PDA

View Full Version : Forgetting God


Jack777
January 24th 2005, 06:11 PM
There is a new day coming I am told. Interesting. The Creator and Genesis 1:1 is of utmost importance. What is the result of discounting God? The Theory of Evolution hand in hand with the times influenced thought in the 19th and 20th centuries. Making a case for TE is something that involves discounting the witness of the Bible.

The question of the Creator and His preeminence is not a slight one in determining views on cosmogony. Darwin at one point in his life thought that God breathed life into the first living organism and to a certain extent held a creationist point of view. Things are not quite that simple in view of the history of the theory of evolution. Determinism, materialism, rationalism, naturalism, pantheism, nihilism, existentialism, and romanticism all contributed to the worldview in the years following the publication in 1859 of the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection of the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life by Charles Darwin. The American Transcendental movement of the early 1800’s preceded Darwin with able defenders such as Ralph Waldo Emerson. Charles Finney records the level of spiritual deadness that he encountered in this era. Thomas Paine pushed for a complete break with Christianity before the transcendentalists came about. The hoped for utopias in early American history largely failed to produce meaningful results as precursors to socialism. Marx hoped to correct the deficiencies of the early social experiments that failed in the early part of the century with his theory that excluded God and abhorred Christianity. He and Darwin seemed a good match by some, including Engles. The liberalism of the 19th century taught that there is no Revelation of God to us and pretty much discarded the Bible as the Word of God. The intellectual foment of the times touched literature, economics, politics, religion, art, philosophy, and much more. Pseudo-Christianity popped up in the 19th century with doctrines that can only be described as that of anti-Christ within cults that became religions called “Christian.” Spiritism, spiritualism, theosophy, and esoteric knowledge became common in churches and some clergy practiced things forbidden in the Bible.



The breadth and scope of all these ideas vying for preeminence had results. The crushing social problems produced a Social Gospel, Progressives, and others trying to cope with a rapidly changing country and also encouraged a new look at how we view others in relation to Scripture. Science changed everything. Progress in the sciences and technology changed everything on a steady basis. The Chicago World’s Fair in 1893 put on display the wonders from the world. Ancient pictures, artifacts, ancient literature, new technology, new discoveries, new inventions, and contributions from all over the world of varying kinds were transported to Chicago, Illinois along with representatives from different cultures. People thought that all the problems of the world would soon be solved and the 20th century would be an enlightened age free of war, poverty, crime, and violence. Religious hopefuls predicted that people would have things together and hand over the earth to Jesus as perfected by man’ efforts. Only 12 years after the Chicago World’s Fair, a German postal worker developed a theory that changed things in a big way for science. There is not one field of endeavor that was not effected by the increase in knowledge.





The historic ascent of humanity, taken as a whole, may be summarized as a succession of victories of consciousness over blind forces- in nature, in society, in man himself.



Leon Trotsky



The History of the Russian Revolution





How did things turn out in the 20th century for us after all? In some measure it turned out well for many of us. The average human life span in 1910 was 47 years and about 75 by the end of the century. This might be an endorsement for evolution was it due to Darwin’s theory. The advances in medicine, sanitation, technology, and science are responsible, not genes. Some people applied evolution to science, to religion, to politics, and to social progress. Man is getting better and better due to our ability to make the environment work for us was the idea. However, there were a few disturbing realities. In order for people to get better and better, those who opted for Marxism and socialism decided to get rid of people who are of Faith. Under the loosely allied ideas that found kinship with Marx and the belief that materialism and secularism held the answer a lot was done. Intrinsically tied in with political and economic theory was the theory of evolution and the idea of the survival of the fittest, or the idea religion is the opiate of the people.



“I have given orders to my Death Units to exterminate without mercy or pity, men, women, and children belonging to the Polish speaking race. It is only in this manner we can acquire the vital territory which we need. After all, who remembers the extermination of the Armenians?"



Adolf Hitler, August 22, 1939



52 million people were exterminated or starved to death to adjust life under the Soviet system. About 49 million lost their lives in China to rid society of the past, especially religion. Muslims slaughtered about 50 million to rid Armenia and Anatolia of Eastern Orthodox Christianity from about 1894 until the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1922. They actually timed the slaughter to be synchronized so there would be little hope of escape. Hitler quipped that no one remembered Armenia, so he did not need to sweat his plans that included ridding the world of Jews and Christians. Stalin said that Hitler was a Sunday School teacher compared to him. Hitler only killed a paltry 12 million in mass executions and death camps. Pol Pot killed 7 million people to adjust Cambodia to communist ideals. Over 2 million people died in Vietnam after the United States pulled out in defeat. 2.5 million were killed in the Sudan to rid the country of blacks, animists and Christians. Rwandans killed defenseless Christians by hacking them to death until 800,000 were slaughtered. About 5 million were killed in the Congo to rid the country of Christians. Idi Amin presided over the slaughter of 800,000 people in Uganda. When the British government handed over Uganda it was the Pearl of Africa and soon became a hell-hole. Sadaam Hussein killed about a million people in his efforts to maintain control of Iraq.



Of course people died of other things in the 20th century. 18 million people died of influenza worldwide in the early part of the century. WWI claimed 10 million battle deaths of soldiers. There were approximately 60 million casualties in WWII with 45 million losing their lives. The Soviet Union incurred 30 million casualties alone. During the siege of Leningrad from 1941 to 1944 over one million people starved to death. Leather wallets were boiled to make soup for instance.



The most dangerous untruths are truths slightly distorted.



G. C. Lichtenberg



Aphorisms



Genocide, disease, war, and death stalked the planet under the banner of the doctrines of men. Solzhenitsyn told the graduation class at Harvard in 1978 that people asked why things were happening to them as they were in the early days of the October Revolution and after. The old people said it was because they had forgotten God. Solzhenitsyn had been a celebrated author and a prize exile from behind the Iron Curtain. His open warnings against forgetting God and our pursuit of things while ignoring God earned him isolation because we did not want to hear about it. His admitting to being a Christian made him unpopular with the lights of the country. The secular gospel in the United States had become one that did and still does believe that religion is responsible for all of the world’s ills. How blind and stupid. The figures I quoted are approximate and vary from source to source but pretty accurate. When people warn against religion in this country, what they say in code is that Christians and Jews are responsible for the world’s ills. Those figures I quoted are those of non-Christians slaughtering people to rid the world of religion—Christian and Jewish mainly. Secular humanism, socialism, communism, and atheism cry and whine about how unfair it is that we exist. It is terrible if someone says Jesus in public or if a preacher says a sin is a sin based on the Bible. Straining at gnats, the world swallowed a camel.



“I was taught that the human brain was the crowning glory of evolution so far, but I think it’s a very poor scheme for survival.”



Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.



Developing my theme, I predict someone is wondering, “what does this have to do with cosmogony?” Everything really. Making science a god, secularism a god, or man as gods comes about once the theologians opt for someone or something besides the God of the Bible as God. Liberalism of the 19th century precluded miracles and Scripture as being inspired and revealed. Heterodoxy is long since past for some mainline denominations, as they are apostate. They are not sure God is God as He says He is in the Bible and they are sure that the Bible is not the Word of God. Some do not believe Jesus existed. I worked with a lady that went to the flagship church for the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. She informed me that the Bible is just another dusty old book and not especially different from other dusty old books. She said it with some pride as she was going to the church that is in the know. I was stunned. Since then, the seminary has decided to reverse course and not so many people think God is a big joke in Baptist churches now. A Baptist church I attended with some new believers went with another Baptist group so they could be more inclusive. In other words, they think it is fine to bless same sex marriage. My Sunday School teacher taught that people evolved a conception of God over time and suggested worshipping other gods was okay. After all, it is all made up according to the theologians. I had an Episcopal priest inform me not to be childish and believe the Bible is God’s Word. Messianic missionaries I knew in Houston told me some churches would let them give a talk only if they did not talk about Jesus. Over the years I have met many who think it is ridiculous to think that God created the universe and people. At best, much neo-orthodoxy states the myths of the Bible tell truth through stories that themselves are not to be believed.



It is unfair to blame any of this solely on one person, one idea, one paradigm, one theory, or one practice of any sort. People cooperate and people capitulate, and people want their ears tickled. Circumstances find us unprepared for the onslaught of maniacal people who hate us. If we do not seek God we can be conned by charlatans posing as preachers looking to take our money from us to put in their pockets. People do not always stay up with reading the Bible and are not ready to give a reason for our Faith. It seems majorly important to defend a neat new idea that is cutting edge and curry favor with the world in that way. It is of utmost importance to seek the Kingdom of God and His Righteousness. Jesus thought it so important that he instructed us to do that first. He dismissed worries about material things as being first, though important. He said that the Father, our Creator knows our needs. The passages in the Bible that point out how important God is to us are all throughout. It is no wonder the Higher Critics had to discredit the Bible. The very first sentence in the Bible states that God created the heaven and the earth. The theme of creation is all through the Bible and included in Revelation. The panorama of history is portrayed in Revelation from Creation to the End. Creation is so important that Jesus is known as the Beginning, the Alpha, and the First. The Bible say that He planned the Aions and He designed the universe from its beginning until its end before it was created. Dismissing Creation because it is sort of important is exactly the wrong thing to do when considering how evolution relates to God. Forgetting God brought the bloodiest century in the history of the world into being. How many total deaths can be attributed to that one fact, the rejection of God as Creator and Jesus as Lord and Savior is hard to assess exactly. The numbers are around 160 million. That does not include the numbers that died in WWI and WWI from battle deaths. Guess what though? The Bible plainly says that because mankind has this habit of rejecting His Word, things will get worse at some point and it is in part up to us as to when I think. 3 billion people will lose their lives in a short period of time because of specific reasons. They are simple things to avoid really and we can do it if we will. It starts with His people humbling ourselves before Him, praying, seeking His face, having a change of mind and forsaking our evil ways.



Oh, why will judgment come to the planet?



Isaiah 24:5



And the earth is infected by the inhabitants thereof:



because



they have transgressed the laws,



they have changed the ordinance,



they have broken the everlasting covenant.





That is it. That is all folks. That is what we are doing. We pollute as much as we can. We defile the earth physically and morally—all of us, not just one country. People want to endorse and bless same sex marriages. People kill their own kids. Homosexuals are priests, preachers, and bishops. Suicide bombers are a daily thing. Hamas has a covenant that states specifically their reason for being is to kill every last Christian and Jew as well as Americans. Eugenics is making a comeback. Looks like we are revving it up for another bloody century. People want to do a lot of things against God and are doing them.



I know everyone noticed immediately the version of the Bible I quoted from, but to make sure I supply references, here it is anyway.



Douay Old Testament first published by the English College at Douay, A.D. 1609

rogero
January 24th 2005, 06:24 PM
Oh Brother! Another attempt to embarass yourself further?

Here's the upshot -- after wading through your voluminous scree -- there are many Christians who accept the witness of God in nature that the Creator uses evolution as a process of Creation and who find that that there is no problem with a reasoned exegesis of Scripture.

Every reader of this thread should bear in mind the putative philosophical conclusions one may attain from evolutionary theory and the scientific conclusions. Jack doesn't seem to understand the difference, and that is a God-awful shame to a reasoning Christian.

Check out the other threads Jack has started, and you will readily see the redundancy.

Jack -- instead of starting repetitive tiresome threads on your philosophical views of (biological) evolution, why don't you explain what your old Earth creationist view entails? In particular, what is your view of the history of the billion+ year old biosphere? Complete extinctions and fiat recreations? Well, what is it?

R

Jack777
January 24th 2005, 06:35 PM
rogero, thanks for telling everyone how to think. I imagine they can draw their own conclusions. I know you do not understand and it is okay, it really is. If you think every human being on earth only thinks of DNA replication of info when they hear the word evolution, you are wrong. Do you think all of this is in a vacuum, especially when some decide to incorporate the religion of evolution into Christianity????

rogero
January 24th 2005, 07:03 PM
rogero, thanks for telling everyone how to think. I imagine they can draw their own conclusions. I know you do not understand and it is okay, it really is. If you think every human being on earth only thinks of DNA replication of info when they hear the word evolution, you are wrong. Do you think all of this is in a vacuum, especially when some decide to incorporate the religion of evolution into Christianity???? I'm not telling anyone how to think. You, on the other hand, do tell people how to think. Your conflation of science and philosophy is well-noted.

The fact that you use the phrase "religion of evolution" shows just how much of a brain-addled individual you are. You continue to be an abject embarassment.

Now, why you don't you start a substantive post, with information we don't already know -- like what is your view of the history of the biosphere? All readers of your threads realize that you accept an old Earth and Cosmos -- at least 1-1.5 Ga, and that the life has existed for at least a billion years. Given that, what is your explanation of the state of the biosphere over that time? Total extinctions followed by fiat re-creations? Inquiring minds want to know!

To reiterate -- your conflation of the putative philosophical evils from the scientific theory of biological evolution are irrelevant, misleading, and completely ignorant. You remind me of an old duffer at a church picnic who buttonholes an unfortunate victim and regales him with boring repetitive scree about conspiracy theories of black helicopters, the Bildebergers, and the Tri-Lateral Commission, etc.

R

AllDay
January 24th 2005, 07:05 PM
rogero, thanks for telling everyone how to think. I imagine they can draw their own conclusions. I know you do not understand and it is okay, it really is. If you think every human being on earth only thinks of DNA replication of info when they hear the word evolution, you are wrong. Do you think all of this is in a vacuum, especially when some decide to incorporate the religion of evolution into Christianity????
A few suggestions ...

[1] shorten up these OP's.

[2] Limit the redundancy.

[3] Get right to the point.

[4] Support #3.

I have spent considerable time readining long, redundant, drawn-out, going-no-where threads, hoping to learn something ... but ultimately wasting time I can never have back. Not that I am the ultimate in importance ... but it seems like there are too many threads essentially having the exact same circular argument.

George Murphy
January 24th 2005, 09:24 PM
A few suggestions ...

[1] shorten up these OP's.

[2] Limit the redundancy.

[3] Get right to the point.

[4] Support #3.

I have spent considerable time readining long, redundant, drawn-out, going-no-where threads, hoping to learn something ... but ultimately wasting time I can never have back. Not that I am the ultimate in importance ... but it seems like there are too many threads essentially having the exact same circular argument.Good suggestions but if Jack followed them he would be limited to saying "Evolution is bad."

One of the baneful effects of the web is that it enables ignorant people to pull large swatches of text from various sites and plug them into their rants to give the appearance of knowledge.

Shalom,
George

grmorton
January 24th 2005, 11:11 PM
Good suggestions but if Jack followed them he would be limited to saying "Evolution is bad."

One of the baneful effects of the web is that it enables ignorant people to pull large swatches of text from various sites and plug them into their rants to give the appearance of knowledge.

Shalom,
George

Yeah, ignorance can multiply on the web. This is the guy who believed

1. a 1.5 billion year age for the earth
2. that we are descended from trilobites
3. that there is a worldwide unconformity at the Miss-Penn boundary
4. That people were martyred for believing in creation
5. that angels can evolve (hint to Jack, they don't marry and they live in the spiritual world.)

But he is the epitomy of the well educated YEC, abounding in misinformation. Notice also that none of the YECs around here tell him to shape up. I guess they implicitly accept his nonsense.

Jack777
January 25th 2005, 11:36 AM
Thanks for the feedback.


I notice some are claiming I am ignorant.

Pray tell, what of?

learning
January 25th 2005, 12:20 PM
I haven't followed Jack777's stuff much here, but Glenn, I think you are wrong about one thing, though I'm not sure whether this matters, but then again, I think it does. I am guessing from the little I've read that Jack777 is NOT a YEC, but an OEC, which is quite different. So, I think he is arguing against evolution, but not the age of the earth.

Good point though about angels, if they don't marry, they can't procreate and therefore evolve. Simple as that!

Jack777
January 25th 2005, 02:28 PM
Good call learning.

grmorton,

The angels do not marry in heaven, it is true, Jesus says so. The pseudoepigraphic, Book of Noah, quoted by Jude says they did leave their first estate and that they did mate with women and got in big trouble for it. Women on the earth. This leaving of the first estate, mating with women is noted in Genesis 6 as well. Ovid talks this as does Hesiod. There is quite a lot of information about it. But thanks for trying to be helpful. You did not understand stratigraphy, sedimentology, biology, or geology well enough to deal with my questions and turned it around to hide that fact and make it look like I was in the wrong. Correcting me is fine, but it seems you are not really doing that but just trying to make me look stupid. That is fine, but you might know what you are talking about first. Read books, they are good.

grmorton
January 25th 2005, 10:47 PM
Thanks for the feedback.


I notice some are claiming I am ignorant.

Pray tell, what of?

Looks to me that it is a growing list.

grmorton
January 25th 2005, 10:49 PM
I haven't followed Jack777's stuff much here, but Glenn, I think you are wrong about one thing, though I'm not sure whether this matters, but then again, I think it does. I am guessing from the little I've read that Jack777 is NOT a YEC, but an OEC, which is quite different. So, I think he is arguing against evolution, but not the age of the earth.

Good point though about angels, if they don't marry, they can't procreate and therefore evolve. Simple as that!


I am not sure where you got that I was saying he was a YEC from my post. He did say the earth was 1.5 billion years old when he got on the list and then claimed that he had a geological education. Those two items are incompatible.

grmorton
January 25th 2005, 10:55 PM
Good call learning.

grmorton,

The angels do not marry in heaven, it is true, Jesus says so. The pseudoepigraphic, Book of Noah, quoted by Jude says they did leave their first estate and that they did mate with women and got in big trouble for it. Women on the earth. This leaving of the first estate, mating with women is noted in Genesis 6 as well. Ovid talks this as does Hesiod. There is quite a lot of information about it. But thanks for trying to be helpful. You did not understand stratigraphy, sedimentology, biology, or geology well enough to deal with my questions and turned it around to hide that fact and make it look like I was in the wrong. Correcting me is fine, but it seems you are not really doing that but just trying to make me look stupid. That is fine, but you might know what you are talking about first. Read books, they are good.


THis from the guy who thought the earth was 1.5 billion years old and didn't know that there are regions where the Miss-Penn boundary is conformable around the world and thought ancient martyrs were done in for belief in creationism. Tsk tsk.

And no, I am not trying to make you look stupid. You are doing a fine enough job without me. :lmbo:

Any of you yecs want to defend the idea that evolutionists should try to explain angel evolution, so recently promulgated by this guy? Come on, He is one of yours, he is on your side. Doesn't he make you proud?

rogero
January 25th 2005, 11:26 PM
Good call learning.

grmorton,

The angels do not marry in heaven, it is true, Jesus says so. The pseudoepigraphic, Book of Noah, quoted by Jude says they did leave their first estate and that they did mate with women and got in big trouble for it. Women on the earth. This leaving of the first estate, mating with women is noted in Genesis 6 as well. Ovid talks this as does Hesiod. There is quite a lot of information about it. But thanks for trying to be helpful. You did not understand stratigraphy, sedimentology, biology, or geology well enough to deal with my questions and turned it around to hide that fact and make it look like I was in the wrong. Correcting me is fine, but it seems you are not really doing that but just trying to make me look stupid. That is fine, but you might know what you are talking about first. Read books, they are good.
Jack, here's a "scientific" angelological question for ya: How many angels can stand on the head of a pin? Give me the answer for the two separate cases of 1) Cherubim and 2) Seraphim. A standard sewing pin will do for the substrate. Oh, and no archangels please -- they will positively skew the calculation.

Jack777
January 26th 2005, 12:41 PM
Funny stuff....


One of the reasons the early Ekklesia was raided with the doctrines of men that pulled them away from the Faith was angelology being appropriated to the point it opposed the witness of Scripture. All of this stuff is inconsequential to you rogero because you do not see the Bible as important as God says it is.

Mr. Ad Hominem and his buddy Mr. Ad Hominem, they are twins you know, like Darryl and Darryl.

rogero
January 26th 2005, 01:29 PM
Funny stuff....


Yes, it is funny, yet not as funny as your "Do Angels Evolve" thread.



One of the reasons the early Ekklesia was raided with the doctrines of men that pulled them away from the Faith was angelology being appropriated to the point it opposed the witness of Scripture. All of this stuff is inconsequential to you rogero because you do not see the Bible as important as God says it is.

Mr. Ad Hominem and his buddy Mr. Ad Hominem, they are twins you know, like Darryl and Darryl.
You know, Jack, all I do is point out the obvious risibility and/or redundancy of your arguments. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly implied that those who don't share your hyperfundamentalist of Scripture are rejecting it or seeing it in a lesser way than you do, as your bolded quote shows. IMHO, that is far more nasty and unChristlike.

Why don't you answer the science questions I've posed to you regarding your views on the history of biosphere on a billion year old Earth?

R

Jack777
January 26th 2005, 01:36 PM
Just an observation of reality there rogero.

Okay, if what I said is wrong, then, answer me this.

Did God create Adam as He says He did, or did He not?

rogero
January 26th 2005, 04:52 PM
Just an observation of reality there rogero.

Okay, if what I said is wrong, then, answer me this.

Did God create Adam as He says He did, or did He not?
How do you think God said He created Adam (man)?

God says He made Adam from the earth (adamah). The Bible doesn't say exactly how He did it, does it? Do you think the Bible tells you exactly how He did it?

If, as theistic evolutions believe (on the basis of empirical evidence of common descent with modfication -- which includes paleontological, genetic, and comparative anatomical evidence) God used natural processes to form H. sapiens. Exactly how, in your mind, does this contradict the Scriptural account of God creating Adam from adamah? It appears you are conflating "Who" and "How" again.

Is it possible that your interpretation of Scripture could be wrong?

R