua 24:26) it contains the how and why to put to death (2 Kings 14:6) it took about 6 hours to read the Book of the Law (Neh.8:1-3, 9:3) And then guess what? Paul mentions the Book of the Law...and it's curses...and states that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law of which it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." (Galations 3:10:14)

So then the question begs...where, in the 10 Commandments does it read about being cursed if on a tree? Where does it tell "us" how to build a sanctuary or list curses and sickness or disaster. Where is Joshua's decrees etched in the stone God wrote on with His own finger? Where does the 10 mention how and why to put to death?

Nowhere.

So then in doing as you, Alex G, promote in doing:

Alex G wrote:That is the exact reason we study the whole counsel of God and do not use the erroneous proof text method of theological development. We learn God's Word in its entirety and discover, for example..

What is the correct conclusion on exactly what was nailed to the cross? Which are those commands that Christ mentioned, "If you love me keep my commands."??

I think I've done exactly what you said SHOULD be done in study.
.
.

Byblos wrote:Now that's a lousy thing to say considering I just came from church on Good Friday after we paraded around carrying a makeshift coffen with a crucifix on it followed by a picture of Mary. I tell ya it was very clear what (or who) we were worshiping.

I have no problem on how you worship or what you accept as a way of praying or worshiping. I just brought an opinion. No offending. Some people are being crucified each year on Good Friday, and I have witnessed it again on TV yesterday. I am not juging them, it is their things. So was I not juging any Catholic or denomination way of whorshipping.

Thanks for your quote.

Victor

...and just to mention about the topic shaving, sabbath and such, I shave most of the time, it is my wife thing.

Here, I'll give you all some food for thought:

Are you a 50 — 50 Christian?

Or a 100 percent all the way Christian?

A 50 — 50 Christian is someone who thinks they are saved by grace (50 percent) and need to add another 50 percent of works to maintain salvation by various means.

A 100 percent all the way Christian is one who realizes one is saved by God sovereign grace alone and cannot add anything to it. Love for God develops over time, that is, if they live long enough. Point is a 100 all the way Christian never relies on anything but God's grace to lead them home.

So is are you a 50 percent grace and 50 percent additions Christian?

Or are you a 100 percent Grace Christian?

Abraham was declared righteous by God through the agency of faith. This was before the law. So do we have faith in God's grace by which we stand or do we need to add to it? What manner of Christian are we?
-
-
-

I'm a 100% grace/ Eph. 2:10 kind of guy.

Works don't produce faith. Faith produces works. You know, vine and branch stuff.

If you love me you will keep (result/produce/flow) my commandments.