Theistic Evolutuonists

Page 3 of 3 (52 items) < Previous 1 2 3
This post has 51 Replies | 3 Followers

Posts 371
Batman | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 9 2014 9:20 PM

Paul C:

MJ. Smith:
I would suggest Tielhard de Chardin as an interesting historical starting point. He's not in Logos but he should be.
Isn't he the guy who helped Dawson promote the Piltdown Man hoax? A devoted Darwinist? We REALLY need that trash in Logos?

Why not? Apparently Logos Bible Software no longer means Bible Software. Apparently now, it means Oscar Wilder, Bram Stroker's Dracula. 
I was feeling guilty about my sentiments towards Logos; now I'm once again returning to my original sentiments. 

Posts 4934
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Apr 9 2014 10:56 PM

Has Wilde gotten Wilder since he passed? Surprise

Posts 11064
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 10 2014 5:56 AM

Oscar's probably been reading the Continental Commentary in his 'spare' time.  Time that's in addition to normal time.

But Libronix went pretty far afield subject-wise, so Logos Inc. isn't covering particularly new ground.

I think people are getting confused by 're-badging' for marketing purposes.  I remember a ways back, the holy writings were re-badged as 'the Bible'.  One could even say for marketing purposes as well.  Of course the Logos software is probably not holy.  But being 'Bible Software' makes it look more Bible-ish.

"I didn't know God made honky tonk angels."

Posts 297
Schezic | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 10 2014 5:25 PM

Batman:

Paul C:

MJ. Smith:
I would suggest Tielhard de Chardin as an interesting historical starting point. He's not in Logos but he should be.
Isn't he the guy who helped Dawson promote the Piltdown Man hoax? A devoted Darwinist? We REALLY need that trash in Logos?

Why not? Apparently Logos Bible Software no longer means Bible Software. Apparently now, it means Oscar Wilder, Bram Stroker's Dracula. 
I was feeling guilty about my sentiments towards Logos; now I'm once again returning to my original sentiments. 

I can see no reason that I would need Dracula, ETC indexed and searchable. These fiction/fantasy/secular titles could just as easily be marketed in Vyrso, for a lot less. But the more disturbing issue is the conspiracy to corrupt scientific evidence to forward an evolutionary agenda, Under the guise of Bible commentary.

Posts 3996
abondservant | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Apr 11 2014 8:16 PM

When I get back to NC (home in fl for break) I will see if I can find the reference I read. Till then, I'm spending much of my time with my nephew, and staying outdoors :)

L2 lvl4, L3 Scholars, L4 Scholars, L5 Platinum,  L6 Collectors. L7 Baptist Portfolio. L8 Platinum & WORDsearch

Posts 117
Paul C | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 12 2014 1:11 PM

Bob Pritchett:
I agree that there's probably more 'danger' in some of the 'biblical' books than in classic fiction -- because it's labeled fiction, where bad theology is not!
 From This Thread. >>> http://community.logos.com/forums/t/83477.aspx 

Posts 130
Willard Scott | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 1:26 AM

Paul C:

Bob Pritchett:
I agree that there's probably more 'danger' in some of the 'biblical' books than in classic fiction -- because it's labeled fiction, where bad theology is not!
 From This Thread. >>> http://community.logos.com/forums/t/83477.aspx 

Possibly that provides hope that he will see the danger in The writings of Tielhard de Chardin and his ilk, And leave them out of Logos.

Posts 29347
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 1:55 AM

Willard Scott:
Possibly that provides hope that he will see the danger in The writings of Tielhard de Chardin and his ilk,

I would be very surprised if you have actually read Tielhard and actually know his theology as opposed to the regurgitations of those who dislike his position. Given that he consistently appears on lists of important theologians of the last century, he belongs in Logos as an essential figure whether or not you personally care to know anything about him. There are a number of authors in Logos that I suspect will be long forgotten in a century - I see the danger as residing primarily in their works. I've found a very convenient way of handling them- once I discover the valuelessness of their writings, I cease to purchase additional works by them. I don't happen to agree with Tielhard de Chardin but I do consider it important to understand him and to have him available for verifying my memory or fill in the gaps.

If it has been translated, perhaps we need Wieland Zademach (ed.): Reich Gottes für diese Welt – Theologie gegen den Strich. Erbe der Väter (L. Ragaz/M. Buber/H. J. Iwand/J. L. Hromadka/H. Gollwitzer/P. Teilhard de Chardin).

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 4934
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 5:38 AM

Willard Scott:

Paul C:

Bob Pritchett:
I agree that there's probably more 'danger' in some of the 'biblical' books than in classic fiction -- because it's labeled fiction, where bad theology is not!
 From This Thread. >>> http://community.logos.com/forums/t/83477.aspx 

Possibly that provides hope that he will see the danger in The writings of Tielhard de Chardin and his ilk, And leave them out of Logos.

I'm not looking to pick a fight, Willard, but I bet I could take your favorite top 5 authors, even your top 50, and demonstrate blasphemy and heresy in every one of them. 'Elohhiym Himself calls it slander. Where the Bible is concerned, a book ghost-authored by a God who explicitly states His intention to hide both Himself and His intentions, getting cocky about which humans are right or wrong is fraught with danger...because in such disputes the correct answer is nearly always "neither".

On the other hand, the only legitimate way to demonstrate an author's error is to engage the author's words. That can only be done if one has access to them. I support the inclusion of whatever Logos can find a market for, and much besides.

Posts 11064
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 15 2014 6:34 AM

David ... ilk hunting's only allowed during ilk season.

"I didn't know God made honky tonk angels."

Posts 4934
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 19 2014 6:26 AM

David Paul:

Bill Coley:

David Paul:
I think YHWH created creation with physical and mathematical characteristics that are essentially apparitions. By "apparition" I mean that they have a seeming history that in fact never existed or took place. Dinosaurs never existed except as fossils. The Big Bang with the subsequent cosmic inflation just found to be supported by measurements made by the BICEP2 radio telescope? Never happened, even though the physical evidence and math support the idea. To me, this is a far more plausible and far less ludicrous idea than the typical young earther attempts to tweak the existing physical evidence, which supports billions of years of existence, in order to force it to support a ~6000 year old creation out of nothing.

David,

First, from what I know of Stephen Hawking's recent change of mind, your reply earlier in this thread specifying black holes, not the Big Bang, as the focus of his concerns was spot on. Very well done!

Second, while your defense of a young earth explains how it could be that every bit of available scientific evidence suggests the planet to be billions of years old, it suffers from a profound weakness. Why would a God who is both the source and inspiration for truth create such a fundamentally deceptive world? Why would God give us curious, perceptive, investigative minds, then surround us with evidence whose central intent is to mislead? More, how could a God responsible for a creation of such fraudulent identity expect us to believe anything else that God ever said? If you lie to me about the price you paid for your bubble gum, I'm likely to deem it an inconsequential minor offense. But if for as long as I have known you, you have lied to me about who you are, where you came from, and why you're in my life, your credibility with me will suffer precipitously, and for good reason.

Bill, I have an answer for your question, but I'm not sure you are prepared to accept it. I'm not saying that out of condescension. It's more a matter of prophecy. The reasons why I don't have any problem with the issues you have raised and consider troublesome are tied very closely to YHWH's prophetic purposes. For that reason, they are not easily comprehended, because He made prophecy deliberately difficult to understand. Not only that, but virtually every hermeneutics book you could purchase from Logos or elsewhere will give you "rules" for Bible interpretation that absolutely exclude the methodology by which comprehending prophecy is possible. That is by Design. It is precisely how (among other considerations) YHWH has been able to "seal" the Book until the time of the end.

To get a bit closer to your concerns, prophecy outlines a God that is radically different than what Christians perceive. Call that absurd, but something has to account for people who call Yeishuu`a "Lord" and engage is churchianity only to have Him say, "I never knew you." Mt. 7:23. Something has to account for Hab. 1:5. Prophecy does account for those anomalies in a clear fashion. Numerous Christian axioms, however, make seeing and accepting such things nearly impossible. That said, YHWH is not who you think He is. That's not a put down. It's a prophetic reality that neither you nor anyone else can really do anything about. That universal condition, the famine of the hearing of the word of YHWH (Amos 8:11) is what He has established as part of His plan. The good news is that if you eat your Wheaties and don't wander out into traffic, you may well get to experience the "wake up call" when the lights get turned back on.

See the part of your question I bolded? Read Job 12:16, then Job 12:24, 25 (Read that whole section from vv. 12-25 for the full context). The book of Job has very little to do with Job and the other four dudes with him. It is a sardine can of prophecy covering a multitude of concerns. In some ways it is the most important book of the Bible because it includes a significant part of the "set up", by which I mean Job 1 & 2. By "set up", I mean the whole driving concept that underlies and defines what is motivating YHWH's actions. These issues and concerns are generally totally overlooked, but they tie into Genesis 3 in dovetail fashion. YHWH isn't primarily concerned with you or me, shocking as that may seem. There is a deep sense in which we are merely a by-product of other concerns that YHWH has. I'm not saying "afterthought"--there is no such thing where YHWH is concerned. But the lack of concern He shows in explaining anything to Job is sufficiently indicative of my assertion. Consider this: effectively, because Job never is told the "why" or "how" concerning his Satanic attack, YHWH has deceived Job. He isn't the only one. Ask Jeremiah...Jer. 20:7. People talk often of YHWH's mysterious ways. They are mysterious only if you don't understand what He is trying to accomplish and why...but He has deliberately and purposefully "hidden" those purposes and motivations up to this point in time. How? As shocking as it will be to hear...deception is one of those ways. [Why? Essentially, for the shock value. He intends on turning virtually everyone's sense of stability upside down, primarily because that stability isn't grounded in His will.] I imagine you won't believe that, which is why I was quite happy to find this book available on Amazon. Having someone else also articulating this concept will take some of the pressure off of me. Even though Anderson's focus is terribly narrow, he at least sees a portion of what is overlooked, ignored, or explained away by virtually everyone else.

Why...How...is this possible? It is actually incredibly simple. It must be so. The principle of Godly justice demands it. Mt. 7:2, Lev. 24:20. If someone is a deceiver, Godly justice requires they receive their comeuppance by way of deception. If someone lays a trap or snare, he will fall into it or be taken by it whether he likes it or not. Job 18:5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Check out Psa. 18:26, and look at it in the NET Bible. That isn't the same God that almost anyone thinks they know...but it is the God of the Bible. Am I saying YHWH lies? No, I'm saying He actively gets others to do it for Him. 1 Kgs. 22:19, 20, 21, 22, 23. " Why? Simple...those He deceives deserve it.

The typical response to what I'm saying is a fulfillment of the aforementioned Hab. 1:5, usually peppered with scoffing and requisite mentions of tin foil hats. So be it. Also common is a mix of anger, fear, resentment, and dismissal grounded in pride. No one...NO ONE...can accept that they don't adequately see God if they presume to have a relationship with Him. When they read His words to the disciples in Mt. 13:16, virtually EVERY person who reads those words personalizes the message and responds, "See! He said, "YOUR eyes see"...that means ME!! He said I SEE!!!" And they continue on, oblivious to the cold truth that the words He spoke that are really intended for them are Mt. 7:21, 22, 23. People assume so much where YHWH is concerned it is staggering...but not unexpected. Prophecy details it all with amazing clarity. Not to be too personal, Bill (I promise that you are not alone), but you really don't know YHWH. Your questions illustrate that. That might be scary to hear (or anger inducing), but if you can say that you would do what YHWH says, no matter the cost, no matter how much it may conflict with what you have come to think He expects of you, then you probably are okay. Give time a chance to catch up to prophecy and it will work itself out. Unfortunately, many people simply won't like the God of the Bible. It is precisely why they have constructed and concocted a God that would never do anything to ruffle their tender sensibilities. Isa. 30:10, 11

But wait, all of those verses are talking about the wicked! His enemies, right? Not about God's people! Mic.2:8 Unfortunately, for those who consider themselves His people, (the Mt. 7:21, 22, 23 crowd, for instance), He doesn't have the same rose-colored glasses on. His expectations are simply not the ones His people profess to be His. That may be unbelievable, but prophecy insists in hundreds upon hundreds of places that it is precisely how it is.

So, dinos never lived? Possible? Considering 'Elohhiym, the One who employs the Deceiver Satan to accomplish His purposes (it's precisely why he wasn't killed on the spot when he sinned, people)...absolutely.

In further response to the bolded question above to which I responded (especially with Job 12:16), I add for additional consideration Isa. 30:27, 28 (which is a continuation of Isa. 30:10 above). Since the tendency of English Bibles is to gloss over that which is particularly uncomfortable to consider, I include the NASB's version of verse 28 (which assigns the cold, hard truth to a marginal note...but at least it is there):

Isaiah 30: 28 His breath is like an overflowing torrent, which reaches to the neck, to shake the nations back and forth in a 1sieve, and to put in the jaws of the peoples the bridle which 2leads to ruin.

1 Lit sifting of the worthless   2 Lit misleads

Coffee
Posts 11064
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 19 2014 7:07 AM

Sifting captives.

"I didn't know God made honky tonk angels."

Page 3 of 3 (52 items) < Previous 1 2 3 | RSS