Religious

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You think the world is going to do itself in with nukes (which it won't, by the way) ...

Boxcar

Would not that fit right in with the Book of Revelation? Is not the Battle of Armageddon supposed to take place at Megiddo in Northern Israel? Does not Israel have nuclear weapons? Is not Iran developing nuclear weapons? Does not Iran hate Israel's guts? If these two go to war with each other is there not a danger that it could escalate into a world wide conflict?

I'm just handicapping the arms race!

[hcap]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/2...o-hell-anyway/

Creationist Ken Ham calls to end space program because aliens are going to hell anyway

Creationist Ken Ham has said that the U.S. space program is a waste of money because any alien life that scientists found would be damned to hell.

“I’m shocked at the countless hundreds of millions of dollars that have been spent over the years in the desperate and fruitless search for extraterrestrial life,” Ham wrote in a Sunday column on his Answers in Genesis website.

Ham argued that “secularists are desperate to find life in outer space” as a part of their “rebellion against God in a desperate attempt to supposedly prove evolution.”

“Life did not evolve but was specially created by God, as Genesis clearly teaches. Christians certainly shouldn’t expect alien life to be cropping up across the universe,” he continued. “Now the Bible doesn’t say whether there is or is not animal or plant life in outer space. I certainly suspect not.”

But regardless of whether there was life in outer space, Ham asserted that it could not be truly “intelligent.”

“You see, the Bible makes it clear that Adam’s sin affected the whole universe. This means that any aliens would also be affected by Adam’s sin, but because they are not Adam’s descendants, they can’t have salvation,” he explained. “Jesus did not become the ‘GodKlingon’ or the ‘GodMartian’! Only descendants of Adam can be saved. God’s Son remains the ‘Godman’ as our Savior.”

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Part of the Easy Believism crowd, are you? Read LK 14:25-35.

Also, no one can even confess Christ (and really mean in their heart) apart from the Holy Spirit. The standard is not high, but impossible one for those in the flesh to attain.

Boxcar

I've read it, there is a cost to be a disciple, as there is cost involved in beginning and finishing any venture. So you have given away all your possessions? Luke 14:33 And you hate your parents, your immediate family, and your own life? Luke 14:26.

Your theology seems to be the easy way. God selected you in eternity past (whatever that is) and saved you without the need of being a disciple. According to you, God did everything at no cost to you regarding discipleship.

Tell us what do you think carrying your cross means? Luke 14:27 As one of the elect what cross do you carry?

I am interested in how one of the elect should calculate the cost of following Jesus?

One thing I know it is not giving away all your material possessions. According to Calvinism, one of the signs you are part of the elect is to be prosperous, through your work ethic.

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Mark's gospel gives the most abbreviated post-resurrection information. The most sparse in details.

The three women left Jerusalem well before daybreak. They arrived at the empty tomb right at daybreak. The tip of the sun was probably just breaking over the horizon. As you probably know the earliest MSS. don't have vv. 9-19, so we'll just stop the chapter at v.8.

Mark 16:8
8 And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.
NASB

Since it was now full fledged sunrise by the time they left and the trip from the tomb to Jerusalem was probably about 2 hours long. By this time, people were waking up and traveling the roads. So what the text is saying is that as they traveled the road -- as they were heading back -- they didn't stop to broadcast the great news to anyone along the road. Also, they weren't going back to Jerusalem. They were going to report their finding to the apostles in Galilee, which would have been an even longer trip.

Matthew 28, providing more details, tells us that they encountered Jesus on the way. And Jesus told them the same thing the lead angel at the tomb did: Go and report this to my disciples who are staying in Galilee.

Luke 24 tells us that the women did indeed tell the disciples in Galilee what they saw at the empty tomb. And of course, the disciples probably ridiculed the women because Luke tells us that the disciples thought their story was "nonsense" and that "they would not believe them".

So, all the difficulties with these accounts are due to you reading your presuppositions into Mark's account. Mark doesn't say that the women didn't tell the disciples as they were commanded to do -- twice, I might add. The account makes a generalized statement that the women told no one. And they didn't on their trip back Galilee. Period.

Again, people rose early back in those days to go about their chores. Mark, in all probability, is telling us is that the women didn't stop to tell anyone anything who they seen or met on their trip to Galilee. And for all we know, they could have bumped into people they knew. But if so, they said nothing. This bit of information, by the way, was to tell readers that Jesus only wanted to let his disciples know about his resurrection. Mark is assuring his readers that no outsiders knew about Christ's resurrection. All post-resurrection accounts throughout the NT are consistent on this point: Christ revealed himself only to his people.

Even the context of the very passage bears this out. It's easy to see that Mark was saying that the women fleeing the tomb -- because they were in a HURRY -- said nothing to anyone. People in a rush are not likely to stop to tell anyone very much, are they? These gals were on a mission to get back to the disciples ASAP to share their news! And what stupendous news it was! The best news in human history!

What you say may or may not be correct. But my point of bringing up"contradictions in the Bible" is that if the Bible is the "word" of God, why does every simpleton who reads the Bible need someone to come up with "excuses" or "explanations" for the many parts of the Bible that do contradict each other. Are you saying that Bible readers need interpreters?

Now talk your way out of this contradiction.

Who moved the stone from the tomb:

Matthew: "There was a violent earthquake and the lord came down and moved the stone"

Mark: "the stone was rolled away, when the women looked up."

Luke: "They found the stone rolled away from the tomb"

This is your idea of the perfection of God's word in the Bible? I would think if the Bible is the word of God, he can get the context right. If it is the words of men with poor memory and hearsay, the contradictions make sense.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

What you say may or may not be correct. But my point of bringing up"contradictions in the Bible" is that if the Bible is the "word" of God, why does every simpleton who reads the Bible need someone to come up with "excuses" or "explanations" for the many parts of the Bible that do contradict each other. Are you saying that Bible readers need interpreters?

Now talk your way out of this contradiction.

Who moved the stone from the tomb:

Matthew: "There was a violent earthquake and the lord came down and moved the stone"

Mark: "the stone was rolled away, when the women looked up."

Luke: "They found the stone rolled away from the tomb"

This is your idea of the perfection of God's word in the Bible? I would think if the Bible is the word of God, he can get the context right. If it is the words of men with poor memory and hearsay, the contradictions make sense.

So, you're a "simpleton" are you? Simpletons have a huge problem: They are blinded by their carnal presuppositions, which is why they can often not see the things that are "hidden" even when in plain sight.

Scripture is much like the parables. Only to those to whom spiritual understanding has been graciously granted have the ears to hear.

And where exactly is the contradiction among the three passages you have quoted?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

I've read it, there is a cost to be a disciple, as there is cost involved in beginning and finishing any venture. So you have given away all your possessions? Luke 14:33 And you hate your parents, your immediate family, and your own life? Luke 14:26.

Your theology seems to be the easy way. God selected you in eternity past (whatever that is) and saved you without the need of being a disciple. According to you, God did everything at no cost to you regarding discipleship.

Tell us what do you think carrying your cross means? Luke 14:27 As one of the elect what cross do you carry?

I am interested in how one of the elect should calculate the cost of following Jesus?

One thing I know it is not giving away all your material possessions. According to Calvinism, one of the signs you are part of the elect is to be prosperous, through your work ethic.

"My theology" does not preclude what Jesus taught in Luke 14 about genuine discipleship.

Tell me: Do you hate all those in your immediate family -- those with whom you have the closest relationships?

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by boxcar

So, you're a "simpleton" are you? Simpletons have a huge problem: They are blinded by their carnal presuppositions, which is why they can often not see the things that are "hidden" even when in plain sight.

Scripture is much like the parables. Only to those to whom spiritual understanding has been graciously granted have the ears to hear.

And where exactly is the contradiction among the three passages you have quoted?

Boxcar

You're right.

The stone was moved - all 3 authors agree on that.
Only Matthew provides an explanation as to how the stone was moved.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

But how do YOU Know God will give YOU Grace?

Wrong question. The question should be: How do I know God has given me grace? Answer in a nutshell: Changed life!

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Wrong question. The question should be: How do I know God has given me grace? Answer in a nutshell: Changed life!

Boxcar

Just because he supposedly has given you Grace once, doesn't mean that he ever will again in the future.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

You're right.

The stone was moved - all 3 authors agree on that.
Only Matthew provides an explanation as to how the stone was moved.

Yeah...and it wasn't by any of the women.

Boxcar
P.S. Congratulations for your right answer.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Just because he supposedly has given you Grace once, doesn't mean that he ever will again in the future.

A Christian is sustained by God's grace throughout his life. This grace comes in the form of the Third Person of the Trinity who lives within each believer. This is how Christian persevere in the faith. This process of persevering is also known as Sanctification.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Would not that fit right in with the Book of Revelation? Is not the Battle of Armageddon supposed to take place at Megiddo in Northern Israel? Does not Israel have nuclear weapons? Is not Iran developing nuclear weapons? Does not Iran hate Israel's guts? If these two go to war with each other is there not a danger that it could escalate into a world wide conflict?

I'm just handicapping the arms race!

See what happens when you become a literalist? You wind up looking for things that will not happen -- or at least not very likely. Instead of literally interpreting a prophetic book that is filled with symbolic and figurative language, perhaps understanding the more difficult, obscure passages in such books could be obtained by interpreting relevant, clearer, didactic passages, such as LK 17:26-36.

Boxcar

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

"My theology" does not preclude what Jesus taught in Luke 14 about genuine discipleship.

Tell me: Do you hate all those in your immediate family -- those with whom you have the closest relationships?

Boxcar

Please explain by answering my questions. Your above response is non-responsive and just another proclamation without explanation. To foster discussion I want to know your position how you calculate the cost of being a disciple, pursuant to Luke 14.

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

So, you're a "simpleton" are you? Simpletons have a huge problem: They are blinded by their carnal presuppositions, which is why they can often not see the things that are "hidden" even when in plain sight.

Stop talking about yourself.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Scripture is much like the parables. Only to those to whom spiritual understanding has been graciously granted have the ears to hear.

Apparently you're not one of them.

Originally Posted by boxcar

And where exactly is the contradiction among the three passages you have quoted?

Mmmm, it's pretty obvious Bible man.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

See what happens when you become a literalist?

Boxcar

Sorry. I thought were the literalist. As I've previously stated I think whoever wrote the Book of Revelation was high on mushrooms. Anyway I was simply bewildered that you dismissed the possibility of a nuclear holocaust. But since you say you don't interpret the Book of Revelation literally, well never mind.

Exactly what you believe is a mystery. You don't believe Revelations literally but you apparently do believe Genesis literally, at least the Garden of Eden and Noah's Flood stories. Well, never mind.