Evidence for God from Science

For the most part my experience on this board has been highly enlightening and educational. But there are some who I believe are willing to reject parts of the Word in light of personal view points.

I have had it posited to me that your salvation doesn't matter and or is not based on certain parts of the Truth as long as we believe that Christ is Lord and that the Father sent Him to die for us on the Cross.

I believe as Christ said that a house divided will fall and that being said I would like to put forth my view of Gods Word and why I believe the way I do and hope to have a good discussion on the matter and see where my view is right or wrong. You know see what happens when the smoke clears.

Here goes.

What is the Word of God? Jesus Christ am I right? If Jesus Christ is the Word of God and the Bible is that Word how can we say that we only need to believe part of what Jesus says and not the whole of it?

equivocate

Main Entry:

Pronunciation:
\i-ˈkwi-və-ˌkāt\
Function:
intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
equiv·o·cat·ed; equiv·o·cat·ing
Date:
1590

1 : to use equivocal language especially with intent to deceive
2 : to avoid committing oneself in what one says

Now, #1 here is what I see going on a LOT.

Would I be wrong to say that if you deny some of the Word you deny it all?

There are varying degrees to what we call lies (witchcraft) white lies for example. Is a white lie of greater or lesser offense to the Lord?

1Jn 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

What is the twisting of and or blatant manipulation of the Word but a lie? Where does the Bible say ALL who make and loveth a lie go?


Where I'm obviously going with this is, is it ok to betray Gods trust in one area of the Bible save for His Grace on the cross?

Are we not breaking the first Great Commandment from Christ when He said: Love God with ALL your heart ALL of your mind and All of your soul? By disbelieving the portions of or speculating that a plain reading of the Bible 'can' 'could' mean something other than what is plainly read?


I'll stop here for now, I need sleep. But please help me come to grips with this. I'd like to here responses from both sides of the fence and where possible use Scripture to back up what you believe an why you believe it.

God Bless.

IRQ Conflict wrote:For the most part my experience on this board has been highly enlightening and educational. But there are some who I believe are willing to reject parts of the Word in light of personal view points.

I have had it posited to me that your salvation doesn't matter and or is not based on certain parts of the Truth as long as we believe that Christ is Lord and that the Father sent Him to die for us on the Cross.

I believe as Christ said that a house divided will fall and that being said I would like to put forth my view of Gods Word and why I believe the way I do and hope to have a good discussion on the matter and see where my view is right or wrong. You know see what happens when the smoke clears.

Here goes.

What is the Word of God? Jesus Christ am I right? If Jesus Christ is the Word of God and the Bible is that Word how can we say that we only need to believe part of what Jesus says and not the whole of it?

equivocate

Main Entry:

Pronunciation:
\i-ˈkwi-və-ˌkāt\
Function:
intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
equiv·o·cat·ed; equiv·o·cat·ing
Date:
1590

1 : to use equivocal language especially with intent to deceive
2 : to avoid committing oneself in what one says

Now, #1 here is what I see going on a LOT.

Would I be wrong to say that if you deny some of the Word you deny it all?

There are varying degrees to what we call lies (witchcraft) white lies for example. Is a white lie of greater or lesser offense to the Lord?

1Jn 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

What is the twisting of and or blatant manipulation of the Word but a lie? Where does the Bible say ALL who make and loveth a lie go?


Where I'm obviously going with this is, is it ok to betray Gods trust in one area of the Bible save for His Grace on the cross?

Are we not breaking the first Great Commandment from Christ when He said: Love God with ALL your heart ALL of your mind and All of your soul? By disbelieving the portions of or speculating that a plain reading of the Bible 'can' 'could' mean something other than what is plainly read?


I'll stop here for now, I need sleep. But please help me come to grips with this. I'd like to here responses from both sides of the fence and where possible use Scripture to back up what you believe an why you believe it.

God Bless.

Please define what plain reading of the Bible means and how you come to the conclusion that what you're reading is first, well, plain, and second why someone else must come to the same exact conclusion.

byblos wrote:Please define what plain reading of the Bible means and how you come to the conclusion that what you're reading is first, well, plain,

Um, ok I guess I'll have to slow this down for some. I'll give you a simple example.

In the mother goose children's book the nursery rhyme Jack and Jill for example we read:

Jack and Jill went up the hill,
To fetch a pail of water;
Jack fell down, and broke his crown,
And Jill came tumbling after

Now, a plain reading of this rhyme simply (Capt'n Obvious) states that a couple of people went up the hill to get some water and the male person falls and breaks his crown. Now it's not specific on the details as to why his female companion followed suit. I will just be concentrating on the fact that the individual "Jack" fell and broke his crown.

Now here we have a little thing called "experience" (Dr.Evil) that tells us when we fall we can be injured or break something many experiences as a child will attest to this fact. So we can safely deduce that within the context and plain reading of this text Jack went horizontal in rapid fashion due to some mishap.

And in doing so broke his "crown". That is hit his head.

However, there is also a type of crown known to young ones reserved for royalty such as a king or queen or prince, princess. But because there is no mention of any type of royalty in the context of the rhyme.
Now, a non plain reading can/could infer various other outcomes and ideas based on the fact that the various words outside of the context of the rhyme can/could mean something else entirely.


Main Entry:
3plain
Function:
adjective
Date:
14th century

1archaic : even, level2: lacking ornament : undecorated3: free of extraneous matter : pure4: free of impediments to view : unobstructed5 a (1): evident to the mind or senses : obvious <it's perfectly plain that they will resist> (2): clear <let me make my meaning plain> b: marked by outspoken candor : free from duplicity or subtlety : blunt <plain talk>6 a: belonging to the masses : common b: lacking special distinction or affectation : ordinary7: characterized by simplicity : not complicated<plain home-cooked meals>



Main Entry:
reading
Function:
noun
Date:
before 12th century

1: the act of reading2 a: material read or for reading b: extent of material read3 a: a particular version b: data indicated by an instrument4 a: a particular interpretation of something (as a law) b: a particular performance of something (as a musical work)5: an indication of a certain state of affairs <a study to get some reading of shoppers' preferences>


I could go on with this exercise but I fear if you haven't understood what a "Plain Reading" is by now you never will.

byblos wrote:and second why someone else must come to the same exact conclusion.

IRQ Conflict wrote:I believe as Christ said that a house divided will fall and that being said I would like to put forth my view of Gods Word and why I believe the way I do and hope to have a good discussion on the matter and see where my view is right or wrong. You know see what happens when the smoke clears.

Lord, grant me patience, but make it quick.

I wonder if I shouldn't have posted this in the philosophical forum?

IRQ Conflict wrote:

byblos wrote:Please define what plain reading of the Bible means and how you come to the conclusion that what you're reading is first, well, plain,

Um, ok I guess I'll have to slow this down for some. I'll give you a simple example.

In the mother goose children's book the nursery rhyme Jack and Jill for example we read:

Jack and Jill went up the hill,
To fetch a pail of water;
Jack fell down, and broke his crown,
And Jill came tumbling after

Now, a plain reading of this rhyme simply (Capt'n Obvious) states that a couple of people went up the hill to get some water and the male person falls and breaks his crown. Now it's not specific on the details as to why his female companion followed suit. I will just be concentrating on the fact that the individual "Jack" fell and broke his crown.

Now here we have a little thing called "experience" (Dr.Evil) that tells us when we fall we can be injured or break something many experiences as a child will attest to this fact. So we can safely deduce that within the context and plain reading of this text Jack went horizontal in rapid fashion due to some mishap.

And in doing so broke his "crown". That is hit his head.

However, there is also a type of crown known to young ones reserved for royalty such as a king or queen or prince, princess. But because there is no mention of any type of royalty in the context of the rhyme.
Now, a non plain reading can/could infer various other outcomes and ideas based on the fact that the various words outside of the context of the rhyme can/could mean something else entirely.


Main Entry:
3plain
Function:
adjective
Date:
14th century

1archaic : even, level2: lacking ornament : undecorated3: free of extraneous matter : pure4: free of impediments to view : unobstructed5 a (1): evident to the mind or senses : obvious <it's perfectly plain that they will resist> (2): clear <let me make my meaning plain> b: marked by outspoken candor : free from duplicity or subtlety : blunt <plain talk>6 a: belonging to the masses : common b: lacking special distinction or affectation : ordinary7: characterized by simplicity : not complicated<plain home-cooked meals>



Main Entry:
reading
Function:
noun
Date:
before 12th century

1: the act of reading2 a: material read or for reading b: extent of material read3 a: a particular version b: data indicated by an instrument4 a: a particular interpretation of something (as a law) b: a particular performance of something (as a musical work)5: an indication of a certain state of affairs <a study to get some reading of shoppers' preferences>


I could go on with this exercise but I fear if you haven't understood what a "Plain Reading" is by now you never will.

byblos wrote:and second why someone else must come to the same exact conclusion.

IRQ Conflict wrote:I believe as Christ said that a house divided will fall and that being said I would like to put forth my view of Gods Word and why I believe the way I do and hope to have a good discussion on the matter and see where my view is right or wrong. You know see what happens when the smoke clears.

Lord, grant me patience, but make it quick.

I wonder if I shouldn't have posted this in the philosophical forum?

Personally I could really do without your sarcasm but if it makes you feel any better or gives you any sense of superiority (falsely or otherwise) then please, by all means, knock yourself out. I just have one question for you, just from the part of the nursery rhyme you quoted above, could you please highlight for me the part in which you plainly read that Jill was female?

good one Byblos. and no I am NOT taking sides here.

I quite frankly believe I accept a plain reading of the Bible.

Obviously your post is in related to creation since I can't think of anything else you have in mind. I quite frankly feel YECs try to impose their interpretations as "God's Word", which I really do feel distorts Scripture, but I have enough grace to allow other Christians to be mistaken regarding creation and believe their errors. I was brought up Christian, and since before I even knew the sciences or that there was a controversy regarding the interpretation of the Genesis creation, I understood a plain reading of the days in Genesis to be "God days". Since it was about God, my understanding which was without any bias truly seemed like the most plain reading to me perhaps since the days were from God's "timeless" perspective and not mans. That was until I listened to my Dad's Ken Ham tapes declaring that if you do not believe the days in Genesis are 24 hours then you have no faith. Well, I was not fussed, so I then just assumed Ken was more familiar as a pastor with Scripture than I, so accepted what he said despite strongly disagreeing that my faith was lacking. And then I came across this website, and saw for the very first time that a controversy existed, and my first understanding, while perhaps infantish, was in fact supported in Scripture as exposed by other sincere Christians.

Furthermore, let's be clear, the words of the Bible is not the same as Christ. Christ is the Word, because He is the Truth. The Bible can be considered the Word of God as it is inspired by God. This is two completely different understandings of "the Word" which ought not be equivocated unless you can produce good reasons to accept such the two understandings as equal?

IRQ conflict wrote: Um, ok I guess I'll have to slow this down for some. I'll give you a simple example.

You may have to slow it down ever more for me because although I think i understand your main point, you post itself can be taken in many ways.

IRQ Conflict wrote: I have had it posited to me that your salvation doesn't matter and or is not based on certain parts of the Truth as long as we believe that Christ is Lord and that the Father sent Him to die for us on the Cross.

I believe as Christ said that a house divided will fall and that being said I would like to put forth my view of Gods Word and why I believe the way I do and hope to have a good discussion on the matter and see where my view is right or wrong. You know see what happens when the smoke clears.

I would have to agree with the others that I am not sure where you are going with this.

Are we talking about salvation or our growth (sanctification) as a Christian?

Salvation(justification):
Jude 3 says we should contend for the common salvation.
I interpret this to mean that that may be disagreements on the meaning of certain verses on how they relate to predestination or YEC & OEC, spiritual gifts, etc.... But the thing we should agree on is that we are saved by grace through faith. If we start adding any other parts as requirements for salvation then we are adding works to our attempt to be saved.


Sanctification:
Where as there are some controversial scriptures that do not speak directly about salvation, I do believe that a correct interpretation of at least some of these verses is essential for our spiritual growth.

Conclusion
We are saved(justified) by grace through faith. (faith being taking the word of god over you own and acting upon it. - possibly romans 10:13)

We are continually being saved(sanctified) by grace through faith. (faith being taking the word of god over you own and acting upon it.)


I also believe that that grace is incremental. And what I mean by this is that until you obey what you already know to be true, God will not reveal to you in the scriptures further instructions. It may be that we might read the same scripture for many years and never get what it means, and then one day you read it and it becomes perfectly clear or maybe you see a whole new deeper meaning.

John 1:16
And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. (incremental grace?)

The story of the 10 lepers that were healed by Jesus is a good example of how Christians treat there salvation. Only one of the ten came back and thanked Jesus for his healing. Christians that are grateful for their salvation say thank you. The way they say thank you is that they ask God "what do I do now." THEY SEEK FURTHER INSTRUCTION. The ones that seek further instruction will grow in faith, others wont.

But back to the topic of interpretation of scripture:
As I said, while correct interpretation of these verses that do not have to do with justification are not essential for salvation, I do believe that at least some of them are benificial for spiritual growth(sanctification). And it MAY the reason some of us have an incorrect understanding, is that we are not obeying what has already been revealed to us in scritpture. (BTW I do include myself in that group, because I know I do not always do what I know to be true.(traffic drives me crazy sometimes, but I am getting better) And there are some (make that MANY) verses I just have not figured out the full meaning, but I do not worry too much about them because I do not believe they are verses about salvation and God will reveal their meaning to me when I am ready)

In Christ,
Jeff

IRQ Conflict wrote:For the most part my experience on this board has been highly enlightening and educational. But there are some who I believe are willing to reject parts of the Word in light of personal view points.

I have had it posited to me that your salvation doesn't matter and or is not based on certain parts of the Truth as long as we believe that Christ is Lord and that the Father sent Him to die for us on the Cross.

I believe as Christ said that a house divided will fall and that being said I would like to put forth my view of Gods Word and why I believe the way I do and hope to have a good discussion on the matter and see where my view is right or wrong. You know see what happens when the smoke clears.

Here goes.

What is the Word of God? Jesus Christ am I right? If Jesus Christ is the Word of God and the Bible is that Word how can we say that we only need to believe part of what Jesus says and not the whole of it?

equivocate

Main Entry:

Pronunciation:
\i-ˈkwi-və-ˌkāt\
Function:
intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
equiv·o·cat·ed; equiv·o·cat·ing
Date:
1590

1 : to use equivocal language especially with intent to deceive
2 : to avoid committing oneself in what one says

Now, #1 here is what I see going on a LOT.

Would I be wrong to say that if you deny some of the Word you deny it all?

There are varying degrees to what we call lies (witchcraft) white lies for example. Is a white lie of greater or lesser offense to the Lord?

1Jn 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

What is the twisting of and or blatant manipulation of the Word but a lie? Where does the Bible say ALL who make and loveth a lie go?


Where I'm obviously going with this is, is it ok to betray Gods trust in one area of the Bible save for His Grace on the cross?

Are we not breaking the first Great Commandment from Christ when He said: Love God with ALL your heart ALL of your mind and All of your soul? By disbelieving the portions of or speculating that a plain reading of the Bible 'can' 'could' mean something other than what is plainly read?


I'll stop here for now, I need sleep. But please help me come to grips with this. I'd like to here responses from both sides of the fence and where possible use Scripture to back up what you believe an why you believe it.

God Bless.

Revelation 22:19
19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.


This should be remembered also, even though it is written at the end of Revelations I feel it applies to the entire Bible

Bow that being said, White lies in order to not hurt feelings may be done on a case by case basis.

Example: My wife and I were watching Bones on television the other night. My wife is Korean and I have a inclination to be more attracted to Asians than to others. I am 1/2 German and 1/2 Hillbilly by the way.

On this Show is a lady who is 1/2 Chinese and 1/2 Irish, who plays the artist to recreated the face of the skulls.

My wife said she was unattractive, me knowing my wife and not wanting an incident, readily agreed with her. This was a white lie, will I be judged for it? I would rather be judged for this than a (humanely perceived) worse lie.

I agree with you by still do not follow it word for word, but I am getting better slowly. I used to be Wiccan, so converting to Christianity is a huge step, in the correct direction.

I don't have the time to respond right now. But would like to take the opportunity to thank those that actually took my post seriously.

JCSx2 I will address this as I believe that your honorable intentions of trying to protect your wifes feelings were, well, honorable. And I believe that as you grow and learn to trust God wholly and completely that you'll find those lies won't be as critical to your interactions as you once imagined.

That being said The Bible clearly states that those who make and practice lying will go to hell. No Ifs ands or buts about it.

There is no context in it that I'm aware of to get around that. God isn't as concerned about hurting our sensitivities where eternity is concerned.

Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Rev 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

IRQ Conflict wrote:I don't have the time to respond right now. But would like to take the opportunity to thank those that actually took my post seriously.

JCSx2 I will address this as I believe that your honorable intentions of trying to protect your wifes feelings were, well, honorable. And I believe that as you grow and learn to trust God wholly and completely that you'll find those lies won't be as critical to your interactions as you once imagined.

That being said The Bible clearly states that those who make and practice lying will go to hell. No Ifs ands or buts about it.

There is no context in it that I'm aware of to get around that. God isn't as concerned about hurting our sensitivities where eternity is concerned.

Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Rev 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

I have to recant agreeing with you

What about

John 5:24
24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

2 Cornth 5:17
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

Mark 16:16
16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

John 3:5
5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

John 3:36
36 He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”


Also,

If what you are saying trumps the way to everlasting life than that would mean NO ONE will ever get in to Heaven.

We are all damned to being destroyed. So that means the Bible is a big april fools joke.

No I cannot believe that, sure God dose not like Lies, but I also think that it will not be our undoing without hope.

I do not know you but I can make a safe assumption that you have done one of these

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (most likely the lying part)

Why do we have a New Life through Jesus Christ?

What you posted give us NO hope for everlasting life. We are human, we will Lie we will not live up to righteous expectation.

We are a hopeless bunch of creatures that will die an eternal death if we go with what you are pointing out. I cannot agree with that at all that would make Christianity a worthless hopeless religion.

What would be the meaning of Christianity with out New Life through Jesus Christ?

I believe what you are pointing out should be taken as Good advice as what NOT to do, or try you very best not to do. I do not think it will curse us to hell without any hope at all.

Peace

jim


EDIT:
After re reading you response, I think you are just playing the Devils advocate and not actually believing we are forever damned.

Byblos wrote:Personally I could really do without your sarcasm

In this case Byblos, I sincerely wish I didn't feel it was necessary, but I digress...

could you please highlight for me the part in which you plainly read that Jill was female?

IRQ Conflict wrote:I will just be concentrating on the fact that the individual "Jack" fell and broke his crown

The fact that I wrote that Jacks companion was female was from the 1916 pictorial that I remember from when I was a child that renders Jill as a female coupled with the fact that the name Jill is associated with the female gender of that era leads me to a PLAIN conclusion of FACT. Regardless of context.

Please do me a favor for the sake of this thread and read what I say before posting silliness. Unless your here just to stir the pot.

Perhaps the point Byblos was making was that you used OTHER information besides the actual text (the plain reading of the text) to ultimately decide the meaning of the word Jill.

Without the actual author writing that Jill is a girl, you resort to information ABOUT the poem, information abou the culture and the names of the cultures. THe PLAINEST reading of the text is that there were two people, one named JAck and one named Jill, we don't know their genders from the text itself.


Of course, Byblos, please elaborate on your point.

JCSx2 wrote:I have to recant agreeing with you

Thats why I created this post. Some honest discourse.

We have to establish what it means to believe in Christ. It isn't just saying I believe, it's doing I believe. which of course part of the don't lie thingy.

Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

What is the will of the Father? It is impossible to please God with out faith, and faith without works is dead. To believe in Christ means you better be doing what He commands us to do.

Mat 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
Mat 24:45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
Mat 24:46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.

I believe what you are pointing out should be taken as Good advice as what NOT to do, or try you very best not to do. I do not think it will curse us to hell without any hope at all.

This is correct. The idea is not to practice sin. Not that we can't make mistakes.

zoegirl wrote:Perhaps the point Byblos was making was that you used OTHER information besides the actual text (the plain reading of the text) to ultimately decide the meaning of the word Jill.

I know what Byblos was trying to do. Thanks.