GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Amo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 85
Amo, I only know by what you have posted, and based upon that I post back to you. You do have a work system, I do not care how you may package your gospel with "grace stickers" inside it's another gospel that you are delivering to others. You clearly said:

Amo's corrupt gospel unveiled.

1. You have people that according to you have been justified, yet not saved~that's an impossibility. If one has been legally justified then they are in one true biblical sense SAVED for sin and condemnation. I choose my words carefully, so that you will not be able to play with my words and twist them in your favor, NOT to say you would, only saying that I very carefully choose my thoughts concerning the words I'm using to that they cannot be used against me in my understanding of the truth.

Now, I'm not sure if you are saying that EVERY sinner is justified, only that he needs to show it by faith and then live a sanctified life. That was the belief of Thaddaeus of the EOC. Maybe you can clarify this for me.

The truth is every sinner for whom Christ died for WAS JUSTIFIED legally at the very point of Jesus' resurrection. When Jesus arose, so did his CHOSEN BODY~it is impossible to separate the HEAD from the BODY. I could keep going, but enough said on this point.

2. You said: "each will now determine their own fate"~so, by your own words, you have man deciding his own fate, and have man being his own savior. Where does God's election of GRACE come into your theology? Like most others, you reject it. Salvation cannot be by any other system than by FREE GRACE, or, it ceases to be of grace, and must be by works. They cannot be mixed.  One's gospel must be either or, they do not mix and still claim to be of one.

Again IN ADAM as we proved in the last month or so in another thread that we were put under the system of WORKS and sinned and were condemned to death and condemnation by Adam's sin. In Christ, his chosen seed was given eternal life BY HIS OBEDIENCE and HOLY life BY GRACE and SECURED by two immutable acts of God~His oath and his promises the same that was given to Abraham concerning Issac, who like all of God's elect was the son of God's  PROMISES to Abraham. My eternal salvation is depending on GOD'S FAITHFULNESS, NOT mine! Have you never read with understanding these wonderful scriptures: Amo, I will trust in God's faithfulness, NOT MINE, and you would be wise to do the same.

More word games and petty accusations I have no interest in. We've been through this kind of junk many times already. Why do you bother debating or trying to teach at all, if there is no choice to be made? All just a waste of time. Do you really believe God set up a system of works first, then abandoned the same when we failed it? Now what, humanities experience is just one long nauseating history of pain and suffering for some kind of fulfillment for God regarding that which no one or no thing can can effect or change in any way for themselves or anyone else.

God did not create a system of works, save working out one's own salvation with fear and trembling through Christ Jesus our Lord. Nor was He surprised by what happened on earth to humanity. To the contrary, we exist exactly to prove the power of choice, and that we are free moral agents. Not just to ourselves and God, but all creation. Here and now the differences between the Mystery of Godliness and the Mystery of Iniquity are being played out and exposed for all to see, understand, and choose between. Those who will not exercise this gift from God given at infinite cost, or make the right choice concerning the same, will come to their end along with sin and suffering in the lake of fire.

If all were not justified in Christ the LAMB who was slain from the foundation of the world, humanity would have ended long ago in the Garden.

1 Pet 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. 8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

1 Joh 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. 10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

The gift of God in Christ Jesus our Lord the LAMB OF GOD, was given to and for all of humanity. In Him alone does or has anyone ever had life before and even more especially after the fall. This life granted to us in anticipation of God's sacrifice in Christ Jesus, who gave us His all, is for the express purpose of allowing the time to make the same choice in response to that very love and grace demonstrated on our behalf. All of humanity will either choose to respond in like manner, or perish in iniquity which alone would reject such love and grace. During which time the Mysteries of Godliness and Iniquity will both be played out and exposed for all to see, understand, and choose between for all time.

Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

We are sanctified by Jesus Christ alone, and His righteousness, not our own which none posses. Those who will not choose to enter into the sacrifice of the body of Christ Jesus, whose body the saved are, will not be sanctified or saved. This is a choice that all must make, even those who have never heard of Christ Jesus by way of the conviction of the Holy Spirit of God unto righteousness. God knows His own who seek after truth and righteousness.

Rom 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Well, well - what do you think about this?  Extract from today's BBC internet news site : -

"The Neanderthals may have been extinct for thousands of years, but in 2010, advances in technology enabled geneticists to map the Neanderthal genome using DNA extracted from ancient bones. This led to a startling discovery: our ancestors interbred with other species after they migrated out of Africa.
So in the UK, most of us have a small percentage of Neanderthal genes in our DNA, and scientists have found traces of the Denisovans and other ancient hominid species too.

In short, as Prof Alice Roberts, an anatomist and anthropologist from the University of Birmingham explains, “We just really weren’t clear about the level of shenanigans that went on in human evolution, and now we are.”

Listen: Ancient DNA and Human Evolution (BBC Inside Science)"

Yea, its all real clear now, until next time of course. I wonder just how many times "scientists" have to have been wrong, before they will stop saying and acting like they have it all figured out now.

I don't think a thread has reverted back to square one as many times as this one  rofl ::juggle:: ::doh:: ::frustrated:: ::aloneinclearlogic::

It all always leads back to square one, faith. Some people will always have more faith in God's word and eye witness account, others will always have more faith in fallen humanities observations and hypotheses. Both sides explaining the same evidence before them, as their faith dictates.


Cambrian Fossils Found in 'Wrong' Place

Many extinct and strange creatures were only known from Cambrian rocks--until now. Newly discovered fossils in higher, more "recent" rock layers in Morocco show "remarkable preservation" and hold a host of what were for decades considered exclusively Cambrian sea creatures. These fossil finds were quite unexpected by evolutionists, who had pictured a different evolutionary scenario.

In the geologic timescale, the "Cambrian period" refers to the lowermost densely fossil-bearing rocks. These rocks record the sudden appearance of creatures, with representatives of almost every living phylum found fully formed and with no signs of evolutionary transition, which is an enigma for evolution.1

The soft-bodied creatures found in Cambrian strata were considered stem or basal creatures. They were supposed to have been the worms, arthropods, and other odd creatures that "gave rise" to subsequent body forms found in upper strata. Although none of them ever showed clear transition toward the more familiar sea animals that are found in higher strata or are living today, they were considered to be evolutionary predecessors because they were thought to be exclusive to Cambrian rocks.

Now all of that has changed. A recent study in Nature reported that some of the same soft-bodied "Cambrian" sea creatures were found in Morocco--preserved in brilliant reds and yellows because of the oxidation of pyrite that occurred on their soft tissues while they were being fossilized--in a higher layer, mixed in with "later" animals.2 This discovery erases the argument for evolution, which relies on the absence of these creatures in higher layers to support the assumption that they "diverged" into "later" life forms--and eventually into people.

This find forces evolutionists to add a new belief in order to support their overall concept of past life. Before, evolutionists believed that some creatures evolved into others--an easy story to assert but one that lacked the expected transitional forms in the fossil record.3 Now, they must also believe that some creatures evolved into others, and at the same time spawned more of themselves in "parallel." They must insist that the "stem" soft-bodied animals "gave rise" to newer life forms found in higher sediments, as well as to populations that continued to produce more forms just like themselves.

Since both of these "parallel" populations lived alongside one another, instead of in separate periods of time, then why are the Cambrian creatures not typically found as fossils in higher strata? The study's authors said, "The rarity of Burgess Shale-type taxa [organisms] in post-Middle Cambrian rocks elsewhere probably results from a lack of preservation rather than the extinction and replacement of these faunas during the later Cambrian."2 (The Burgess Shale Formation is widely known for soft-tissue preservation in its fossils.)

This one brief statement rewrites a foundational part of the evolutionary story. Instead of going extinct because they evolved into subsequent forms, it must now be believed that they evolved into other forms despite what these new fossils show--not transitional forms evolving, but stable forms persisting. This find forces the evolutionary story to take too many twists and turns to be true.

On the other hand, if God created all creatures during the same week-long miraculous event, and if God subsequently judged the world in a globe-covering watery catastrophe, then one would expect to find exactly what has been described: ancient sea creatures that were fully-formed and coexisted in time, buried together in mud in a massive, worldwide graveyard.

"The Archaean basement consists of domes of granitoids and granitic gneisses (the Nanambu Complex), the nearest outcrop being 5 km to the north. Some of the lowermost overlying Proterozoic metasediments were accreted to these domes during amphibolite grade regional metamorphism (5 to 8 kb and 550° to 630° C) at 1870 to 1800 Myr. Multiple isoclinal recumbent folding accompanied metamorphism...A 150 Myr period of weathering and erosion followed metamorphism."
Andrew Snelling, Koongarra Uranium Deposits in Geology of the Mineral Deposits of Australia and Papua New Guinea Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 1990, pages 807 -812

"Myr" means "millions of years"    Snelling here is writing that these formations are about 1.8 billion years old.

And so? My faith is not in Snelling, it is in the word of God. If you choose to place your faith in Snelling simply because he might have said something you agree with, go to, do likewise.


According to his many online biographies at creationist websites, Snelling received a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honours in Applied Geology from the University of New South Wales and a Ph.D. from the University of Sydney, for his thesis A geochemical study of the Koongarra uranium deposit, Northern Territory, Australia.[2] He worked for various mining companies for several years before leaving to pursue his creation "research" in 1983,[3] however he was retained as a consultant by Koongarra uranium project until 1992.[2]

His creation research has centred around dating methods, with his pet hobbyhorse being polonium halos, which according to Answers in Genesis, he has used to demonstrate that most rock layers and fossils were deposited by a global flood 4,300 years ago.[4] He has been repeatedly overlooked for a Nobel Prize despite the importance of this discovery. He has recently sued the US National Park Service on grounds of "religious discrimination" because they won't let him collect rocks at the Grand Canyon National Park.[5]

The above quote from the link provided doesn't seem to suggest that Snelling believes in deep time evolution or cause of rock layers. Nevertheless, my faith is not in him.

Nope.  Not one of those facts I showed you were first noticed by anyone who denied a global flood.   If you doubt this, show us otherwise.   

Wrong.   The average depth then was much less than it is today, because the oceans spread over low areas to make shallow seas.   What is needed for the cretaceous chalk beds to form, are lots of shallow seas and continental shelves.   Which is what we see in the Cretaceous.

The Cretaceous was a period with a relatively warm climate, resulting in high eustatic sea levels that created numerous shallow inland seas. These oceans and seas were populated with now-extinct marine reptiles, ammonites and rudists, while dinosaurs continued to dominate on land.

As you learned, the deposition of cretaceous chalk was so gentle as to preserve the skeletons of sharks.   So that story won't work, either.

It was violent and sudden, except that it wasn't.   In other words, Snelling is trying to make his new doctrine fit any possible facts.

Bottom line:
Notice that the waters in the upper layer of chalk (formed, remember by the shells of very tiny organisms) had to be quite calm to form the fossils.   But that's not the largest problem with Snelling's story.   Most of the uneroded chalk beds are something like 1,500 feet thick.   Remember solid rock made of packed shells of forams.     The average depth of the oceans is about 12,000 feet.    So if all those forams lived in the same time, the oceans would be so packed with forams that they would be like very loose mud.    And there's the problem of different fossil fauna low in the chalk layers that are different than those higher up.
So far, creationists have not found a satisfactory explanation for this.   It is happening today.   In shallow seas, the same fall of tiny shells continues, burying other organisms with them. 

Snelling simply choose his new interpretation of scripture, depending on those who think they know better than Jesus Christ and the prophets, above the testimony of the same. This is where you place your faith, that is all.

You don't even believe in a global flood, now your saying what it was like after one? So your saying that people who believed in a global flood also believe it took deep time to form the chalk beds. Why, and what sense does that make? Please do provide examples of those who believe the biblical global flood account, but still think it took countless millions of years to form all the layers. The flood negates the need for deep time, and deep time gets messed up by the flood.

Please do provide examples of scripture which teach evolution and deep time slow development. Not the same old lame arguments that if scripture means what you say it means rather than what it plainly states, then it teaches evolution and or deep time. Show us scripture which plainly states your case, or continue to say it does at your own peril.

Amo. it IS BOTH legal and practical, not just one or the other. I gave support above from 1st Corinthians 1:30~"But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: proving the legal phase of sanctification that Christ purchased for his elect, that makes them as holy as HE IS HOLY~Yet, there is a progressive sanctification whereby we increase more and more in practical holiness as we grow in grace and knowledge of the Son of God and learn to walk in his steps, even though our best efforts are mixed with the sins of the old man. Practical sanctification is indeed a lifelong work for a child of God, yet that is NOT what will earn us eternal life, but the PERFECT holiness/righteousness of Jesus Christ, for again, our best is mixed with imperfectness, not just a deed here and there, but ALL of our deeds have sins mixed with them. Amo, your gospel and Catholicism and many other is a "work system" that has totally removed the Spirit of God from regeneration whether or not you will confess this to be so, your teachings said that it is so.  Of course, I already knew this, but I have a desire for you to realize this, which most likely you will not UNLESS God intervenes. Well, own practical sanctification cannot obtain perfectness on our part, NOT even close. We reject sin being eradicated from our members...we CAN rule over them, yet not remove them from working and laboring to reign over us.  That's the most unscriptural statement I have ever heard you made.... and then on top of that saying you added:  Give scriptures that would allow you to make just an absurd statement. Thaddeaus must have converted you, or you both have embraced a serious corruption of the truth of Jesus' redemption. Scriptures, please. In truth ALL false religion actually have the same gospel that centers around MAN being his ultimate delivery and his own savior!

As always, you presume and put words in peoples mouths or thoughts in their heads that are not expressed in their posts at all. I was not addressing any of your posts or positions at all. Humanity has no works to boast of in the process of salvation at all, apart from making the right choice, and even that is only by the grace of God by way of conviction by the Holy Spirit of God. Sanctification is a gift from God, we cannot change our spots. Sanctification is necessary to salvation and it has nothing to do with our own righteousness but rather the righteousness of Christ by faith within the believer.

Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. 7 And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities. 8 But now, O Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand. 9 Be not wroth very sore, O Lord, neither remember iniquity for ever: behold, see, we beseech thee, we are all thy people.

Your presumptions about what I think or believe are just that presumptions. You do not know what I think or believe as your above post demonstrates.

Well, let's take a look...

The cretaceous was first identified by chalk beds.   The white cliffs of Dover, for example, are from the Cretaceous.   However, the most ancient layers of chalk contain fossils not found in more recent layers:
The Upper Chalk is the largest portion of the entire chalk beds (Melville 1982). It is up to 404 m in the Isle of Wight and 260 m in Dorset (Melville 1982). It is described as “milk-white, fine in its grain and smooth when cut” (Wright 1981). The base of the Upper Chalk is marked by the hardest layer of all, the Chalk Rock (Melville 1982). It has a nodular character and was deposited in unusually shallow water (Bennison 1969). It contains the fossils of sponges and the moulds of ammonites and gastropods (Melville 1982). Above the Chalk Rock the chalk becomes very smooth, white, and “massively bedded, except for nodular beds and hardgrounds in…the pilula Zone of the Isle of Wight and Dorset” (Melville 1982). There are many different types of fossils present in the Upper Chalk (Bennison 1969). These include remains of fishes, in particular teeth are quite common, as well as the remains of sharks and teeth of ray fishes (Melville 1982). This provides extra evidence to support the statement about how calm the water was in which the chalk was found. Sharks have a cartilaginous skeleton, and are usually not preserved well since they are so fragile (Wicander 2004). To find a shark skeleton means that the water was not disturbed much over a long period of time. Echinoids such as Micraster and Echinocorys are common and can be used to correlate different layers of chalk (Melville 1982). Ammonites are also used for correlation including the Hyphantoceras reussianum (Bennison 1969). Other fossils present include: gastropods, bivalves, oysters, brachiopods, and sponges which are commonly enclosed in flint (Melville 1982).

Notice that the waters in the upper layer of chalk (formed, remember by the shells of very tiny organisms) had to be quite calm to form the fossils.   But that's not the largest problem with Snelling's story.   Most of the uneroded chalk beds are something like 1,500 feet thick.   Remember solid rock made of packed shells of forams.     The average depth of the oceans is about 12,000 feet.    So if all those forams lived in the same time, the oceans would be so packed with forams that they would be like very loose mud.    And there's the problem of different fossil fauna low in the chalk layers that are different than those higher up.
So far, creationists have not found a satisfactory explanation for this. 

It is happening today.   In shallow seas, the same fall of tiny shells continues, burying other organisms with them.

All observations made by those who have already determined there was no global flood, and therefore exclusionary of any explanation including that scenario. In a global flood of course, the waters of the oceans would be far deeper than they are today, it would take quite some time for them to fully recede and settle to their eventual new bounds, they would be filled with the debris of mass extinction, which would include cases of both rapid burial during the most violent stages of the flood, and more slow layering after things calmed down and began to settle over time. The layering would of course be far more rapid than deep time evolution allows for and easily explains the anomolies deep time evolution cannot. The recession of the masses of waters distributed all over the planet would produce periods of both calm and violent incidents as massive amounts of waters were redistributed throughout the earth.

Your simply choose the observations of deep time theorists who think they know better than Jesus Christ and the prophets, above the testimony of the same. This is where you place your faith, that is all.


That doesn't even begin to address my post, no one here has rejected the testimony of Christ, it is YOU and you alone that judge us and refer to us as liars.

Oh, so you do believe in the biblical global flood. So how do you square that with evolutionist observations and speculations which ignore the same?


Women in the senate said Amy Coney could not be supported because she was too religious and that would affect her decisions in many of the SCOTUS rulings.

She... being Roman Catholic.

Now we have a "man" who is Roman Catholic... and a Jesuit an nary a word about his strong religious beliefs....

Perhaps because they know how he would vote and what they all squal about is not really the issue at all.....?

Bingo! Smoke and mirrors.

He absolutely did acknowledge the truth. Aloud for all to hear.

He said

40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.”

Do you not even fear God tells us this thief recognized Jesus was God.

How much more acknowledgement do you need?

And he recognized Him to know that Jesus had the ability to do something for him once Jesus got into His kingdom.

If you cannot see that then you need to get another bible teacher.

As to your  "None who are not sanctified in Christ Jesus can be saved, they are deluded by their own choice. "
You are saying the Jesus/God is not able to save whoever they will......that they are not able to see into a man's heart.

As to your "Those who reject truth ... The thief on the cross did not reject the truth. He told the truth aloud to all who could hear him to the other thief.

Jesus heard him loud and clear, as did others who were able to record what he had said.

I don't know who you are arguing with, I said and believe that the thief on the cross was sanctified by his acknowledgement of the most basic fundamental truth of the gospel message. As for your other point, yes God can sanctify whomever He wishes, but He has told us in His word that he will not sanctify those who reject truth. If you wish to believe He will that is your choice, but it does not change God's word concerning the matter.

Or he just convinced himself a fable without knowing anything.  Or maybe he was misled by someone who knew no more than he did.

Or maybe someone lied to him.

But what you're telling me he says, is completely wrong.  Demonstrably so.   If you'd like some more detail, and evidence, let me know which one you'd like me to show you first.


The following quote is from the link above, where the entire article may be viewed.

The Extent of the Chalk Beds

First, let’s take a look at where the main chalk beds are located. The white chalk cliffs of Dover are an iconic English landmark, but similar chalk cliffs are also found to the west along the southern English coast near Brighton, and to the north along part of the Yorkshire coast. The chalk beds that connect these areas are estimated to average over 1300 feet (400 m) in thickness. The same chalk beds also crop out along the Antrim coast of Northern Ireland, and can be traced right across Europe (France, Germany, Poland, and beyond) to Turkey, Egypt, Israel, and even Kazakhstan.


Similar chalk beds are found in the Midwestern USA, from Nebraska to Texas, and from Alabama to Colorado. They include the Niobrara Chalk in Kansas, which is famous for its astonishing variety of fossils. Chalk beds are also found in the Perth Basin of southern Western Australia (the Gingin Chalk) and contain the same fossils as the English chalk beds, as well as the same types of rock layers above and below them.

All these chalk beds are at the same relative level in the global geologic record. So they represent one global sedimentary rock unit. This similarity explains why they have all been assigned to the Cretaceous geologic period. (The name itself is derived from creta, the Latin word for chalk.) Since they’re all at the same level, we know all these chalk beds were deposited at the same time.

But did these chalk beds take 40 million years to accumulate? Absolutely not. The unusual, jumbled mix of fossils dispels the evolutionary scenario of slow-and-gradual accumulation of tiny grains in a placid sea over 40 million years.

The Fossils in the Chalk

The chalk fabric consists primarily of the tiny fossil remains of single-celled organisms called foraminifers, and of coccoliths (tiny plates which were the external skeletons of certain kinds of algae), set in a very fine-grained calcite. Even more important is the existence of so many larger fossils found mixed in the chalk beds. How did all these large, diverse creatures get buried in the ooze, unlike what we find on the ocean floor today?

The list of large fossils is huge. English chalk bed fossils include many big seafloor animals like sponges, corals, bryozoans (lace corals), brachiopods (lamp shells), bivalves (clams), gastropods (snails), ammonites, nautiloids, belemnites, arthropods (crabs and lobsters), and echinoderms (crinoids, starfish, and anemones).4 The chalk beds also contain a host of other creatures—the fossilized jaws and teeth of fish, and fossil remains of turtles, ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, marine lizards, flying reptiles (pterosaurs), and even dinosaurs, which lived on land.

The Niobrara Chalk in Kansas contains an even more impressive list of larger fossils—fish of various types up to 16 feet (5 m) long, sharks, turtles up to 13 feet (4 m) long; plesiosaurs up to 46 feet (14 m) long; mosasaurs up to 49 feet (15 m) long; pterosaurs with wingspans up to 30 feet (9 m); dinosaurs, such as ankylosaurs and hadrosaurs, up to 30 feet (9 m); and birds up to 6.5 feet (2 m) tall.5

How could so many large ocean-dwelling and land-dwelling creatures get buried together in ooze on the ocean floor in the past, when this is not happening today?

Jesus did not specify how the flood happened, or even if it was a parable or not.   It is most unwise to add new requirements for salvation.   Avoid it.  He does not care if you accept the way He did creation or not.

Let it go, and focus on what He wants from you.  That will save.   The rest won't.

To the contrary, let go of the lie you have latched onto in contradiction to the word of God, and grasp the truth of the words of Jesus Christ and scripture. Then you will not perish along with the lies of the evil one.


Why is that someone is always a "liar" in your opposition? If one believes they are telling the truth it can never be considered a lie. Misinformed, misled, uneducated, ignorance, yes, but a liar? No

All who contradict the word of God are liars, willful or not. God is truth, we are not. All will be judged by the word of God, not every individuals perception of truth. We are all liars, God alone is true. We will either submit to that truth unto salvation, or reject it as true children of the father of lies and share his fate. Deep time evolution, and the creation account of scripture cannot both be true.

Jn 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. 49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

Mt 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Lk 17:26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. 27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

Those wo reject the testimony of Jesus Christ who is the truth and the WORD OF GOD, are liars. They will be judged by His word in the last day. If the flood happened as Jesus Christ testified that it did, then evolution is a lie plain and simple.

A simple request ....42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.... demonstrates this thief knew
without doubt who Jesus was.  That was the necessary faith needed for his being saved.

As to living a sanctified life, whatever minutes or hours he had on his cross the bible is silent. Because it was not the point. Jesus was the point.

Those remaining hours after Jesus told the thief 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise. I would think he spent his remaining time in prayer of thanks, gratitude, repentance and shame.... all of which would
go toward that goal.

But aside from this....

What a strange question. As if you are questioning Jesus' ability to save that man away from the expected norm or perhaps
because it was out of the norm you are questioning if it was valid... Always remember... Jesus could and still can sanctify whomever he wants to.

In any event....

Was the thief on the cross sanctified. Don't know, Don't care... it is irrelevant.

Actually, very relevant. None but those who at the very least acknowledge the truth can be sanctified in Christ Jesus. None who are not sanctified in Christ Jesus can be saved, they are deluded by their own choice.

John 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

No one who willfully rejects the truths of God's word can be sanctified or in Christ. Christ is the living word of God, all who are sanctified in Him have and will acknowledge truth. The thief on the cross acknowledged the most basic and fundamental truth necessary to salvation and was at that time sanctified in Christ by the same. All the lost will be lost because they would not acknowledge the truth, not because they are sinners, we are all sinners. The basic fundamental premise of being a lost sinner, is rejection of the truth. Thus the fall of humanity in the garden by their acceptance of the evil one's lie. A lie is sin, and sin is a lie. God is truth, and Jesus Christ came to reveal that truth in our flesh. Sanctification is exactly about changing sinful liars living the lie, into obedient servants of all that is true which presides in and of God alone. Who alone is, creates, and sustains the only existence of reality.

2 Thess. 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 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. 13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

There is no sanctification for those who reject truth. Doing so is the rejection of the Holy Spirit of God, who convicts the world of sin, righteousness, and truth. All sins can be forgiven of God accept blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Rejecting the truths of God's word is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost who Himself convicts the world of truth.

Mt 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. 31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Those who reject truth to maintain a lie, commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit of God. They cannot be sanctified or saved.

I'm just pointing out the errors.

We find fossils almost all the way down in the geologic column.   That's just the way it is.   The sequence of fossils in the geologic column remains an insolvable problem for YE creationism.

Mostly, they don't.   The later layers (which are still forming in many places in the oceans) have some fossils of vertebrates, few of which required sudden burial to be there.   The relatively few exceptions, such as the Burgess shale, formed by means observed to happen today.  Would you like to learn about that?

And all of those fossils are found in layers which have only the fauna that lived at that time.  Hence, no modern birds and placoderms in the same strata, no vertebrates and trilobites together, no dinosaurs above the K-T boundary, and so on.   Would you like to learn more about how they are separated?

Sorry, that won't work.   As you now see, the separation of organisms in the layers of rock show that they were deposited at very different times. You simply do not want to go where such evidence leads or suggests, which is toward long ages, consistent with God's word.   Correct if I am wrong, and please do explain this phenomenon.

So basically, either the man in the video is a liar, or your are a liar, correct?

Christian Politics Forum / Re: America No Longer a Christian Nation
« on: Sat Jul 14, 2018 - 12:28:23 »
Yes, Protestant biblical Christianity has been and is on the way out. Roman Catholic Christianity, atheism, and the anything goes have been on the way in.


Looks like Trump is trying to appoint his second Jesuit trained man to the Supreme Court. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch already appointed and Brett Kavanaugh both attended the same Jesuit High School even at the same time, and Jesuit Georgetown University. The Counter-reformation continues to march steadily forward as "Protestantism" increasingly falls asleep behind the wheel ready to crash and burn. So be it, come Lord Jesus.

These people serve Rome, not Republicans or Democrats, Conservatives or liberals, or the American people. Such are simply the two party system or ideologies Rome manipulates to her own ends.

Seventh Day Adventist Forum / Re: Roman politics
« on: Sat Jul 14, 2018 - 11:52:14 »

Looks like Trump is trying to appoint his second Jesuit trained man to the Supreme Court. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch already appointed and Brett Kavanaugh both attended the same Jesuit High School even at the same time, and Jesuit Georgetown University. The Counter-reformation continues to march steadily forward as "Protestantism" increasingly falls asleep behind the wheel ready to crash and burn. So be it, come Lord Jesus.

Theology Forum / Re: How holy do you feel?
« on: Sat Jul 14, 2018 - 10:29:24 »
Chances are, if you feel like our are holy, you most certainly are not.

Sanctification is the work of a life time. It concerns the transformation of a rebellious sinner into an obedient child of God. The acceptance of Jesus Christ as one's personal Savior, is most certainly a result of the working out of the process of sanctification. The thief on the cross was most certainly involved in that process, revealed by the decision he made there on the cross. While sanctification is an ongoing work during one's entire life, this does not equate to sanctification taking a life time to obtain.

Those who are justified are also sanctified, there is not one without the other among the saved. The lost are justified in Christ, but they cannot be saved until they are sanctified by Him as well. In Christ Jesus humanity has been delivered from the inherited condemnation of their parents fall in the garden. Having been justified in Christ, each will now determine their own fate by choosing sanctification and or newness of life in Christ unto salvation, or rejecting the same and having this life only.

They don't.  Some are literally miles above others.

Species tend to live for tens of thousands of years.   Some, a lot longer.  But they are sorted nicely according to age.   This is why Haldane suggested that one easy refutation of evolution would be a rabbit in Cambrian deposits.

Seems to work out just as one would expect.

Apparently you didn't watch the video, or if you did you didn't pay much attention to the details, or if you did your are simply ignoring that which doesn't fit into your chosen belief system.

How does a massive global layer of chalk composed of tiny shell fish and lime grains which supposedly took millions of years to form at a rate of 1/4 inch per thousand years, contain so many varying kinds of fossils which require rapid burial to be there? Fully developed crinoids, very large fish even with undigested other fish inside them which they had just consumed, large pliosaurs, turtles, dinosaurs, and birds are all found within these globally distributed chalk beds. There is only one answer, the layer was deposited rapidly, not over the course of millions of years. You simply do not want to go where such evidence leads or suggests, which is toward a global flood as described in God's word. Correct if I am wrong, and please do explain this phenomenon. 

Seems to me, you are all missing the point. The most basic questions are never asked or answered. Who is facilitating all of this mass migration, and why do they care nothing at all about what the citizens of the various nations being affected think? Those responsible obviously care nothing about government for and by the people, and what they are doing is  detrimental to the same. It is all intended to bypass and eventually do away with the rights, protections, and political influence of the informed tax paying citizens upon whose backs these rat fink politicians ride their their power and wealth.

General Discussion Forum / Re: LGBTQI2S-P A time that has come?
« on: Sat Jul 14, 2018 - 09:03:25 »
Acceptance and tolerance of a minority are one thing, submission to and being controlled by a minority is another thing altogether. While it is right and of course Christian to be tolerant and accepting as far as possible, it is neither right nor Christian to allow a minority to force itself upon the majority by way of passive submission to the standards of their apparent rule. Just as a majority should not be able to force itself upon minorities, neither of course should minorities be able to force their views and perspectives upon a majority simply by being present. Demanding that everyone deny the reality which exists right in front of everyones face because you belong to a minority which refuses that reality, should not be acceptable or tolerated.

End Times Forum / Re: Timeline for Head of Gold:
« on: Sun Jul 08, 2018 - 19:34:28 »
The First Witness
The first witness who claims our attention is undoubtedly Irenaeus, appointed Bishop of Lyons, A.D. 177, in succession to Pothinus, whose age, ninety years, takes us back to the generation that saw the last of the Apostles, and with whom Irenaeus, as one of his Presbyters, can scarcely have failed to have had familiar intercourse. The words of Irenaeus have been preserved by Eusebius, “for no long time ago was it (the Revelation) seen, but almost in our generation, at the end of the reign of Domitian.”

An effort no doubt has been made to evade the force of the conclusion to which these words lead, by suggesting that the subject of [the Greek word] in the sentence is not “the Revelation” but St. John himself – not “it” but “he” was seen.

Argument against such a supposition may be dispensed with. Although supported by an able writer (generally supposed to be Dr. Goodwin) on the Apocalypse in the Biblical Review, and by Dr. Macdonald in his Life and Writings of t. John, no Greek scholar would for a moment endeavour to defend it.

Weiss has indeed recently advanced another proposal for getting rid of the testimony of Irenaeus. Proceeding upon the supposition that the beast of chapter 17:11, who is the eighth and of the seven, is Domitian he concludes that Iranaeus, believing St. John to be a prophet, could entertain no other idea than an Apocalypse so associated with the terrors of that reign must have been written at that time.

That is, however, inconsistent with the conclusion to which the belief of Irenaeus in the prophetic character of St. John would have naturally led him. The apostle he thought was a true prophet of God. Why then should he have waited till the end of Domitian’s reign, for it is of “the end of the Reign” that Irenaeus speaks, before he beheld the visions and uttered the prophecy? Would not he have more clearly revealed his prophetic character had he both seen and spoken at an earlier date?

The supposition of Weiss, so far from accounting for the mistakes thought to have been committed by Irenaeus, is the very thing that would have led that Father to an entirely different conclusion had the circumstances of the case not been too strong for him.

The testimony of Irenaeus is therefore clear. The meaning of his statement is indisputable; and we must either accept it or all (what may certainly have happened) that he was mistaken. Yet he was not likely to be mistaken, and several other considerations lay weight to the witness he bears with so much precision.

The following may be mentioned:
1) His nearness to the apostolic age; for he cannot have been born later that A.D. 130, while many have contended that his birth should be placed at least twenty or twenty-five years earlier this century.

2) The well-known fact that he had been a disciple and friend of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, who had been a contemporary of the apostle John himself, who had held intercourse with him and who was wont to relate in the circle of his friends incidents out of that deeply interesting past. In this respect Irenaeus’s own letter to Florius, in which he details the nature of his intercourse with Polycarp, will always remain one of the most precious monuments of Christian antiquity, showing as it does in the clearest manner the spirit of inquiry, the intelligence, the vivacity, and the effort to form distinct conceptions of times anterior to their own, by which these old Fathers of the Church were marked. 3) The object which Irenaeus had in view in making the statement now commented on. He had been discussing the number of the beast as given in Rev. 13:18, and it goes on to explain that it was only at some risk that anyone could endeavour to interpret it; for, had the Apostle desired “the present time” to know the interpretation, he could himself have given it, inasmuch as the vision had been granted him on the very borders of the generation to which Irenaeus spoke.
The date of the book was thus no trifling matter in the eyes of this Father, for it powerfully affected the relation in which he stood to one of the most difficult mysteries of the Apocalypse. 4) The confidence of Eusebius in the statement made by him. This confidence, it will not be denied, appears in all that Eusebius has said upon the point; and no one could have know better than he any counter opinions which are supposed to have existed long before his day, and to have formed another and wholly different current of tradition.

It is unnecessary to say more. There need be no hesitation in asserting that in regard to few facts of early Christian antiquity have we a statement more positively or clearly given than that of Irenaeus, that the Seer beheld the visions of his book at the end of Domitian’s reign, that is, about A.D. 96.

Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the Apocalypse, Macmillan and Co., 1893, pp 77-79.

Clement of Alexandria
The Second Witness
We turn next to the testimony of Clement of Alexandria who flourished towards the close of the second and early part of the third century. For this we are again indebted to Eusebius, who quotes from Clement the beautiful story of the young robber, in order to prove that, after the death of Domitian, the Apostle John returned from his exile in Patmos to Ephesus, and presided over the churches there.

It is true that, in his account of the story, Clement does not name Domitian, saying merely that John had returned “after the death of the tyrant”. But no one can read Eusebius without seeing that he at least distinctly understood Clement to mean that John had been banished to Patmos by Domitian, and that, at a period subsequent to that Emperor’s death, he had presided over the church in the neighborhood of Ephesus.

Nor is there any force in the objection that, if so, the Apostle must have lived into the second century, because the incidents of that story, beginning only about A.D. 95, would require some years for their complete development.

Nothing is told that might not have happened in the course of a single year; while, if we suppose, and it is the only other possible supposition, that St. John’s return took place after the death of Nero, when he was in all probability not more than sixty years of age, and when he may have been in reality nearly ten years less, many expressions of the narrative of Clement, such as “forgetful of his age,” and “thy aged father,” lose their force, and the whole object of its quotation by Eusebius is destroyed.At the close of the second century, therefore, the impression certainly prevailed in Alexandria that St. John’s banishment to Patmos had taken place under Domitian, and that before that date the Book of Revelation could not have been penned.
Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the Apocalypse, Macmillan and Co., 1893, pp 80,81.

The Third Witness
The evidence of Tertullian, but little later than that of Clement, for he died A.D. 240, may appropriately follow. His own words indeed will hardly justify any positive conclusion upon the point, for, after having spoken of Nero as the first persecutor of the Christians, he merely adds, “Domitian, too, a man of Nero’s type in cruelty, tried his hand at persecution; but as he had something of the human in him, he soon put an end to what he had begun, even restoring again those whom he had banished.”

But Eusebius notices the passage in such a manner as to show that he believed St. John to be included among those to whom Tertullian refers.
Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the Apocalypse, London, 1893. p 81.

The Fourth Witness
Passing to another region of the Church, we are met by the testimony of Victorinus, Bishop of Pettau, in Pannonia, who was martyred under Diocletian, A.D. 303. So far as is known he is the earliest commentator on the Apocalypse; and it is natural to think that, as a commentator, he would take a greater than ordinary interest in such question as is now before us.

His testimony is of the most specific kind, for, commenting on Chapter 10:11, he says that “when John said these things he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the labour of the mines by Caesar Domitian. There, he saw the Apocalypse.”
Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on theApocalypse, London, 1893. p 82.

The Fifth Witness
In still another quarter we meet Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea (A,D. 260 to A.D. 339), a man whose inquiring spirit led him to search out, and to preserve in his writings, many ancient documents of incalculable value to the student of early Christian antiquity.

Of his opinion there can be no doubt. We have already found him citing Irenaeus and Clement as authorities in favour of everything in connexion with this matter for which we need to contend; and, in his own historical account of the fourteenth year of Domitian’s reign, he says of the Apostle John that “he was banished” at that time “to Patmos, where he saw the Apocalypse, as Irenaeus shows.” 
Nor is there any ground for the assertion that Eusebius simply repeated what Irenaeus had said more than a century before. That he relied greatly upon Irenaeus is unquestionable. His very object was to collect and preserve the testimonies which seemed to him to warrant a definite conclusion.

But he did not depend upon Irenaeus alone. Referring to the point before us, he in one place names also Clement of Alexandria as his authority, and in another the “tradition of the ancients”.
Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the Apocalypse, Macmillan and Co., 1893, pp 82.

The Sixth Witness
This list of witnesses may be fitly closed with Jerome, who died A.D. 420, the most learned of all the Fathers except Origen, and one who, as is well known, devoted himself to the study of Scripture with a zeal not even surpassed by that of his illustrious predecessor in the same field. Speaking of St. John in his Treatise on IllustriousMen, he says of him that “having been banished in the fourteenth year of Domitian to the island of  Patmos, he wrote the Apocalypse.”

Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the Apocalypse, London, 1893. pp 83.

A Discordant Voice
Thus far the evidence adduced on behalf of the composition of the Apocalypse before the fall of Jerusalem may without impropriety be spoken of as unworthy of regard. It is somewhat different when we come to Epiphanius, appointed Bishop of Salamis A.D. 367, and one of the most voluminous writers of his age.

Lucke, anxious as he is to find proof of the earlier date, speaks of him as the first to interrupt the Irenaeus tradition. What does the interruption amount to? Epiphanius has spoken upon the point in two passages. In the first, he says that John, though he shrank from the task, was constrained by the Holy Spirit to write a Gospel, “in his old age, when he had spent ninety years of life, after his return from Patmos, which took place in the reign of the Emperor Claudius.”

In the second, he speaks of the Apostle as having prophesied in the time of Emperor Claudius,  when he went to the island of Patmos.

The impossibility of receiving these statements must be at once apparent. The Emperor Claudius died in A.D. 54, so that St. John was even then  ninety years old, and that he wrote his Gospel at  that time.

Besides this, it is to be observed that Claudius did not persecute the Christians generally, though  they may be included among “the Jews” whom  he banished from Rome. The universal voice of  early Christian antiquity is that Nero was the first  persecutor, Domitian the second.

How Epiphanius was led into his mistake, whether by that general inaccuracy and want of  critical acumen for which he is noted, or by some  misapprehension connected with the words of  Acts 18:2, it is impossible to say; but that there is  error either on his part or on the part of those  who copied him there can be hardly a moment’s  doubt.

This is rendered the more probable by the singular fact that the story of Epiphanius appears  never to have made the slightest impression upon  those that came after him. No tradition in that  form exists; the statement seems to have been  forgotten until revived by Grotius and Hammond;  and it now stands in the pages of its author, a striking instance of the perplexity which  one single inaccuracy may introduce into our  efforts to reconstruct the past.
Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the Apocalypse,  London, 1893. pp 89,90

Milligan was the professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism  at The University of Aberdeen. His comments on the dating  of the Apocalypse were originally published as appendices  in the Volume “The Revelation of St. John” first published  in 1886.

Summary of Early Witnesses
From Iranaeus to Jerome
Testimonies subsequent to these [those after  Jerome], however clear, hardly possess so much  authority as to entitle them to quotation.  Looking back upon what has been said we have  the following result. From the first witness who  speaks upon the point in the latter half of the  second century down to the first half of the  fifth we have a succession of Fathers bearing  testimony with one accord, and in language  which admits of no misunderstanding, to the fact  that St. John was banished to Patmos under the  reign of Domitian, and that there he beheld those  visions of the Apocalypse which he afterwards committed to writing.

These Fathers, too, are men who in their interest  in the subject immediately in hand (to say nothing  of other subjects), in ability, learning, and critical  insight into the history of bygone times surpass  all the Fathers, except one to be afterwards  mentioned, of their respective eras.

In their spheres of labour, if not by birth, they  belong to the most different and widespread  regions of the Church - Gaul, Alexandria, North  Africa, Pannonia, Syria and Rome.

They are thus in a great degree independent  of each other, and they convey to us the  incontestable impression that, for at least the first  four centuries of the Christian era and over the  whole extent of the Christian Church, it was  firmly believed that St. John had beheld the  visions of the Apocalypse in the days of Domitian  and not of Nero.
Milligan, William, D.D., Discussions on the  Apocalypse,London,1893.p92.


So, how do all these fossils end up in one layer all across the earth, while individual fossils within the same occupy space consisting of what would be layers representing thousands to tens of thousands of years according to deep time? Doesn't work out very well concerning what we know about fossil formation.

Hi Amo. I just thought it rather humorous that one of the people featured in "Video Ministries" from your link is a devout Christian Evolutionist.  ::crackup::

Anyhow, hope your doing well and have a blessed day! ::smile::

Even "Christian" evolutionists are right about some things.

General Discussion Forum / Re: What do we think of this?
« on: Sun Jul 08, 2018 - 17:25:15 »
HEy Dave, hope you're well.
 What do we think of this?
 I believe Gay and Lesbian issues are a result of another assault on Christianity by Satan. But, not for the most expressed reasons.
 I believe a couple satan's most favored tools against Christians are hatred and bigotry. And, it works better than most of his other enticements. We are to love our neighbors as ourselves. That doesn't mean condone their behavior, but it certainly doesn't mean to treat them like dogs or rejects. I'm not sure there is a person anywhere that we are to treat with less than Christian love. If there is, then the responsibility, for that is on us, not the gays or lesbians. I believe we hurt ourselves by condemning others. Maybe I've just missed it, but I don't remember anywhere we are called to hate our neighbors. And to allow them to steal, or us to give away, our fruits of the Spirit is our responsibility, not the fault of others.
 Seems to me.

The law condemns all of us. Each individual will either respond to that condemnation under the conviction of the Holy Spirit of God unto repentance and salvation, or rejection and destruction. While it is not our place to condemn, it is most certainly not only our place, but our duty to warn the rejector of God's grace of the consequences of the same. Unfortunately, even when the truth is spoken and revealed out of true love and concern for those in danger, it is perceived as condemnation by those who will reject the convicting power of the Holy Spirit of God. So they hated our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, so they will hate us also.

General Discussion Forum / Re: What do we think of this?
« on: Sat Jul 07, 2018 - 09:07:29 »
Gen 19:23 The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar. 24 Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven; 25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground. 26 But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt. 27 And Abraham gat up early in the morning to the place where he stood before the Lord: 28 And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace.

Jude 1:5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. 6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

2 Pet 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?


More examples of just how shaky supposedly unquestionable fact oriented "science" really is.

Seventh Day Adventist Forum / Re: Roman politics
« on: Sat Jun 30, 2018 - 18:09:06 »

The following excerpts are from an article linked above co-authored by Amy Coney, who is now being considered for the Supreme court. All emphasis is mine.

It is hard to get an exact figure, but it appears that as many as one-fourth of all federal judges may be Catholic.! Moreover, although there has been some variation in Catholic teaching about the death penalty over the years, the pope and the American bishops have recently offered clear and forceful denunciations that have drawn considerable public attention................................... ...............

To anticipate our conclusions just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recom- mendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving......................

The modem Catholic opposition to the death penalty has been driven by the conviction that neither of these arguments about the defense of society-the need for incapacitation and deterrence-is persuasive in developed countries. The Pontifical Commission for Justice and
Peace, which studied the question at the request of the American Catholic bishops, concluded in 1976 that "There is no convincing evidence to support the contention that [the death penalty] is exemplary or, in modem terms, a deterrent. [Therefore] it can be concluded that capital punishment is outside the realm of practicable just punishments." 2 Four years later the National Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a Statement on Capital Punishment which concluded "that in the conditions of contemporary American society, the legitimate purposes of punishment do not justify the imposition of the death penalty."' 3

Catholic judges must answer some complex moral and legal ques- tions in deciding whether to sit in death penalty cases. Sometimes (as with direct appeals of death sentences) the right answers are not obvious. But in a system that effectively leaves the decision up to the judge, these are questions that responsible Catholics must consider seriously. Judges cannot-nor should they try to-align our legal system with the Church's moral teaching whenever the two diverge. They should, however, conform their own behavior to the Church's standard. Perhaps their good example will have some effect.

All Christians understand that they must obey the word of God rather than or above man. What happens though, when certain Christians place the words of a man constantly addressing the politics and practice of nations, on a par with the word of God? History has already answered this question many times over. As we increasingly choose to ignore histories testimony in regard to the same, we are increasingly doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

The Roman Catholic Church, with all its ramifications throughout the world, forms one vast organization under the control, and designed to serve the interests, of the papal see. Its millions of communicants, in every country on the globe, are instructed to hold themselves as bound in allegiance to the pope. Whatever their nationality or their government, they are to regard the authority of the church as above all other. Though they may take the oath pledging their loyalty to the state, yet back of this lies the vow of obedience to Rome, absolving them from every pledge inimical to her interests.(The Great Controversy, Ellen G. White, Chap. 35 LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE THREATENED, Pg. 580)

Barbarian observes:
Right.  Neither YE creationism, or any other belief about how God created life, is Christian orthodoxy.    Christians disagree about this, unless they try to make their personal interpretation into the Word of God, they are at no risk of losing their salvation from those beliefs.

 Since God created all things, life is another of His creations.   In this world, He uses nature to create it.

Amo presents his beliefs:
I think you're wrong about this.    Yes, no one fully understands scripture.   As Paul says:

1 Corinthians 13:12 We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know even as I am known.

Creationists aren't going to hell for refusing to accept God's word about creation.   That's not a salvation issue.   Theology won't save you.   What is in your heart saves you.    Loving God and loving your fellow man will save you.

Are non-believers going to hell?    What does Jesus say? 

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 25:31 And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty. [32] And all nations shall be gathered together before him, and he shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats: [33] And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. [34] Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. [35] For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in:

[36] Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me. [37] Then shall the just answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and fed thee; thirsty, and gave thee drink? [38] And when did we see thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and covered thee? [39] Or when did we see thee sick or in prison, and came to thee? [40] And the king answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.

[41] Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. [42] For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink. [43] I was a stranger, and you took me not in: naked, and you covered me not: sick and in prison, and you did not visit me. [44] Then they also shall answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to thee? [45] Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me.

[46] And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting.   

Romans 2:13  For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves: [15] Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending one another,

No, that is just the way you interpret it Barbarian. According to your own exemplified standard, any and all are free to claim that is just your interpretation and believe otherwise without any effect upon their salvation. Nor do they need to explain what the verses you shared really do mean in contrast to your false claim of what they mean because of your faulty interpretation. Not according to your exemplified standard regarding creation and the flood in any case.

General Discussion Forum / Re: Hitler and the Jews
« on: Sun Jun 24, 2018 - 13:57:11 »
Anti-Semitism was very popular on the right at that time.   There was considerable admiration for fascism in the United States in the 20s and 30s.   Mussolini was especially cited as an example of the way fascism could "make the trains run on time."

The extreme right repeatedly attacked Roosevelt by claiming he was actually Jewish, and therefore seeking to undermine the United States:

You no doubt were not there, so you must have read the above somewhere. How about sharing your sources and who the right you are referring to actually was. I have found other information you have stated as matter of fact, not to be so. Couldn't tell you myself, but would like more than a Barbarian says so if you don't mind.


Interesting video. Apparently it is to only YE creationists that serious problems with the theory of evolution.

Seventh Day Adventist Forum / Re: Roman politics
« on: Sat Jun 23, 2018 - 13:53:10 »

How social workers can advance Catholic social teaching

Washington D.C., Nov 6, 2017 / 03:04 am (CNA/EWTN News).- How social workers can live their faith in the workplace was the focus of the latest annual conference of the Catholic Social Workers National Association.

“The association’s members … are united and called to live out the Gospel to carry out his mission, not only in our personal lives but professional as well,” president and co-founder Kathleen Neher told CNA Nov. 1.

“We share a common belief, which is to bring forth a culture of life by promoting the Catholic social teachings in the area of social work and in keeping with and faithful to the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.”

The association’s annual conference began Nov. 3 in in Washington D.C. at the Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in America. The group of professionals and students seek to have their occupation guided by the teachings of the Church. The organization also acts as a place of Catholic formation and source of spiritual strength.

In collaboration with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the group answers ethical questions regarding field practices and educates Catholics on what legislation is supported by the Church.

Neher said the association’s members gather annually “to network, pray and learn about current developments in their practice” with lectures on a wide variety of professions.

She said the goal of the conference is “to educate members on recent developments, gather Catholic social workers who don’t normally have a way to express their faith and beliefs in an accepting forum, and to celebrate our faith as we are united with the Catholic Church.”

Founded in 2005, the association’s members work in government agencies, health clinics, faith-based organizations and universities. They often work with the most vulnerable: immigrants, addicts, veterans, pregnant women, children and the poor.

Neher said the association members want their clients to see them as representatives of St. Louis de Marillac, someone who cares deeply about moral and social problems and as “someone whose step they listen for as we go about serving their needs,” in his words.

Auxiliary Bishop Timothy Senior of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia is an episcopal liaison to the group. He told CNA that a social worker’s profession is aligned to the Gospel’s description of charity: to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and visit the imprisoned.

Although works of mercy are part of the job for social workers, Bishop Senior said, it is still the role of all the laity to be a light of faith in the world.

“To have Catholics living their faith, that is something we want in every profession,” he said. “We want Catholics committing Catholics to be missionary disciples, as Pope Francis has called us all to be as a Church perpetually on mission.”

However, for the social worker, dealing regularly with intractable social problems is exhausting and challenging, In the bishop’s view, the organization is a source of spiritual and intellectual support.

“Social workers work hard and you are dealing with problems all the time and there is no way you can do that without finding some resource for life and refreshment,” he reflected. “We have ready access to that in our faith.”

In his role within the association, Bishop Senior will provide answers for members who struggle with a specific approach of an agency or have ethical questions on a certain practice in the field.

The association also informs its members on current legal issues. It advocates for laws in defense of human dignity.“Our advocacy is grounded in Catholic social teaching and the teaching of the Church. Information is shared on a regular basis on issues that are impacting and of concern to social workers, such as religious freedom, sexuality and gender issues,” Neher told CNA.

Catholic social teaching is not only for Catholics, Bishop Senior said, but it envisions a just system he hopes would be made available for anyone.

“Catholic social workers are committed to implementing that vision for a just society, for the respect for human life, or addressing people in extreme poverty and their needs,” he said.

As is obvious from the above article, Catholics living their faith and being missionaries, includes implementing the churches social doctrines and teachings through legislation in their perspective areas. Again, this is nothing new, this is the papacy doing what it has always done as soon as opportunity provides. Its ultimate goal is always to make itself the dominant force in and of government to establish itself through the rule of national or international law, rather than through the Holy Spirit of God by way of conviction and conversion. A course truly opposed to the teachings and living example of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and the true church which He established.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 85