Monthly Archives: February 2016

A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 2

28

A COMMON SYMPTOM (10 statements  unbelievers don’t believe about the Bible)

This in respond to a blog that was posted some time ago on a Christian blog forum by a professing Christian that obviously does not really believe in true Christianity.  The blogger made 10 statements that they did not believe about the Bible and what I found is these are not just statements or beliefs from Christians on the theological fence but these are statements that unbelievers would make as well in fact these statements are nothing new.

Because these statements are common in today’s world view I will take each statement as its own otherwise this can become a long drawn out blog so in order to keep your attention we will focus one statement at a time and this is statement 2, you can check out my first blog on these statements at A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 1

I don’t believe the Bible explains the time and manner of earth’s creation and population accurately. The Creation accounts in Genesis are not scientific writings designed to instruct, as much as they are poetry and song meant to inspire. They should not be read as a literal explanation of the fashion or timetable of what Science clearly tells us were the far older and more gradual evolution of life than a literal Biblical translation contends. Genesis 1 and 2 are a who story, not a how story.”:

Understandably one who lacks faith and trust in God will question God’s creation. If we cannot believe the Bible is the real inspired word of God then how can we believe God created all things much less in 6 days.

There is much debate in the creation theater; secular science today has muddied the waters that have divided Christians on how many days to how many billion years old the earth is. One thing is for sure Genesis is not a who story but a real account on God creating the universe, the earth and its inhabitants.  Nehemia 9:6 and Acts 14:15 

There is a debate on how many years the earth is and it falls under good credible conversation. Both Greg Koukle and Ken Ham have a radically different perspective on the earth age yet both will agree Genesis is a story on how and why God created the earth Christians can agree on this.

People that do not believe in the sufficiency of the word of God will of course be incline to believe the account of Genesis is poetry and song and a story of who. The problem with people that do not consider the Bible as the sole word of God is the who is only two people when in fact the who needs to be on more than a man and a woman, there is a creator involved and eventually a redeemer involved.  Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,  who formed you from the womb: “I am the Lord, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself”

The complete understanding of God’s time table is not needed fully. Understand even today when secular science throws out time tables it is not concrete but a theory. Science uses dating that can be fallible; there is not exact perfect way to date God’s creation.

Some Christians use God’s word (Bible) along with archaeology, the flood and other scientific anomalies like volcano and earthquakes to help date while other Christians use stars and light years to help their definition of the date of the earth. Either way does not diminish what God has created and how he created and why he created.

To say the Genesis account of the earth population states that writer of Genesis is not in literal is to have no credibility.  When you make a statement like what is made in first statement “I don’t believe the Bible was dictated by God” then we can fully understand why a person cannot believe in the full account of Genesis 1-2 and how man and woman flourished.

If Genesis and the Bible is not a full account of how and why God made everything do we then fall back on the worlds view of evolution and big bang and if so then how did that start and as a Christian would then one begin to compromise the word of God. To not completely understand how society became many is to deny how God made his creation or a coward of the truth.

It was Martin Luther that said “ But, if you cannot understand how this could have been done in six day then grant the Holy Spirit the honor of being more learned than you are” Simply stated we know what we know because God lets us know.

Advertisements

A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 1

27

A COMMON SYMPTOM ( 10 statements unbelievers don’t believe about the Bible)

The other day a blog popped up  focusing on 10 statements that this Christian (this being the writer of the blog) does not believe about the Bible on one of the Christian Blogger feeds, what sparked my attention was that the blogger known for his liberal stand in Christianity. Further reading one can come to the conclusion that if this person was a Bible believing Christian this blog would be considered heresy.

Why I’m writing this blog is not to tear down this blogger but to show the lack of understanding of Christianity and what it means to follow Jesus and to show these statements are nothing new but a common symptom of  people that truely do not either believe or understand The God of the Bible and and or what it means to be a Christian.

Whether you are a non believer or a believer that is on the theological fence of Christianity I would like to contrast what our blogger here has written and show what Christians know to be true. Feel free to read the article for yourself to decide where you stand on the faith and words of Jesus Christ, God, the Holy Spirit and the faith of Christianity.

Because these statements are common in today’s world view I will take each statement as its own otherwise this can become a long drawn out blog so in order to keep your attention we will focus one statement at a time and this is statement 1

I don’t believe the Bible was dictated by God. The sixty-six books comprising the Bible were composed by flawed, imperfect, emotional, very human beings who never claim to have been fully possessed by God or robbed of their faculties as they wrote. This means that however virtuous or well-meaning or inspired they might have been, they can’t help but have brought some of themselves into the writing.”

This is a common belief by non believers and a belief by what we call “so called Christians”, liberal Christians and Universalist. 2nd Timothy 3:16 squashes this idea “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness”

If a person argues the Bible is not true and that goes for historical and scientific evidence then the argument is over because that kind of logic then must be taken for all books written on history or science, philosophy then become the only thing we can trust. You will find it hard to have a conversation with someone that does not believe the Bible is based on real event no matter how historically accurate it is.

Throwing the historical and scientific evidence aside we as Christians must believe beyond historical and scientific evidence. We must believe the Gospel is the inspired word of God, all 66 books are by God and point to Jesus and that is our faith that justifies us for his Grace.

If the Bible is true then it is all true otherwise it is all a lie. You cannot say “well some of it is true based on the historical documents” but the rest is hocus pocus. If you take that route you then have to define what is real and what is not, all historical and scientific references are real but the rest is well interpretation.

You now are going on a cherry picking search for evidence that only satisfies you and your own morality; the Bible then becomes useless and offers no real good substance for anyone but only what I need for my wants and needs and makes my arguments valid.

If we are going to take the Bible, the scriptures as the sole word of God as it is intended then we must answer this statement based on the sole authority of the scripture and not just ones opinion or good thoughts.

The statement above rejects the Bible as being the sole authority of the scriptures being the word of God and if you take that line of thinking then the rest of the statements that I will go over will easily make sense to anybody because the above statement is saying yes there might be a God but the Bible is not his only word so you cannot trust it alone.

Exodus 31:18 says God not only spoke with Moses but used his finger to write the 10 commandments. Are we to believe Moses just made up the commandments used his own thoughts of what they the 10 Commandment should be, can you see the absurdity to this.

With that logic anyone could rewrite or add to the basics of these commandments. When we stop and say “the Bible is not inspired” or “the Bible is not the word of God” then that person has to ask what is the Bible for? Good thoughts and inspiration?

Christians that believe this sort of theology normally enjoy the words of Jesus and few will attack his word but you cannot then say “the Bible is not the inspired word of God” without making the statement Jesus is not God. When you say or think the Bible is not the sole word of God you then attack the word of God. When you attack God you attack the Holy Spirit and when you attack the Holy Spirit you attack Jesus; if you attack one part of God you attack all three persons of God.

In John 14: 1-14 Jesus is saying if you see him you see the father (God). What was John adding to this verse. Was he repeating what Jesus actually said or was John trying to add or advance  his own wants and needs to this verse so it reads Jesus is God. If we are to believe John added his own thoughts and not the inspired words of the Holy Spirit then we have to question was Jesus God; something non believers want to be questioned.

2nd Peter 1:16 “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty”

For a person to think the Bible is not inspired by God is a person that does not believe in God nor do they believe in Jesus as the Son of God. Peter is saying we the disciples  witnessed everything, if we are to believe Peter is making some of this up or adding his own biases and is not inspired solely by God then 2nd Peter is a fraud, correct?

Romans 1: 1-4  Paul, a servant[a] of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David[b] according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord

Paul declares Jesus to be the messiah, Paul declares Jesus to be God, so if we are to believe this is not inspired but just Paul’s own thoughts and biases then Jesus cannot be God based on any of the New Testament writers.

The New Testament becomes a feel good book based on good philosophy and warm thoughts. Jesus death  was all symbolism and Steven died for nothing.

As we can see Paul validates Peter who validates John who validates Moses.

The statement above allows one to have his or hers own view on God, morality, right and wrong. The Bible is merely a yard stick to measure your own ideas. As long as they don’t hurt anyone we can use any good book that teaches right and wrong. Problem is where did those books get right from wrong and who said those right and wrongs are indeed right and wrong.

The above statement is a world view, not a Biblical or Godly world view. It allows you to turn away from God and view anything as good or bad. The above statement is saying the Bible is not “The Word of God”. This is a concept of a deity based belief that a God created the world in some way now it is up to us to figure it out. We can use Jesus, Buddah, or eastern religion to sort out things out.

WINNERS LOSERS OF IOWA

26

Iowa Caucus done and in the books, big winners big losers this week.

Big winners on the GOP have to be Cruz who won but barely, Trump and Rubio. Both Trump and Rubio were not pummeled but stayed real close and that is a win.

To me this is a real win for Americans in general, both Cruz and Rubio have good plans for America both are pro life and both have good tax plans as well. I view both Cruz and Rubio as pretty good statesmen with Cruz getting the node based on his smaller government ideology over Rubio.

What about Trump well I just don’t have the faith in the Donald like others. A red herring is my first thought, a man who use to support the Clintons, was a self toting liberal from New York just does not have my trust Ross Perot comes to mind. Could Trump have changed and gone middle of the road GOP well of course anything is possible I just don’t trust him at this point he won’t get my primary vote.

Big losers in the GOP Paul, Bush and the rest. I like Paul and hope he can climb back up but I have to admit I’m glad to see Bush fair so poorly. What I would like to see is Paul, Cruz and Rubio fight it out instead of Trump. I know these are political guys in the establishment but these three men have in my opinion the best ideas for America at this point in our time.

Big winner in the DNC are both Clinton and Sanders, Sanders holding on tight and probably will win New Hampshire but after that I think Clinton will blow his doors off.

The losers in the DNC are O’Malley and the American people. Right now the big winner for Sanders is Karl Marx. The fact Americans have split the vote between a lier and a socialist that cannot understand economics is sad very sad indeed. Both Clinton and Sanders want government growth and the only way to do this is for you to give the government your money.

You cannot have free collage, free internet without somebody paying for it. Teacher do not teach for free and AT&T does not give out free data plans. Socially the DNC is morally bankrupt, theft from personal property to pay for free stuff is morally wrong. Killing innocent unborn humans is morally wrong, dismantling the traditional family is morally wrong and those are just the basics.

This is the year people, the year you decide what kind of America do you want, choose wisely because we cannot take back what we choose. In a good world view one should be able to do so but in a real world view it won’t be given back, you are stuck with what you took.