• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do creationists accept biology?

nPeace

Veteran Member
Let me try another example. According to Numbers 5:11-31, when a man suspects that his wife has been unfaithful and is pregnant by another man, he must impose a trial by ordeal, and make his wife drink 'the water that brings out the truth'. (No such ordeal is required to be imposed on a husband who is suspected of infidelity.) If the woman has been unfaithful, drinking this water will bring on an abortion. If you suspected that your wife had been unfaithful, would you impose this Biblically-required test, or would you compromise and allow the matter to be handled by the present laws of the United States?
That can be looked at this way...
Say you are in North Korea, and Kim Jong Un has given orders.
Would you say, "I am not obeying those laws because the US government says they are wrong"?
God was the ruler of the nation of Israel. It was a nation set apart from all other nations. It had its own set of laws given by God. No Pharaoh could demand that the Israelite obey him instead of God's law.

Have you any evidence that the book of Daniel is anything but a pious fiction written at the time of the Maccabean rebellion? From what I have read (see, for example, Catherine Nixey, The Darkening Age, chapter 4 and 5) the stories of persecutions of the early Christians are exaggerated; in particular, the only persecutions sanctioned by the Emperor were those of Nero, Decius, Valerian and Diocletian, and the Decian persecution was not directed specifically against Christians.
To my knowledge, there is evidence.

I can respect Muhammad Ali's principles and his actions. However, would you feel the same way about an atheist who refused to be drafted into the military because he was opposed to the Vietnam War or to all wars? Would you applaud him, or would you think that he deserved his punishment? What would you think about a British person in 1939 who refused to join the armed forces because he approved of Hitler's policies? Do you think that such a person should follow his conscience and his values, or do you think rather that his values were evil and that he should be forced to accept the error of his ways?
I believe in conscientious objection.

I don't know; I don't suppose that such a situation would ever arise in modern Britain. Perhaps if the person with the gun was telling me to go into a school and teach the pupils that the Earth is flat, that the sky is a solid vault, that the Earth is stationary with the Sun, planets and stars revolving around it, or that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, I might prefer being shot to doing such a thing. Otherwise, as I say, I can't imagine ever being put in such a situation.
There you go. That answers your question, doesn't it. :)
 

Astrophile

Active Member
That can be looked at this way...
Say you are in North Korea, and Kim Jong Un has given orders.
Would you say, "I am not obeying those laws because the US government says they are wrong"?
God was the ruler of the nation of Israel. It was a nation set apart from all other nations. It had its own set of laws given by God. No Pharaoh could demand that the Israelite obey him instead of God's law.

The trivial answer is that what the US government says is irrelevant to me because I am British. The more serious answer is that if I choose to visit a foreign country I must abide by its laws while I am resident there. If I am not willing to obey the laws of North Korea, I shouldn't be in the country in the first place.


I believe in conscientious objection.

Fair enough.


There you go. That answers your question, doesn't it. :)

Does it? Do you mean that if a person in authority threatened to shoot you if you bored a hole in the ear of one of your slaves or if you made your wife drink 'the water that brings out the truth' that was likely to cause a miscarriage, you would go ahead and risk being shot? You said that you would obey the Bible regardless of the consequences, but you asked me whether I would do something that I believed to be wrong if I was threatened with death for disobedience. What the Bible commands and what is morally right are often two different things. What I am trying to find out is whether you would obey the commands of the Bible even when most people would regard those commands as morally wrong.
 

Astrophile

Active Member
Would you have found it more beautiful never to be born? Quit whining and thank God for life.

I think that you are missing the point.

You said,
I do not find it beautiful to be descended from slimy germs or bugs or from animals.

I asked a question that implied that I do not find it beautiful to have come out of a woman's vagina, 'born between urine and faeces', but I have to accept that this is what happened, and I don't think that it is an insult to God to suggest that he designed this painful, bloody and messy process. I agree also that it is not beautiful 'to be descended from slimy germs or bugs or from animals', but again I have to accept that this is what happened. To put it simply, the processes of childbirth and evolution were not invented to satisfy our aesthetic sensibilities.
 

dad

Undefeated
I think that you are missing the point.

You said,


I asked a question that implied that I do not find it beautiful to have come out of a woman's vagina, 'born between urine and faeces', but I have to accept that this is what happened, and I don't think that it is an insult to God to suggest that he designed this painful, bloody and messy process. I agree also that it is not beautiful 'to be descended from slimy germs or bugs or from animals', but again I have to accept that this is what happened. To put it simply, the processes of childbirth and evolution were not invented to satisfy our aesthetic sensibilities.
The processes of life were not invented by anyone. (but God)

I do not have to accept your religion that the gift of being able to adapt and evolve is responsible for creation of life on earth. No one does or should. It is offense to mankind and God. There is wonder and beauty in how kinds reproduce, and deep wonder and beauty in how God creates the spirit of man that is so much more than flesh.
 

Astrophile

Active Member
I was being very conservative using 40 million murders a year. If you want to confess to 56 million a year, fine, that puts it over half a billion in a decade.

You didn't answer my question about improving medical care and making birth control available so as to reduce the number of abortions.

Natural miscarriages are not murder. No comparison.
.

Natural miscarriages and stillbirths are just as distressing as artificial abortions, so why does God allow so many of them?

Premeditated murder in the form of child sacrifices are a serious crime to God, and one that will illicit a response.

'Elicit', not 'illicit'. Do you think that women have abortions for the fun of it?
 

dad

Undefeated
You didn't answer my question about improving medical care and making birth control available so as to reduce the number of abortions.
Don't recall that one. However I would prefer that they fund people advocating that babies live and helping mothers and families. As for child sacrifices they should be more illegal than murder.

.
Natural miscarriages and stillbirths are just as distressing as artificial abortions, so why does God allow so many of them?
Why allow anything in nature like drought, floods etc etc? This world has chosen to live away from God so don't blame Him for life here. In this nature, apparently some miscarriages are 'natural'. But if a tree falls on someone and kills them I would say it is natural, if you cut down a tree to kill a neighbor that is murder.

'Elicit', not 'illicit'. Do you think that women have abortions for the fun of it?
Do you think people do child sacrifices for fun? Not really. It is to sacrifice the children to some 'greater' cause or spirit. (such as career, finances, lifestyle, peer pressure, fear etc etc)
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
The trivial answer is that what the US government says is irrelevant to me because I am British. The more serious answer is that if I choose to visit a foreign country I must abide by its laws while I am resident there. If I am not willing to obey the laws of North Korea, I shouldn't be in the country in the first place.

Fair enough.

Does it? Do you mean that if a person in authority threatened to shoot you if you bored a hole in the ear of one of your slaves or if you made your wife drink 'the water that brings out the truth' that was likely to cause a miscarriage, you would go ahead and risk being shot? You said that you would obey the Bible regardless of the consequences, but you asked me whether I would do something that I believed to be wrong if I was threatened with death for disobedience. What the Bible commands and what is morally right are often two different things. What I am trying to find out is whether you would obey the commands of the Bible even when most people would regard those commands as morally wrong.
It wasn't too long ago that some countries had people drawn by horses, disemboweled, strangled, and more. List of people hanged, drawn and quartered - Wikipedia
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
The trivial answer is that what the US government says is irrelevant to me because I am British. The more serious answer is that if I choose to visit a foreign country I must abide by its laws while I am resident there. If I am not willing to obey the laws of North Korea, I shouldn't be in the country in the first place.
:confused:



Fair enough.




Does it? Do you mean that if a person in authority threatened to shoot you if you bored a hole in the ear of one of your slaves or if you made your wife drink 'the water that brings out the truth' that was likely to cause a miscarriage, you would go ahead and risk being shot? You said that you would obey the Bible regardless of the consequences, but you asked me whether I would do something that I believed to be wrong if I was threatened with death for disobedience. What the Bible commands and what is morally right are often two different things. What I am trying to find out is whether you would obey the commands of the Bible even when most people would regard those commands as morally wrong.
Hmmmm.
I don't think this is so hard.
What period am I living at, and what location, and nation?
Am I living more than 3000 years ago? Am I an Israelite? Am I living in the present?
What do you want me to be, and what time period, and what location?
Maybe give me those details. That way I can answer in a more specific way, such that you might understand what I am saying.

I'm trying to show you that you are using unrelated questions. The time, place, and circumstances matter.
Do you understand what I said earlier?

1. Christians are not commanded by God to keep slaves. They are under the law of Christ.
God allowed and gave certain instructions to a nation living at a time, and in conditions that called for particular circumstances. God tolerated those for a time.
The Israelite who were under theocratic rule (ruled by God) - not human dictatorship, nor democratic, nor any other man-made rule, obeyed God.
Is that clear... I mean, do you understand that?

2. If God makes any request or command for a Christian, through his anointed - the Messiah, who proved to be Jesus Christ, as a Christian, I take the stand the apostles, or followers of Christ take (Acts 5:29).
Christians have died at the hands of rulers for refusing to break God's laws - both past, and at present.... and they will continue to do so in the future.
Do you understand?

So have your questions been answered?
Let me see if this can help further.
The judges in Israel were given this command...
(Leviticus 20:2) ...Any man of Israel and any foreigner who resides in Israel who gives any of his offspring to Moʹlech should be put to death without fail. The people of the land should stone him to death.
This was a command from the ruler of the nation of Israel. Simple - "Put to death... by stoning, anyone who sacrifices his children to a god."

This is not the law of God, to Christians - his people living after the Messiah's removing the handwritten document that consisted of decrees. . . (Colossians 2:14; Ephesians 2:13-15)
Rather, the law that Christians follow - the law of the Christ, includes this...
(Romans 13:1-7)
1 Let every person be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. 2Therefore, whoever opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will bring judgment against themselves. 3For those rulers are an object of fear, not to the good deed, but to the bad. Do you want to be free of fear of the authority? Keep doing good, and you will have praise from it; 4for it is God’s minister to you for your good. But if you are doing what is bad, be in fear, for it is not without purpose that it bears the sword. It is God’s minister, an avenger to express wrath against the one practicing what is bad. 5There is therefore compelling reason for you to be in subjection, not only on account of that wrath but also on account of your conscience. 6That is why you are also paying taxes; for they are God’s public servants constantly serving this very purpose. 7 Render to all their dues: to the one who calls for the tax, the tax; to the one who calls for the tribute, the tribute; to the one who calls for fear, such fear; to the one who calls for honor, such honor.

So, a Christian, who obeys God's law, is required to obey the law of the land.
God does not require anyone to execute a wrongdoer, since he has left that in the hands of the ruling authorities. Even so, God's law does not require Christians to execute anyone today, because his government is in Jesus' hands, to render future judgment.

However, the law of one land differs from one place to another. Morals differ from one place to another.
For example...
* Religious freedom is not the same for every country. One may be hindered from carrying a Bible, owning a Bible, or even engaging in particular features of worship - like public ministry.
* Conscientious objection is not the same in every nation. One can be imprisoned where they may be subjected to torture and other inhumane treatment for refusing to be drafted into the military.
* Morality is not the same in every nation. Under some tribal rulers in Africa, one may be requested by the chief, to allow one's wife to have sexual intercourse with another man, or several men.

As a Christian nation under God's rule, how should a Christian respond?
This is where the line is drawn. Since Christians are united wherever they are (when I say Christians, I do not mean Christian, as is understood by society today. See here for an explanation on that.), they do not take part in wars of a physical nature... period; they do not practice, or condone immorality - fornication ( adultery, homosexuality, bestiality...); they do not stop worshiping God - practicing their faith, for any man.
So under such situations, they would face whatever action is taken against them - be it prison, torture, or death... or all three.

This is actually taking place in some land, right this minute.
Jesus said it would happen, so it's nothing Christians are surprised about. John 15, 17

Consider too, that there is currently, no one world government, so if anyone want to tell a Muslim nation, under its own laws, not to execute criminals, or chop of a hand or foot, as a punishment for a crime, then they may as well be prepared to fight that nation. If sanctions don't work, then maybe they might want to prepare their military, and send some soldiers to their death... or they could drop a nuke and wipe out man, woman, and child. They won't have to worry that a nation is not following their morals, and laws.
The fact is, there are nations that do not want anyone telling them how to govern their nation.
That's what it's about, isn't it? Control. Power. Superiority.

Christians are law abiding, peaceful citizens, only carrying out their worship.
As long as they are not taking up weapons, and murdering someone, or carrying out sexual crimes... things of those nature - which Christians don't do, then anyone that wants to control them, and force them to do things against their conscience - like take up a weapon, to kill, or stop reading and using the Bible, or using their freedom of speech to share with interested persons - are really the criminals, imo.
We won't fight them, nor hate them. God is their judge.
We just obey God.

If this is not clear enough, then I don't know how else to make it clear for you.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Is it a Plymouth? A Chevy? No, it's a Dodge!
Not at all. What is your idea of law and order including just punishment? And remember, while most governments demand obedience depending on situation, as you mention your case, there are times people side step the law and worse.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Is it a Plymouth? A Chevy? No, it's a Dodge!
So you mean you don't see what you consider badness by decree in modern times? I mean, I was thinking, with all the changes in the evidence of the theory of evolution, if it's not true, what do you have left? Evolution?? And if one form of government isn't to your liking, what do you have instead? Evolution??
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Not at all. What is your idea of law and order including just punishment? And remember, while most governments demand obedience depending on situation, as you mention your case, there are times people side step the law and worse.
You dodged and ducked @Astrophile 's question of you. My idea of law and order does not enter into this.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
So you mean you don't see what you consider badness by decree in modern times? I mean, I was thinking, with all the changes in the evidence of the theory of evolution, if it's not true, what do you have left? Evolution?? And if one form of government isn't to your liking, what do you have instead? Evolution??
Another dodge and a false claim to boot. See above.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Another dodge and a false claim to boot. See above.
You keep making false claims. So again, if evolution isn't true (which you think it is, along with millions of others), then what's left? If law and order was imposed in many awful ways within the past century or so, what do you have left? Evolution?
Here's another bit of info I came across about Einstein, although I can't remember everything. But it's interesting -- "I am not interested in this phenomenon or that phenomenon," Einstein had said earlier in his life. "I want to know God's thoughts – the rest are mere details." But as he lay there dying in Princeton Hospital he must have understood that these were secrets that God was clearly keen to hang on to." (He found that out, I suppose.) BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You keep making false claims. So again, if evolution isn't true (which you think it is, along with millions of others), then what's left? If law and order was imposed in many awful ways within the past century or so, what do you have left? Evolution?
Here's another bit of info I came across about Einstein, although I can't remember everything. But it's interesting -- "I am not interested in this phenomenon or that phenomenon," Einstein had said earlier in his life. "I want to know God's thoughts – the rest are mere details." But as he lay there dying in Princeton Hospital he must have understood that these were secrets that God was clearly keen to hang on to." (He found that out, I suppose.) BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon
Puff pieces do not support your claims.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Yes, it does. Since that question has come up. If you can think of any government with just laws and execution of those laws, please do say.
That is again a dodge. And I do not think that you would let yourself understand how a basic moral sense evolved. You do realize that people are not the only animals with morals, don't you?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
That is again a dodge. And I do not think that you would let yourself understand how a basic moral sense evolved. You do realize that people are not the only animals with morals, don't you?
You haven't answered the question. What government issues moral laws and punishments as you believe they should be?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Puff pieces do not support your claims.
Einstein died. He said his time was up. Wonder why or how he, with all his expertise in scientific thought, believed he was at the end of his "naturally selected" existence, hmmm? But he wanted to know the unknowable.
"I want to know God's thoughts – the rest are mere details." But as he lay there dying in Princeton Hospital he must have understood that these were secrets that God was clearly keen to hang on to." BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon
Perhaps you think the article was, um, puffed and fabricated, huh? Einstein said he wanted to know God's thoughts. God evidently did not allow him to "know his thoughts." He died anyway.
 
Top