Tag Archives: liberal

CONVERSATIONS 1

img_1293

Had a conversation with a liberal Christian the other day that started out over global warming. Liberals are convinced humans are the cause of ice melting in the Antarctic.
My goal was to make a point with a Biblical statement by asking “I wonder what God has planned for his creation next?”, noting that I do not believe humans can destroy or alter God’s creation without his guidance.
My reply was questioning my liberal opponent that our free will has caused the ice to melt ( bogus I know considering even science has proven that the ice caps in the north are growing not shrinking.)
My reply back was a question “our total free will or our creature free will”.
Creature free will is our instinctive components that we humans have based on our nature that God gave us. It is the will that allows us to not drive 100 mph during 4 O clock traffic in downtown Los Angeles. It is the will that drives parents to teach their kids about sharing and the consequences of being selfish; creature free will is the everyday will we have getting up in the morning and going to work being a good steward or cutting in line at the checkout in the supermarket.
But God will often restrain and direct our total free will. Much of the time
God has to do this, he has to sometimes direct our path to him because our nature will not allow us to do the right thing much less seek God part of the time. Pslam 32:8
My liberal opponent was slightly correct on the nature of our free will to always put us in error although I’m pretty sure he really does not believe this because after all he’s a liberal but if he did believe this I believe he would have been correct because our freedom to be self reliant will always lead us to error because of our nature. Romans 3:10
I know some people hate to hear this but understanding human nature requires us to admit we are fallen people we are in error in the sight of God Jeremiah 17:9. Without a moral standard there is no way of knowing truth and no way of knowing error without a standard of a moral truth.
Truth and morality was not manmade nor did evolved it required a creator, a God that would create a standard for us to know and follow in the natural, some call the nature law St. Paul reiterates this in Romans 2:14-15 it is written on our hearts.
Yes we humans have a will to do error but we also have a will to repent and ask for forgiveness. To say we don’t know good or to think we are nothing but good is to not know truth nor is it to know our nature. When we are right with and in good standing with God we can trust he will guide us and direct or path.  2 Thessalonians 3:3 
Advertisements

COST OF LIVING A STANDARD

38

Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance– Dietrich Bonhoeffer

One book that is really worth reading is Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s the Cost of Discipleship if nothing it will convict you of where your standing with God is.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German Lutheran pastor whose goal was to change Christian theology and make his view the standard. Bonhoeffer was considered by some as a liberal Christian or at least he started out that way.

Hitler and Germany coming into power changed everything for Bonhoeffer, he saw how the church was not united to stop Hitler and the 3rd Reich, his book the Cost of Discipleship gives us a good look into where ones stands and views their ideas of God compared to where God sees your view of following Jesus.

What I really get out of Dietrich Bonhoeffer is the fact he throws this brick at you and myself included that you really are not doing anyone a favor by living a life that is not in step with what God deems to be righteous or the way we follow Jesus.

The idea of unjustly judging a person based on what they do or not do in sin can slow us down Bonhoeffer states it binds us in our own evils or sins so it then justifies others to do the same.

Turning a blind eye to sin and wrong doing  because it is convenient  for our lives is Cheap Grace

Costly Grace is ourselves dropping everything to follow Jesus, it will cost our lives but the price of admission is our everlasting souls with God.

Costly Grace means giving up our wants and desires because our desire is to follow Jesus.

It cost so much because people will look at us in a odd way, as out of touch with today’s reality  as hypocrites, judgy, intolerant and hate filed because societies view of life is nonjudgemental, tolerance, and love that mirrors lust more so than life.

It will cost some more than others, our jobs and what we can do and not do in our little corner of our lives.

Costly Grace means we live by God’s standard not societies standard, we don’t lie because it is God’s standard not to lie. We don’t live our daily life like everyone else because it is not God’s standard to live through the world.

Costly Grace is choosing to obey God and forgetting what everyone else thinks or does because that is God’s standard.

1 Corinthians 11:1

If I don’t exemplify Gods conviction in myself then what good am I and who am I to God

James 4:17 So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

Yes we are flawed, we are complete sinners, we do bad things but we hold to the standard of Jesus because he gave us real grace.

The disobedient cannot believe; only the obedient believe.– Dietrich Bonhoeffer

 

MIXING TWO WORLD VIEWS

The reason why I write this blog is based on that I believe the idea of God creating the universe based in millions and billions of years only compromises with the secular world view and it has implications that are far more reaching than just difference of opinion.

If you have the time here is a nice little debate or conversation between the idea of young earth and old earth via Ken Ham and Hugh Ross. Ken Ham is young earth and backs his theology by scripture while Ross is old earth that is trying to interpret scripture and the Bible with the idea of fitting millions of years into the Biblical historical picture.

Most secularists will say both proponents Ham and Ross are wrong because the universe is billions of years old.

What I find as the problem with the old earth belief is there is not good evidence and you have to add to scripture to make the point while the young earth is better equipped to follow scripture.

Interesting out of a panel of six on this show, five of the guest believed in a young earth and one (Ross) believes in an old earth that included the big bang.

Out of that 5 only three so it was split evenly (with Ross being the 6th), but only three Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and Eric Hovid believed the scripture was more clear on the idea of each day as it was created by God (day being 24 hours) and that this statement of scripture was very important, not only understanding Biblical creation but it aided in the understanding of Biblical knowledge for everyone.

The interpretation of each creation day being one day (24 hour day) is important to teach people based on if we demand that people believe in the parting of the red seas, a virgin woman getting pregnant by the Holy Spirit and a man dying and coming back to life. How then can we tell people that in Genesis God was not talking about 24 hour day but he meant millions of years and that the passages of Genesis aids itself more to how modern science interprets the age of the earth via millions and billions of years.

On one end we demand people believe in supernatural events but in Genesis we compromise and say there is nothing supernatural how God created the universe. That statement maybe a bit over the top due to that Christians believing in a creation of a million years still view it as supernatural but the idea of God creating the world in 6 days has to be agreed as a bit more of a supernatural event than using a naturalistic way to explain creation.

Sean McDowell and John Bloom from Biola University were more on the fence of Biblical interpretation, McDowell even so far as to going there and saying so much as can we really know the true interpretation from Greek, Hebrew to English. I chalk McDowell statement to his youth; this statement is what secularist use to kill the conversation on Christians that don’t know there Biblical history or believe in actual words of our Biblical authors and we cannot accept such a statement.

Bloom and McDowell were willing to question interpretation while Comfort, Ham and Hovid felt that the Bible was God’s breathed word that all can know, people could know then (thousands of years ago) we can know now. 1 Timothy 3:16 Ephesians 4:11-16 and Hebrews 11: 1-40

McDowell and Bloom walk a slippery slope that will have you back peddling trying to explain Biblical truth in a sea of secular lies and it does not have to be that way if we take scripture at its word.

I believe Ross is trading certainty for truth and McDowell and Bloom are entertaining that idea as well Bloom more so than McDowell.

The truth is we can know scripture and what it says, understanding that not everyone will completely get what is being stated in every book or letter but the main theme of the Bible is God and following God. His grace to us and for us and how and why he did what he did for his creation.

You will see at the end of the video Ross offers a truce and I have no doubt Ross was very sincere just as I have no doubt Ross is a Bible believing man of God. The problem I have with Ross’s truce is it is not as the same way we can view the main purpose of truth from such men as George Whitfield and John Wesley.

Whitfield was a strong preacher of election with his main theme on salvation, while Wesley was a strong preacher on the will to know God with the main theme on salvation so we see two men that preached different styles had the same theme and that was salvation. This is what made these men great in the eyes of Biblical history the final authority was God and his salvation for you.

Ross’s truce is genuine but misguided based on the issue we live in different times than Wesley and Whitfield did; the average person had a standard of who was God and the respect of who God was not to mention being a pastor or evangelist during the 1700’s was a very respectable position.

Today’s western world does not respect God as it once did nor has a standard of who God is. Today’s western world does not respect men like Ross or Ham they view them as the enemy. People like Bill Nye who puts out hate messages that parents that teach creation are abusing their children.

We can easily see why main stream media and science who is desperate to be the grand daddy of all authority of life will mock and tear down our children and young people in the public arena.

How can we as Christians tell our children God did all these great supernatural things but that stuff in Genesis may not be literal, can you see why liberal Churches are not teaching that Jesus died or was born of a virgin, compromise to secularism to be relevant in today’s world is the in thing for people and Churches that think this is the only way to get people to God.

The difference between Ross and Ham is that Ham uses the Bible to interpret scripture for both knowing God and understanding God in a Biblical context with the final goal preaching the word of God for the purpose of following Jesus to salvation. Ross uses the Bible to prove science is correct and prove there is a God while returning a standard of the belief in God to science and while this is important without the notion of one following Jesus and putting God first before all things there is no real hope for people to know God.

Final thoughts I know those six men, Ham, Comfort, Hovid, Ross, McDowell and Bloom  are good men of God and I know they want the best for bringing the Gospel to all people but the western world we live in is now requiring we either go with the world or against the world.

Trying to compromise or make a hybrid world view with a mix of some world and some Christianity will not work. It is not Biblical to mix Holiness with evil 1 Corinthians 15:33, like my old youth pastor use to say, two rivers running into each other, one is flowing clear blue water the other is dirty brown water and when the two come together and mix the clear blue water turns to dirty brown. The two cannot mix.

DAILY TWIST 1

Yesterday’s Orlando’s terror attacked as it is being labeled created a world view that might be perplexing if you view things in a leftist way.

We have an attack or should we say a massacre by Islam a much protected religion under liberalism assaulting another well protected and highly prized group of people that practice what Islam considers as a sinful behavior; what are the elite liberals to do.

On one end the Obama administration has overly embraced Islam as peaceful they only site terrorism as its own entity apart of Muslims and core Islam but on the other hand the same administration has flipped over backwards to usher in homosexuality as the norm but they failed to give the memo to Islam do not attack homosexuality.

Do liberals really think a hard core religion like Islam that believes western society is morally reprehensible would embrace homosexuality which has been one of the main causes this administration has invested in.

Liberals have built a cage as you will and put a poisonous spider in the same cage as a group of bees and the spider has just killed 50 of those bees should we expect less.

Two groups who liberals expect everyone to tolerate could not be tolerated the other. Mind you Muslim hate the concept of tolerance to their religion it’s very disrespectful since they view Islam the true religion and Allah the true God and to tolerate send a message that you view them as wrong but you will tolerate the wrongness.

So how are liberals to twist this event well here it is.

FullSizeRender (1)

ACLU the champion of liberalism has blamed Christians for this very shooting.

The idea of having thoughts and prayers for the victims and the families is Islamophobic and because Christians view homosexuality as sinful behavior that is the cause for the massacre.

Okay let’s put this in a Christian world view perspective. Praying for people and their families that have fallen victims of this tragedy does not disrespect Muslims; attention liberals, if you are not aware Muslim pray as well have you ever heard of a prayer rug?

Christians have not labeled homosexuality as sin God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit all have described the behavior as sinful. Islam does not believe in the triune God that such as Christians do so there is no reason why they would take any influence from a Christian perspective.

Christianity does not condone an anti queer climate that includes murdering people based on the sin they wallow in. Christianity requires repentance of sin it does not attack, kill or injure sinners it would be self defeating since we are in sin.

The sinful nature of liberalism has protected a sin that has killed another sin that is highly prized in their world view and now they must pawn it off on something else that liberals hate, either Christians or guns and preferably both.

Finally super intelligent Seth McFarland has figured out a way to fix this problem and that is ban automatic weapons.

FullSizeRender (2)

The problem with this brilliant line of thinking is automatic weapons were already banned from this nightclub and look what happened.

I’m sure McFarland would come back and say ban auto guns then mass shootings can’t happen.

Okay let’s not forget it’s just as easy to set off pipe bombs, explosives, poisoning people, mass killings with automobiles by running down people ect. ect. ect.

The Christian world view doesn’t ban tools but demands the heart and mind follow Jesus.

Biblical principles are of peaceful resolutions to adversities, one does not need to rebuke his neighbor for owning a sword when instead he can show the world that a sword can be used for good not evil.

 

THE MEGAPIXEL GOD

34

I very much enjoy Dietrich Bonhoeffer and this quote is one reason why. It is overwhelming the truth in any society here there or in any century.

A few months ago I was trolled on social media into a conversation with a devout atheist/agnostic I only add the agnostic because he would kind of admit that he didn’t know for sure if there was or not intelligent design but he was bent on doing his best to rebel by denying there was no God.

What sparked the conversation was a FB friend had posted a meme that featured a smashed watch that no longer worked that basically said let us see if is broken watch will evolve itself into a working watch. I added a reply and so did our atheist by saying let’s drop some sand on the floor and see if God will create a human, you know how God took Adam from the earth and breathed life into him.

My first thought was “well God has been there and done that, besides he used a bone from Adam to create the second human Eve so why use dirt again”.

The conversation went on and on but believe it or not I finally got our atheist to civilly admit unless he saw proof there was no way he could believe in a God, at least he was honest I can respect that much.

My next thought was even if you saw God, you would not believe. Jesus said in Luke 16:31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’” Those words still ring true today as God has written on our hearts yet some still rebel and deny. Romans 2:13-15

This takes me to when I was listening to Ravi Zacharias one day and he had made a statement that I believe is very true, Ravi was convinced that Jesus came during the time period he did for good reason.

If God had came in a more modern time where we humans could record Jesus by photograph we would turn that image into an idol, I would add to that if we had visual proof of God most would make that proof into an visual or physical idols and then worship those images instead of worshiping God himself “why” you ask, because that is the way we humans are.

If God came down and visited us nothing new now would happen as it did then when he sent his son Jesus two thousand years ago.

The proof of God would be there as a digital image but still groups would be formed called the atheist magicians and they would try and explain how Jesus fed thousands with a few pita breads and a can of sardines and turned water into White Zinfandel using smoke and mirrors or used the power of suggestion.

Medical experts would try and explain away the physical and mental healing’s and first hand site miracles like the calming of the sea and the mount of transfiguration would be chalked up to cult like followers that would say or do anything to make Jesus or God appear supernatural.

God’s image would be liked and shared otherwise you won’t receive a blessing, pin it on your board and look my image I tweeted is trending well.

People first would give God’s image way freely but eventually the paparazzi would sell behind the scenes images of God doing miracles and the next thing you know we would be worshiping those photos.

You no longer need to have faith that the actual God of the Bible existed just stare at your photo or have a digitally enhanced stone cutter carve out a life size likeness of God.

There would be no mystery in who God was for some because you have his photo on your phone. Just pray to your phone and believe.

New mega churches would pop up everywhere in all denominations with God’s image front in centered, mood lighting, little plastic necklaces to wear and rub in your hands when your not sure or scared.

Why God sent his son Jesus to die and returned to heaven would no longer have meaning because I have his actual photo on my electronic photo frame who needs to study the Bible, Jesus is not in heaven he’s on my tablet my sins are forgiven just looking at my image the resolution is remarkable

My atheist troll would still not believe even if he said he saw some proof because like all people of his mentality there is never enough proof.

On the same notion a new breed of non believers would pop up, oh sure they saw Jesus, they have his image but that is all they want or think they need. No need to follow Jesus I saw God he’s on my computer I’m good to go.

No reason to crack open my Bible and listen for the Holy Spirit to speak to me God is on your front porch or on the fireplace mantel and I say a prayer to that image every night before I go to bed so I now have faith.

Bonhoeffer was absolutely right a God that would let us see and examine every megapixels of his existence without first believing in him and acknowledging his existence would just become an idol.

Some people would eventually throw their image into the trash because its everywhere why hold on to it, some would hoard even more images obsessing over them without truly understanding why he made them and what their existence is for.

Finely others will call him great but deny he was God because look I can see him, a true God that can do all things is beyond any humans approach.

 

OUR PROBLEM

33

The problem is not that we do not have good laws on liberty much less religious laws of liberty. The problem is we don’t enforce laws of liberty in favor of political correctness.

The problem is we allow bad statesmen to create or reinterpret laws to favor political correctness in the name of tolerance and equality all the while not tolerating the original law, the how and why those laws were written.

The problem can be solved by society electing good statesmen that design good laws and appoint good moral and just judges.

The blame lays with us the society that refuses to take a risk in favor of their pocket books or any other material idem that we accumulate.

The blame lies in our insatiable appetite for material things over righteous and just things.

The blame lies on us when the statesmen we elect and who they appoint turn on us so they can keep themselves in power because of their increased appétite for power and material things over righteous and just things.

We are to blame, we picked out the rope, found the tree and had the statesmen put the noose over our necks and they grabbed our material chair out from under us.

Matthew 6:19-21 Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust[e] destroy and where thieves break in and steal, 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

 

KING DAVID AND GOD’S GLORY

32

The newest assault on Christianity from the liberal Christian crowd is labeling Israel’s second king David as a rapist.

Not surprising of this, liberal Christianity has no regard to understanding the Bible just creating doubt for others. The first assault was calling David a homosexual or calling his friendship with King Saul (the first King of Israel’s son) Jonathan a homosexual act because the two were very close friends and now we are told David was a rapist.

We are told to believe that David rapped Bathsheba; it was against her will, this actually very telling of Christians that sell this bill of goods. They assert that the Bible is inaccurate and is withholding information in the name of a male oriented God or writer.

The story of David is long and laced with disobedience but most importantly it is filled with repentance from David to God.

First we need to understand God was very disappointed in Israel for wanting a king other than God himself. If you read 1 Samuel 8:1-18 God gives the people of Israel a king but tells Samuel the people have disobeyed him (God) in doing so. Israel, we can see here is not trusting God, they are fearful that Samuel will die and leave wrong people to judge them and lead them so they demand a Kind. In doing so God teaches them a lesson that they can never get out of because they doubted him with leadership and it cost them their kingdom.

In picking a king for Israel we the reader can see why disobeying and doubting God is so dangerous. We see Israel now has to rely on men to govern them, fallible, lying, sometimes good, and sometimes bad men that will always let down this nation.

First king is appointed by God through Samuel as Saul. Saul is given a commandment by God through Samuel to kill and rid all witches and fortune tellers of Israel. Saul disobeys this command by sparing one fortune teller and using the witch because of his doubt and this cost not only King Saul’s life but his son Jonathan’s life as will.

1 Samuel 16: 11-13 Samuel is told by God that he has rejected the first king of Israel and tells Samuel to go to the house of Jesse and he will anoint anther king, that King was to be David. The key here is God is anointing David as king; David doesn’t fall backwards into the position as Kind but is appointed by God.

Now the rape allegation; liberal Christians are telling us David raped Bathsheba against her will. Because the Bible does not say Bathsheba opposed her contact and adultery with King David they (liberal Christians) insist since David was king and there is no way she could have said no. Understanding David was King, rape could have been the easy thing to do and no one but God would have opposed.

The problem with that form of reasoning David raped Bathsheba is it doesn’t follow the text of the Bible, so one has to conclude based on liberal Christianity reasoning: 1 The Bible was written to hide the rape from the reader so as not to cast ill on David (makes zero sense since David is full of ill and disappointment to us all through his rein). 2 This book is written by a man and men have no clue what rape is and will hide it if it does appear. (This thinking is called heresy because it states the writer of the book is not following God when writing. The book is not inspired by God. Begs to wonder how it got in to the cannon if was not the inspired work of God). Textual reasoning gives us this: David is guilty of power abuse, adultery, murder and overall disobeying God that leads to death of more than one person.

The text of the Bible or the book of Samuel is very telling when somebody is saying “no” or being warned by God. 2nd Samuel 11:11 David is told by Uriah (the man who David covets his wife Bathsheba) that David’s responsibility is with the Ark of the covenant and fighting with his men. This blatant disobedience of David to God based on his lust for Bathsheba, it cost Uriah’s life. We are not told Bathsheba ever opposed David in his lust for her so liberal Christians chalk this up that because David was the King and there is no way she could have said no.

The key text here in 2nd Samuel chapter 11 is because David fell into his lust he fell out of holiness with God. James B Jordan puts it as such “Uriah’s protests serve to highlight David’s sin, his sin of not going out to fight as a king was supposed to do (11:1). If David had been with the Ark in the field, he also would have been under conditions of holiness that would have prevented him from having sex with his wives (Deuteronomy 23:10; Exodus 19:15).

Further we see in 2nd Samuel chapter 13 7-14 we find the rape of David’s daughter Tamar by this son (Tamar’s half bother) Amnon in which Tamar protest. Key here is protest. Bathsheba does not protest yet Tamar does protest, Biblical text does give us lead to know the difference between lust between David and Bathsheba and rape or violation of Tamar by Amnon.

Liberal Christians might now argue that well of course we have protest we are talking incest rape the most vial of rape. This is why understanding the Bible requires us to read and discern Biblical text before leveling accusations and interpreting scripture beyond the Biblical text something progressive Christianity often fails to do.

The start of the David Bathsheba incident caused a calamity for David and his household and those who were close. The key here is that David sinned but he repented from his sin 2nd Samuel 12:13-14 but even with that it cost David and Bathsheba the life of their child. David repents of his sins as we see 2nd Samuel 12:13, Psalm 32, and 51

We also need to look at before we level accusations towards David to know who David was. 1st Samuel 13:14 God tells Samuel to Saul that because he had acted foolishly he will replace him as king with a man after his own heart. Acts 13:22 the inspired word of God reiterates this. Ron Edmondson gives us 10 reasons why David was a man after God’s own heart. David was Humble, reverent, respectful, trusting, loving, devoted, recognition, faithful, and obedient.

It is troubling to see people that call themselves Christians to take such a man like David and try and change our view of him but I assume this is the point of liberal Christianity to take what is of God and change it, redefine it and relabeled it.

What I would say is this, we first might know and understand what the concept here is, what is to be learned from God, and how does this give glory to God something the life of David does give

King David was many things, he did much bad and sin in his own life and for that he suffered and his kingdom suffered with the point being Israel rebuked God for a human king and when one does that they become lost.

With all the sinful deeds David fell into he never stopped loving God, he never stopped trusting and giving God the glory. I believe this is why God used David for his saving grace by using his family line to bring Jesus to us as noted by 2nd Samuel 7 and John 7:42

 

 

RED LETTER HYPOCRISY

30

Reading a post from the Red Letter Christians today and you would assume the name Red Letter would mean Jesus’ words alone, but you would be quite wrong if you did.

The article was on a protester that protested the Trump Chicago rally because in their mind Trump is a racist. Why, because Trump in the past has called people names and wants to build a boarder.

Now mind you I’m not a Trump supporter, I have a different candidate that I am supporting but this is not the point.

Tony Campolo and his Red Letters don’t see the hypocrisy in all this as a matter of fact they publish the hypocrisy.

What is the hypocrisy, it is that one can protest a candidate because they don’t like them. Let’s call him a racist because he shoots his mouth off now and again but nothing about why Biblically one needs to disrupt presidential rally.

Never mind the candidate supports abortion, has no clue of what it means to be a true Christian, has no intentions and will not repent of any violations of God moral code even though he believes to be a Christian and this from a group that insist they follow the words of Jesus.

The second hypocrisy is the protester makes it plain that Trump is the target based on he called people names making him a racist. Let’s forget that two candidates Bernie Sanders and Hilary Clinton have promised abortion on demand be the main stay law of the land if elected. There will be no protection for the unborn with a democratic candidate with both candidates in clear violation of the 6th and 8th commandments but I guess red letters don’t agree those are worth protesting.

Amazing how progressive Christians won’t see truth because it clouds their agenda. True sin in the mind of a liberal Christian is negative emotions; it is symbolism over substance something well defined in the Red Letter Christian.

 

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.

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.