Discussion Regarding Evolution, Fact or Fiction?

[Amo]

No, that's wrong.   Unless you make an idol of creationism, it doesn't matter a bit.   If you don't want to accept evolution, you are no less Christian than the rest of us.


Nothing whatever about evolution.   Here's what He said:


"Truly I tell you," He said, "unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

So you don't need all your new doctrines and extra stuff.   Just listen to Him and accept what He tells you and stop trying to rationalize it.    Here's how you know how He'll chose those who go with Him and who will go with Satan and his angels:

Matthew 25:31-46

Do that, and you're with Him.    Don't do it, and He will send you away.   

Just that simple.   Notice evolution has nothing to do with it.   

Belief structure is critical for admission in Heaven after the physical death.

False prophets will not be in heaven. If evolution is a false testimony, those who have propagated it will not be there either.

[The Barbarian]

Radiometric dating is a mathematical model that can never be proven.

We can prove some dates via C14, but that's it.

Actually, argon/argon testing correctly dated the pyroclastic flow that buried Pompeii.

It very well tested and we know the actual rates of decay to very close percentages.    And there are some that can vary, which is why they aren't uses as much.

If you'd like the details, we can talk about it.

[The Barbarian]

False prophets will not be in heaven. If evolution is a false testimony, those who have propagated it will not be there either.

Evolution is not a prophesy or a testimony.   It's just a natural phenomenon.    And even if you don't accept it, God won't care.   That's not how He decides where you will spend eternity.

[Amo]

Evolution is not a prophesy or a testimony.   It's just a natural phenomenon.    And even if you don't accept it, God won't care.   That's not how He decides where you will spend eternity.

Your and I and all will be judged by the word of God. Those found to have been warring against it, will not be in heaven.

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

Many will think they are going to be in heaven, but will not be their. None of us thinks we are the ones the above is referring to. Many of us will apparently be wrong.

[4WD]

Now, "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit", what would you want me to understand by that? Please explain as I don't want to go on guessing. Thanks.

Ecc 12:7  and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

Zec 12:1  A prophecy: The word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the human spirit within a person......

[4WD]

And the point is?

All creationists are not young earth creationists.  In fact I think it is safe to say that most creationists are not young earth creationists.  Few creationists hold to the 6000 year old earth [and universe].

[4WD]

Radiometric dating is a mathematical model that can never be proven.

We can prove some dates via C14, but that's it.

http://www.reasons.org/files/articles/non-staff-papers/roger_wiens_radiometric_dating.pdf

Read and learn.

[The Barbarian]

Your and I and all will be judged by the word of God. Those found to have been warring against it, will not be in heaven.

Since the word of God takes no position on evolution, that's not a concern in this case.   

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

Many will think they are going to be in heaven, but will not be their. None of us thinks we are the ones the above is referring to. Many of us will apparently be wrong.

Matthew 25:31-40 explicitly tells you how He will choose those who spend eternity with him.   Whether or not you approve or disapprove of evolution is not one of those things.

Let God be God, and accept it His way.

[Amo]

Since the word of God takes no position on evolution, that's not a concern in this case.

A truly and willfully ignorant statement. There is not one hint of evolutionary theory anywhere in scripture save in your deceived mind. You cannot produce one single conclusive statement suggesting evolution from scripture without twisting the meaning to your own understanding. You also ignore every conclusive statement from scripture simply stating the creation or pollute it with your own unscriptural understanding. Only in such a state of self imposed ignorance regarding the word of God, can you and have you made the above statement.

[Texas Conservative]

http://www.reasons.org/files/articles/non-staff-papers/roger_wiens_radiometric_dating.pdf

Read and learn.

Already knew about it boyo.

My points still stand.

[Alan]

The age of the earth is not in question here. Genesis does not mention a creation day for the earth.
This discussion is about evolution, unless you wish to argue that the earth evolved.

Although we can measure many things about a rock, we cannot directly measure its age.
For example: we can measure its mass, its volume, its colour, the minerals in it, their size and the way they are arranged. We can crush the rock and measure its chemical composition and the radioactive elements it contains. But we do not have an instrument that directly measures age.
Before we can calculate the age of a rock from its measured chemical composition, we must assume what radioactive elements were in the rock when it formed.
And then, depending on the assumptions we make, we can obtain any date we like.

It's as simple as that is it? I'm glad you know more than 1000's of scientists that have dedicated their lives to the field, perhaps you should inform them they've wasted their time and efforts.

[Alan]

Radiometric dating is a mathematical model that can never be proven.

We can prove some dates via C14, but that's it.

That's a valid point but the scientific community for some time now has opted to apply alternative methods or continued field exploration to verify their data before assigning dates to geological finds.

[Alan]

Amo, you're taking this discussion too far when you begin to question another person's salvation over disagreements.

[Michael2012]

Michael said:

How did you come to know that these 3 were created out of nothing? Is it said in Genesis? If so, can you cite the Genesis scripture?

On life: Is life created or is it given coming from a source?

On the spirit of man: Is it created or is formed or is given?

In your answers please cite reference scriptures.

Sorry, but your questions don't make any sense.  What could God have made the heavens and the earth out of?  Out of what could God have made life?  And out of what could God have made the spirit of man?

From Vine's OT dictionary:

Create

bara' (H1254), "to create, make." This verb is of profound theological significance, since it has only God as its subject. Only God can "create" in the sense implied by bara'. The verb expresses creation out of nothing, an idea seen clearly in passages having to do with creation on a cosmic scale: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen_1:1; cf. Gen_2:3; Isa_40:26; Isa_42:5). All other verbs for "creating" allow a much broader range of meaning; they have both divine and human subjects, and are used in contexts where bringing something or someone into existence is not the issue.

Bara' is frequently found in parallel to these other verbs, such as `asah, "to make" (Isa_41:20; Isa_43:7; Isa_45:7, Isa_45:12; Amo_4:13), yatsar, "to form" (Isa_43:1, Isa_43:7; Isa_45:7; Amo_4:13), and kun, "to establish." A verse that illustrates all of these words together is Isa_45:18 : "For thus saith the Lord that created [bara'] the heavens; God himself that formed [yatsar] the earth and made [`asah] it; he hath established [kun] it, he created [bara'] it not in vain, he formed [yatar] it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else." The technical meaning of bara' (to "create out of nothing") may not hold in these passages; perhaps the verb was popularized in these instances for the sake of providing a poetic synonym.

Objects of the verb include the heavens and earth (Gen_1:1; Isa_40:26; Isa_42:5; Isa_45:18; Isa_65:17); man (Gen_1:27; Gen_5:2; Gen_6:7; Deu_4:32; Psa_89:47; Isa_43:7; Isa_45:12); Israel (Isa_43:1; Mal_2:10); a new thing (Jer_31:22); cloud and smoke (Isa_4:5); north and south (Psa_89:12); salvation and righteousness (Isa_45:8); speech (Isa_57:19); darkness (Isa_45:7); wind (Amo_4:13); and a new heart (Psa_51:10). A careful study of the passages where bara' occurs shows that in the few nonpoetic uses (primarily in Genesis), the writer uses scientifically precise language to demonstrate that God brought the object or concept into being from previously nonexistent material.

Especially striking is the use of bara' in Isaiah 40-65. Out of 49 occurrences of the verb in the Old Testament, 20 are in these chapters. Because Isaiah writes prophetically to the Jews in Exile, he speaks words of comfort based upon God's past benefits and blessings to His people. Isaiah especially wants to show that, since Yahweh is the Creator, He is able to deliver His people from captivity. The God of Israel has created all things: "I have made [`asah] the earth, and created [bara'] man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded" (Isa_45:12). The gods of Babylon are impotent nonentities (Isa_44:12-20; Isa_46:1-7), and so Israel can expect God to triumph by effecting a new creation (Isa_43:16-21; Isa_65:17-25).
Though a precisely correct technical term to suggest cosmic, material creation from nothing, bara' is a rich theological vehicle for communicating the sovereign power of God, who originates and regulates all things to His glory.

qanah (H7069), "to get, acquire, earn." These basic meanings are dominant in the Old Testament, but certain poetic passages have long suggested that this verb means "create." In Gen_14:19, Melchizedek blessed Abram and said: "Blessed be Abram by God Most High, maker [KJV, "possessor"] of heaven and earth" (RSV). Gen_14:22 repeats this divine epithet. Deu_32:6 makes this meaning certain in that qanah is parallel to `asah, "to make": "Is he not your father, who created (qanah) you, who made (`asah) you and established (kun) you?" (RSV). Psa_78:54; Psa_139:13; and Pro_8:22-23 also suggest the idea of creation.

The cognate languages usually follow the Hebrew in the basic meaning of "to get, acquire." Ugaritic, however, attests the meaning "create." In fact, qny is the primary Ugaritic term to express creation. The close relationship of Hebrew and Ugaritic and the contextual meaning of qanah as "create" in the Old Testament passages cited above argue for the use of qanah as a synonym for "create" along with bara', `asah, and yatsar.

`asah (H6213), "to create, do, make." This verb, which occurs over 2600 times in the Old Testament, is used as a synonym for "create" only about 60 times. There is nothing in- herent in the word to indicate the nature of the creation involved; it is only when `asah is parallel to bara' that we can be sure that it implies creation.

Unfortunately, the word is not attested in cognate languages contemporary with the Old Testament, and its etymology is unclear. Because `asah describes the most common of human (and divine) activities, it is ill-suited to communicate theological meaning—except where it is used with bara' or other terms whose technical meanings are clearly established.

The most instructive occurrences of `asah are in the early chapters of Genesis. Gen_1:1 uses the verb bara' to introduce the Creation account, and Gen_1:7 speaks of its detailed execution: "And God made [`asah] the firmament...." Whether or not the firmament was made of existing material cannot be determined, since the passage uses only `asah. But it is clear that the verb expresses creation, since it is used in that context and follows the technical word bara'. The same can be said of other verses in Genesis: Gen_1:16 (the lights of heaven); Gen_1:25, Gen_3:1 (the animals); Gen_1:31; Gen_2:2 (all his work); and Gen_6:6 (man). In Gen_1:26-27, however, `asah must mean creation from nothing, since it is used as a synonym for bara'. The text reads, "Let us make [`asah] man in our image, after our likeness....So God created [bara'] man in his own image...." Similarly, Gen_2:4 states: "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created [bara'], in the day that the Lord God made [`asah] the earth and the heavens." Finally, Gen_5:1 equates the two as follows: "In the day that God created [bara'] man, in the likeness of God made [`asah] he him." The unusual juxtaposition of bara' and `asah in Gen_2:3 refers to the totality of creation, which God had "created" by "making."
It is unwarranted to overly refine the meaning of `asah to suggest that it means creation from something, as opposed to creation from nothing. Only context can determine its special nuance. It can mean either, depending upon the situation.

4WD said:

What could God have made the heavens and the earth out of?

Scripture does not say, as far as my reading of scriptures. But my mind tells me that, it is from out of nothing, as by reason, everything else do not exist until God created them, since scriptures says that all things were God's creation. And this goes well with Vine's discussion of the word bara'.

I noticed that from what you've posted out of Vine's, is that, man is a created being ex nihilo (See highlighted portion in green in Vine's quote above).

Anyway, I'd like to point out that, in fact everything was created by God, whether from out of nothing or from out of what was created from out of nothing. All that, and so all then, is the creation of God.

Col.1:16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.

So, why say, you are not created by God?

4WD said:

Out of what could God have made life?

In so far as life is concerned, my understanding on this is that life is not created but is given by God. In God is life and the Source of life. And this life is eternal and unlimited and is in God, for He is the living and immortal God from eternity to eternity. So, life is not created, more so, created ex nihilo by God, but is given.

4WD said:

And out of what could God have made the spirit of man?

Scripture does not say, as far as my reading of scriptures. And whether it is created from out of nothing, so I can't say. Besides, concerning man, the spirit which is in him, in my present view, is not something that is part of what makes up man. It is in the same sense that the life which is in the man is not part of what makes up man. In another similar sense, the spirit which is in the animals is something that is not part of what makes up the animal.

[4WD]

Anyway, I'd like to point out that, in fact everything was created by God, whether from out of nothing or from out of what was created from out of nothing. All that, and so all then, is the creation of God.

So then when, say, a baby such as Charlie Gard is born with mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome you believe that is God's creation.  Interesting.  Hideous but interesting.

[Amo]

It's as simple as that is it? I'm glad you know more than 1000's of scientists that have dedicated their lives to the field, perhaps you should inform them they've wasted their time and efforts.

It is a simple choice. Either God's word is correct, and the world is the way it is due to His creative power, or fallen humanity stuck in the extremely limited view of the box of that creation are correct. You put your faith in fallen humanities observations within their box, others put their faith in the testimony of God's word who is Himself not restricted from any knowledge in any way shape or form. I say again, those inside the box who do not know the original state of the materials this world consists of, or the state of this world itself at its beginning, cannot determine its age or the age of the materials of which it consists.

All attempts to do so, depend upon them creating their own version of how things were and are. This is faulty from the outset. It is exactly as the bible has said, those who say all things remain the same since the creation, are ignorant of crucial facts pertaining to the knowledge those very people seek to establish. They are lost souls, having more faith in their own understanding than the word of God. The end thereof is death.

Prov 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

[4WD]

It is a simple choice. Either God's word is correct, and the world is the way it is due to His creative power, or fallen humanity stuck in the extremely limited view of the box of that creation are correct. You put your faith in fallen humanities observations within their box, others put their faith in the testimony of God's word who is Himself not restricted from any knowledge in any way shape or form. I say again, those inside the box who do not know the original state of the materials this world consists of, or the state of this world itself at its beginning, cannot determine its age or the age of the materials of which it consists.

All attempts to do so, depend upon them creating their own version of how things were and are. This is faulty from the outset. It is exactly as the bible has said, those who say all things remain the same since the creation, are ignorant of crucial facts pertaining to the knowledge those very people seek to establish. They are lost souls, having more faith in their own understanding than the word of God. The end thereof is death.

Prov 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

Amo,
The minute that you provide an interpretation of what the word of God means, then you have put your faith in your own understanding.  And if the end thereof is death, then you have just signed your own death warrant.  Perhaps you should be more careful about who you are consigning to death.

[Amo]

Amo, you're taking this discussion too far when you begin to question another person's salvation over disagreements.

Salvation or not, is all about agreement with God's word or not. Perhaps you should read the bible again and take note of how many times those who would not listen to God's word died for doing so, and are said to have lost salvation. According to your understanding, anyone can make the bible out to say anything, and then still be saved because no one will lose salvation over just a disagreement. BALONEY!   

Those who choose to disagree with and argue against the plain testimony of God's word, will not have eternal life. God Himself will judge all according to that word, and determine who accepted His rightful authority and will be saved, and who rejected that same authority and will not. This is basic and goes back to the very beginning. God said don't eat from a certain tree or you will die, Satan said you can it from the tree it doesn't matter. It was just a disagreement. Our parents ate from the tree and we have been dying ever since. Get a grip man. Those who will not believe and submit to the authority of God's word here and now, will not enter heaven. This is basic.

Choosing not to believe the truth is the prerequisite of all sin. Therefore, choosing to believe a lie, is choosing sin over the righteousness of God. All who do so are deceived and will not enter heaven. To the contrary, god Himself will select their final and fatal delusion.

2 These 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

God's word is truth. Those who deny it are and will be deceived unto damnation.

[4WD]

Salvation or not, is all about agreement with God's word or not.

No, it not about agreement with God's word; it is all about agreement with what you, Amo, think God's word means.  That may or may not have much to do with what God means.

[Texas Conservative]

Perhaps not definite, but not a single one says that the earth is only 6000 years old, the only ones that do need to fill in the blanks with faith rather than facts.

Everyone needs to fill in the blanks with faith.  Faith in an interpretation of God's Word or in science.  How many people understand all the science and can do all the mathematics involved without a computer program?  If not, you are putting your faith into science.

[4WD]

Everyone needs to fill in the blanks with faith.  Faith in an interpretation of God's Word or in science.  How many people understand all the science and can do all the mathematics involved without a computer program?  If not, you are putting your faith into science.

Faith in an interpretation of God's Word is does not preclude faith in science.  Nor does faith in science preclude a faith in an interpretation of God's word.  They are not mutually exclusive as some here try to make it.

[Alan]

God's word is truth. Those who deny it are and will be deceived unto damnation.

Yes, but simply put, the way you read it isn't the way I read it,  no damnation here and no denying the word of God.

[AVZ]

Faith in an interpretation of God's Word is does not preclude faith in science.  Nor does faith in science preclude a faith in an interpretation of God's word.  They are not mutually exclusive as some here try to make it.

Perhaps true, but the moment science is in opposition with Gods' Word, a choice must be made.
There are people on this board who make the claim that man evolved from apes, and insist that this is a scientific fact.
Those who claim that theology is not under attack by science are in self-denial.
And those who think evolutionists do not have an agenda to promote their theory, even if the data argues to the contrary, are seriously deluded.

The worst thing however are Christians who do not dispute such data and go to great lengths to corrupt interpretation of scripture so that it fits the claims made by evolutionists.

[Sonofason]

Salvation or not, is all about agreement with God's word or not... According to your understanding, anyone can make the bible out to say anything, and then still be saved because no one will lose salvation over just a disagreement. BALONEY!   

Those who choose to disagree with and argue against the plain testimony of God's word, will not have eternal life...

God's word is truth. Those who deny it are and will be deceived unto damnation.

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him."
(1 John 5:1  KJV)

A reasonable interpretation:
Everyone who believe that Jesus is "The Christ" is a child of God: And everyone who loves God also loves all of God's children. 

Because this is the word of God, because it is the inspired Word of God, I believe we ought to be very careful not to condemn any of God's children. 

I believe we should take a moment to consider what is being said here.  Some of you might believe that the second part of this verse is suggesting that everyone who loves God also loves God's Son Jesus.  While they would not be incorrect, because Jesus is indeed God's Son; many people miss the fact that this verse is not only referring to Jesus our Lord and Savior, but to all of God's children.  It is not that if we love God, the one who begets, that we also love Jesus, often said to be "the only begotten Son of God"; but if we love God, the one who begets, we will also love all of God's children.  Those of us who love God are all begotten children of God.  If we say we love God but do not love all of God's begotten children, we are liars, and the love of God is not in us.  I believe that the confusion is rooted in interpretations.  In John 3:16 of The King James version of the Bible, as well as many other versions of the Bible, interpreters have interpreted God's word, that was written in Greek  to say,"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

It is interesting to note that the King James version of Hebrews uses the same terminology when referring to Abraham's son Issac when Abraham was commanded to offer up his son Issac as a sacrifice unto the Lord.  The King James version states in Hebrews 11, verse 17 that "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son"

We all know that Abraham did not have a one and only begotten son at the time Abraham set Issac upon the alter as a sacrifice unto God.  Indeed, Abraham had another son.  His name was Ishmael.  And Ishmael was indeed a begotten son of Abraham.

Jesus is indeed a Son of God.  He always was a Son of God.  And that is what makes His Sonship unique. 

Therefore, I would not be so quick to condemn any of God's children to hell.  That is, I would not be so quick to condemn any person to hell that believes that Jesus is the Christ.  Let not the translations of men condemn you as well.

"If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death."
(1 John 5:15)

Indeed, if you see a brother sin a sin that is not unto death, do not condemn him, but pray for him instead.    The condemnation of God's children has no place among God's children.

[Alan]

Perhaps true, but the moment science is in opposition with Gods' Word, a choice must be made.

But that's the point, science is not in opposition to God's word, therefore the rest of your comment is irrelevant.

[4WD]

There are people on this board who make the claim that man evolved from apes, and insist that this is a scientific fact.

I don't know of a single person on this board who makes that claim. 

[4WD]

Those who claim that theology is not under attack by science are in self-denial.

Science is nothing more than the study of the natural universe which is God's creation; how could science attack theology?  If you mean there are scientists who attack theology, then yes I would agree.  But I could probably give you a couple of theologians who to attack theology more so than any scientists.

[Sonofason]

Perhaps true, but the moment science is in opposition with Gods' Word, a choice must be made.
There are people on this board who make the claim that man evolved from apes, and insist that this is a scientific fact.
Those who claim that theology is not under attack by science are in self-denial.
And those who think evolutionists do not have an agenda to promote their theory, even if the data argues to the contrary, are seriously deluded.

The worst thing however are Christians who do not dispute such data and go to great lengths to corrupt interpretation of scripture so that it fits the claims made by evolutionists.

I personally cannot insist that mankind has evolved from some kind of creature that was not mankind.  Although I have seen many claims of science to that affect, and also claims that vast amounts of evidence exists to that affect.  I haven't seen it.  Or if I have seen it, I have not been convinced by it.  That is not to say that evolution of species is not occurring.  It very well may be occurring.  I just haven't seen any convincing evidence that it is true.

I agree with you, in that " the moment science is in opposition with Gods' Word, a choice must be made."

I agree with you that "There are people on this board who make the claim that man evolved from apes, and insist that this is a scientific fact."  And the truth is, some of them are Christians.  Yes, some of them are God's children, whether or not evolution is true.

I agree with you in part that, "Those who claim that theology is not under attack by science are in self-denial."  However, science is knowledge, it is not something capable of attacking anyone, or anything.  But people who use science with a purpose to attack theology do exist.  And it is therefore true that anyone who claims that no one is using science to attack theology is indeed in self-denial.  It is happening all around us.

Therefore, what you say here must also be true in part, that "...those who think evolutionists do not have an agenda to promote their theory, even if the data argues to the contrary, are seriously deluded."

I say in part because I do not believe that all evolutionists have such an agenda, to attack theology.  Some do, of course.  Some Christians are evolutionists.  And true Christians do not have an agenda to destroy theology.  Rather they may simply have a thirst for knowledge and truth, however misguided, if misguided at all. 

As I have said, I do not believe in evolution.  I see it as a reasonable theory and tool of creation.  It may not be true at all.  I don't know.  If you have any evidence that evolution is not true, I'd love to see it.  If you have verses of scripture which forbid the possibility of evolution as being truth, I'd love to see that as well.  As a Christian, I am not at odds with science.  I am however skeptical of science.  That is, I am skeptical of all knowledge.  Convince me, and I will believe.

Your final comment is more difficult to answer.  You say, "The worst thing however are Christians who do not dispute such data and go to great lengths to corrupt interpretation of scripture so that it fits the claims made by evolutionists."

I cannot dispute scientific data that I do not understand.  And I cannot dispute reasonable interpretation of the Scriptures either.  To dogmatically accept one interpretation of scripture when another is equally viable is just as unreasonable as to accept scientific claims on the grounds that they were conceived in the name of science, therefore it must be true mentality. 

[Michael2012]

Michael said:

Anyway, I'd like to point out that, in fact everything was created by God, whether from out of nothing or from out of what was created from out of nothing. All that, and so all then, is the creation of God.

So then when, say, a baby such as Charlie Gard is born with mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome you believe that is God's creation.  Interesting.  Hideous but interesting.

Why would the baby not be a creation of God? Just because he is born with mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, he is no longer is God's creation? Hell is a creation of God. Judas was created by God. All those who died in the Flood in Noah's time, including those with perhaps mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, blind, deaf, lame, retarded, were created by God.

Col. 1:16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.

John 1: 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

Isaiah 45:12 I have made the earth, And created man on it. I—My hands—stretched out the heavens, And all their host I have commanded.

[Michael2012]

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him."
(1 John 5:1  KJV)

A reasonable interpretation:
Everyone who believe that Jesus is "The Christ" is a child of God: And everyone who loves God also loves all of God's children. 

Because this is the word of God, because it is the inspired Word of God, I believe we ought to be very careful not to condemn any of God's children. 

I believe we should take a moment to consider what is being said here.  Some of you might believe that the second part of this verse is suggesting that everyone who loves God also loves God's Son Jesus.  While they would not be incorrect, because Jesus is indeed God's Son; many people miss the fact that this verse is not only referring to Jesus our Lord and Savior, but to all of God's children.  It is not that if we love God, the one who begets, that we also love Jesus, often said to be "the only begotten Son of God"; but if we love God, the one who begets, we will also love all of God's children.  Those of us who love God are all begotten children of God.  If we say we love God but do not love all of God's begotten children, we are liars, and the love of God is not in us.  I believe that the confusion is rooted in interpretations.  In John 3:16 of The King James version of the Bible, as well as many other versions of the Bible, interpreters have interpreted God's word, that was written in Greek  to say,"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

It is interesting to note that the King James version of Hebrews uses the same terminology when referring to Abraham's son Issac when Abraham was commanded to offer up his son Issac as a sacrifice unto the Lord.  The King James version states in Hebrews 11, verse 17 that "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son"

We all know that Abraham did not have a one and only begotten son at the time Abraham set Issac upon the alter as a sacrifice unto God.  Indeed, Abraham had another son.  His name was Ishmael.  And Ishmael was indeed a begotten son of Abraham.

Jesus is indeed a Son of God.  He always was a Son of God.  And that is what makes His Sonship unique. 

Therefore, I would not be so quick to condemn any of God's children to hell.  That is, I would not be so quick to condemn any person to hell that believes that Jesus is the Christ.  Let not the translations of men condemn you as well.

"If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death."
(1 John 5:15)

Indeed, if you see a brother sin a sin that is not unto death, do not condemn him, but pray for him instead.    The condemnation of God's children has no place among God's children.

Those of us who love God are all begotten children of God.

Are they all begotten children or adopted?

[Michael2012]

Michael said:

Now, "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit", what would you want me to understand by that? Please explain as I don't want to go on guessing. Thanks.

Ecc 12:7  and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

Zec 12:1  A prophecy: The word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the human spirit within a person......

Sorry, but I still am not clarified on what it is you wanted me to understand by  "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit".

With the verses you cited, here's what I gather of the spirit:

1. The spirit is given by God.
2. The spirit is formed by God.

Nothing with regards that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. So please explain and elaborate.

[Sonofason]

Indeed, I said, "Those of us who love God are all begotten children of God."

Are they all begotten children or adopted?

Lets have a look at verse 1 in context with verse 2 and see what God is talking about here.

1Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. 2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
(1 John 5:1-2)

Okay now.  Verse one says that if we believe that Jesus is the Christ, we are children of God.  When we accept this fact, we must also acknowledge that Jesus is also begotten of the father and is indeed a son of God.  Yet Jesus was with the Father prior to Creation.  He is also the Christ which makes him unique from all other sons and daughters of God, and we call him "The Son of God" which sets him apart from all other sons and daughters of God.  By what power is Christ the Son of God?  Is it not by the Power of God's Holy Spirit.  Was not the physical manifestation of Jesus, the man, conceived and manifested by the Holy Spirit?  How indeed, and by what power is a simple man adopted and received into the body of Christ, and into the family of God?  Is it not by that same spirit, God's Holy Spirit?

The second part of verse 1 says that everyone that loves God loves his children.  Verse 2 says that we can know that we love these children of God, when we love God and keep his commandments.  Do you see we have come full circle.  Everyone who loves God loves his children.  If we love God, we keep his commandments.  If we keep his commandments, we know we love God's children.

Now take your eyes to verse 18:
"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not."

a reasonable translation:
We know that everyone who is born of God does not sin.  Rather, everyone who is born of God keeps himself from sin, and that wicked one cannot touch him.

I am not suggesting that the interpretation I have given is right.  I am not demanding that yours is wrong.  I have put forth what I believe is a reasonable interpretation that ought to cause everyone to stop and think.  Are you really so confident in your interpretation despite the risk condemning God's children?

[Sonofason]

Furthermore, the Scriptures, according to the King James Version of the Bible tells us that Issac was the only begotten son of Abraham.  How do you resolve this absolute contradiction? 

I resolve it by understanding that "only begotten" may not have been the intended meaning of the Greek word that was originally written.  In fact, I would suggest that the true sense of the word used means unique, uniquely begotten, or even beloved.

[th1b.taylor]

Actually, argon/argon testing correctly dated the pyroclastic flow that buried Pompeii.

It very well tested and we know the actual rates of decay to very close percentages.    And there are some that can vary, which is why they aren't uses as much.

If you'd like the details, we can talk about it.

Patently false!  We have the knowledge that, if the earth is millions or billions of years old that the atmosphere changed as well as the other conditions surrounding a piece of material, that changes the rate of decay and we cannot e certain of how much did it begin decaying from and under what conditions?

[Sonofason]

Indeed, it is quite possible that the rate of decay of all radiometric isotopes changes over time.  I wonder what the impact of a universal decrease in density is on these rates of decay.  Indeed, I wonder what it's affect is on the diameter of our planet as well?