1. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #79966 by revcort on October 19, 2007 at 9:37 am

1312. Comment #79885 by Philip1978 on October 19, 2007 at 12:44 am

"Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you."

I really don't understand what this has to do with what Jesus was asking them to do, he was asking them what they thought he was and then dear old Thomas marches back and says this, why? Isn't that all a little bit harsh?

I like the idea that Jesus in this story is asking his friends, well then chaps, who or what do you think I am? Fine, makes sense that the guy is seeing if his friends truly know what he is up to, makes some kind of sense to me. But to then add this ridiculous "you will have to stone me and then fire will devour you etc" sounds more like Eddie Izzard the comedian going off on of his hilarious but obscure tangents. Its a bit like saying "I went into a shop to buy a newspaper and whilst talking to the proprietor of the shop about the World Cup Rugby he suddenly turned into a large chocolate radiator called Geoff!" This is what it is like for me reading the Bible, you sit there and normal things are happening and the suddenly its all chocolate radiators!

I think this is why I can't read the bible properly, my brain cannot cope with the weirdness and continually questions it rather than just accepting it.

Revcort, how do you cope with it all?

Every time I read something like the pigs on a marathon story or Jesus's feet washing obsession, I immediately start thinking, well, why do that? Being Jesus surely he could get demons to sod off just by sending them away, pigs dont have to run 20 odd miles to jump off a cliff to get rid of them. Plus being the son of God don't you think he could keep his feet clean and smelling great purely by His divine will! Its just so odd and peculiar!

Ah well, at least I am sane enough to hear the Call of the Kettle telling me its 08:43 and its Time for Tea!
Beep! :)
Philip

Philip, that section that I quoted is not Scripture- it is the gospel of Thomas, which was written by a heretic. It is NOT Scripture. I was quoting it to illustrate how freakish the gnostics were. I do not believe that is inspired writing.

2. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #79868 by revcort on October 18, 2007 at 9:22 pm

1309. Comment #79831 by Bonzai on October 18, 2007 at 4:44 pm

Here is a take on Jesus by a rather unconventional "Christian" theologian. Tom Harpur's theme is that the early Christians understood the story of Jesus was a myth, it was a fable. Like other ancient mythologies it contains deep spiritual insights and profound truth about our place in the grand scheme of things but it was not meant to be taken as factual. He noted that archaeological findings in all earliest Chrsitian sites indicated that Christianity was a mystical religion. Then Paul came along and fabricated the whole history of Jesus out of Judiasm and Roman myths and created literal Christianity (the brand of Christianity that treats Jesus as an actual person and his story as historical fact)He then launched a hostile take over of other Christian sects.

Harpur argues that Jesus' life and teaching are not unique, they fit into a recurring motif in many mystical traditions. This, to him, is an indication that the teaching of Jesus is more universal than Christians traditionally acknowledge.

I wonder what is Brother John or Revort's view on this if either has read the book. If not may be you'll be intrigued enough to have a look based on the reviews.

http://www.tomharpur.com/books/books_thepaganchrist.asp

Well Bonzai, I checked out those links. And it's old news. It's gnosticism, plain and simple. (part of the conspiracy brought up by the DaVinci Code) This guy is taking his lead from the gnostic gospels of Thomas, Judas, Mary, etc. And, if you want to believe those versions of the story of Jesus' life, then you're really having to go on faith. We don't even know who wrote those books. We DO know they weren't written by Thomas, Judas or Mary though. They picture a Jesus who floats around on the earth and wasn't a real person, but more like a spirit.

They also came long after the fact. You say that the Apostle Paul created the idea of a literal Jesus, but at least he actually lived during the time of Jesus' "alleged" life. The gnostic gospel of Thomas, for example, was not even preserved at all initially because of its strange teachings (I'm sure you'll call this conspiracy to cover up a non-orthodox writing). It is estimated to have been written during the mid-second century AD.

Compare to the dates of some other Christian writings... years A.D. or C.E. as you'd prefer
50-60 1 Thessalonians
50-60 Philippians
50-60 Galatians
50-60 1 Corinthians
50-60 2 Corinthians
50-60 Romans
50-60 Philemon
50-80 Colossians
50-95 Book of Hebrews
65-80 Gospel of Mark
70-100 Epistle of James
80-100 2 Thessalonians
80-100 Ephesians
80-100 Gospel of Matthew
80-110 1 Peter
80-130 Gospel of Luke
80-130 Acts of the Apostles
90-120 Gospel of John
90-120 1 John
90-120 2 John
90-120 3 John
90-120 Epistle of Jude
100-150 1 Timothy
100-150 2 Timothy
100-150 Titus

One thing that should tip us off is the distance from the actual events that the gnostic literature was written. That's a big red flag- or should be.

Have you ever read any of the writings of these people? It is freakish stuff like you wouldn't believe. It makes Jesus sound like a madman. And it amazes me that anyone would rather listen to these than the Gospels with authentic authorship. (i'm not saying Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were the actual scribes in every case, but they are based on their actual teachings by their contemporaries) It is yet another example of the lengths to which people will go to deny the truth. They would claim authority from something as foolish as gnosticism in order to deny Jesus was a literal person.

So, it's no wonder that a person, relying on the traditions of the gnostics, would conclude that Jesus wasn't an actual historical figure. They were attempting to make their own cult based on the success of Christianity.

Here's an excerpt:

11 Jesus said, "This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away.

The dead are not alive, and the living will not die. During the days when you ate what is dead, you made it come alive. When you are in the light, what will you do? On the day when you were one, you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?"

12 The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?"

Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."

13 Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to something and tell me what I am like."

Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a just messenger."

Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher."

Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth is utterly unable to say what you are like."

Jesus said, "I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended."

And he took him, and withdrew, and spoke three sayings to him. When Thomas came back to his friends they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?"

Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you."

14 Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will bring sin upon yourselves, and if you pray, you will be condemned, and if you give to charity, you will harm your spirits.

There's some really weird stuff there people. But, by all means, take it as truer that the synoptic Gospels.

3. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #79826 by revcort on October 18, 2007 at 4:21 pm

Yeah, I suppose it could have been worse. Shirley would have been pretty tough. (though the guy on that link looks pretty tough :D) I also have a good friend, who is a guy, named Ashley. So, that's a tough one too. My first name is Darryl and people ask me all the time why I don't just go by that. Of course, the answer is that my mom would be heartbroken. (Courtney was her idea)

Regarding walk's question- I have 2 answers, but you guys deny either of them point to God.

#1 The Universe- All of Nature points to a Creator.
#2 The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Now, of course, you've explained the universe by evolution and you deny that Jesus was even a real person, so there's not much more I can give you.

4. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #79625 by revcort on October 18, 2007 at 1:32 am

Hey Phillip, what's funny about that is that my name is actually Courtney- so, there IS a "U" in my name. I just leave that out in my screenname. I would explain the reason I left out the U, but it's a long story which doesn't even matter. I've had to answer questions about having a girl's name all my life, which is always fun. Junior High was brutal. :D

So, needless to say, revcourt or revcort doesn't matter to me.

5. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #79141 by revcort on October 16, 2007 at 9:31 am

Hey, I thought this thread was going to die. Apparently not, eh? :D

Ah yes, good ol' Brother John. I disagree with much of the early part of your post, but I agree wholeheartedly with the conclusion you have drawn.

You're absolutely right- the world does not want the God I describe.

The world hates God- so much so that they try with all that is in them to deny even His very existence, and come up with thousands of gods to suit their own fancies. That is the nature of man.

This is the very God that your own Catholic Church once taught and believed. St. Augustine of Hippo taught these very truths. A council of Catholics- The Council of Carthage in 412 A.D.- made these kinds of statements in condemning Pelagius...

Man was born in sin. Man's will was in bondage to a sinful nature. Man would always freely choose evil and the devil unless God Himself intervened.

So, you see, it was once Catholic Dogma- it was once Orthodox in your own Church Brother John. But, as humanism slowly crept in- as it tends to happen- the Church slowly moves away. It didn't take very long in this case. The Bishop of Rome at that time- Zosimus- sided with Pelagius, and there it went. That was before the Bishop of Rome had the exalted status that he has today.

Yet St Augustine, and all Catholics prior to the 5th Century, believed as I believe. It was orthodox. The controversy continued for several centuries, and the Church slipped further away from Augustine's position. A thousand years later, along came an Augustinian monk named Luther who appreciated the early church's and Augustine's viewpoints on God's sovereignty. He said that salvation was all of God- monergistic, not a cooperation between God and man- synergistic.

Voila! the Protestant Reformation. Now, it wasn't long after this that Protestants had their own disagreement. It was between Calvin and Arminius, but the argument was the same. Calvin's argument stood at the time, but Protestant churches slowly became more and more Arminian throughout the years, and we have arrived at the same place today that the Catholic Church believes.

We naturally move toward man centered theology when we are left to our own selves. This is what has happened.

So, you're right, man doesn't want God- they want to move away from God. Even Christians will naturally become more and more man-centered in their theology if they do not stick closely to Scripture and the original teachings of the Church. Jesus Himself said, "If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. "If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you."

So, of course the world hates God- and they hate those who preach the truth of God too. The truth is that man is depraved and unable to come to God unless God enables them to come. That is not a popular teaching, but it is the truth. It is what the Apostles taught. It is what the Catholic Church taught, believed, and formally acknowledged at the Council of Carthage. It is what Luther believed, which led Him toward a desire for reform. It is what Calvin believed. It is what I believe, by God's grace. I say "by God's grace" because I was staunchly Arminian until about 3 years ago. And really this summer is when the light came on within me.

Denounce me as non-Christian if you must, but I will not waver Brother John. I do not describe a God Who is here to make men happy. I describe the God who demands that all men everywhere repent and believe. This is who God is. I could try to change Him to make Him more palatable, but that is not why I'm here.

6. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78387 by revcort on October 12, 2007 at 4:09 pm

1269. Comment #78319 by walk on October 12, 2007 at 12:23 pm

Sorry, Rev, but I'm starting to see why some here have disengaged with you. Your answers are starting to sound like gibberish. You say:

Are all things already set? Yes, they are

Then you say:

No, you definitely must think and reason- and you will think and reason in ways that are according to your nature. That is the freedom God has given you.

Whaaaat!? That's a direct contradiction. If everything is already decided, you have NO FREEDOM. And pleeease don't say "with god all things are possible!"

God always has a reason for everything, and His reason is always perfect, holy, just, and good.

Man, you must be divinely psychic. How do you claim to KNOW this? Oh, yes, "because the bible tells me so."

But I do pray God will awaken all of you

Why? He's already decided who will believe and who won't, and that CAN'T change, (and although I do appreciate your kindness) your prayer won't mean jack-sh*t according to what you said above.
Actually, if "Are all things already set? Yes, they are", then your presence here on this blog couldn't possibly change anything for any one of us. So, what are you doing?
Also, why do you bother to teach your youth group? Their paths were decided long ago, and YOU can't change them!

Hey walk, I was just as shocked as you that I got by with that one. (until now at least :D) It is a quandary, I admit. Why evangelize if God has chosen the elect from the foundation of the world? Why pray if the outcome is settled? Why teach people if God already knows what their responses will be? I've thought about these things many times.

Well, there are only a few valid reasons...

#1 To give glory to God. That is one of my main purposes for still being here. (on this planet, not necessarily on this forum- but both may well be correct)

#2 Because God told all believers to do these things in Scripture. I do what I do in order to obey- and because He enables me to obey.

#3 Because I don't know who is elect and who is not, and I don't know whether God foreordained that it would be through my teaching, evangelism, or prayer that His will would be accomplished in their lives.

That's the way I think about it anyway.

7. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78307 by revcort on October 12, 2007 at 11:59 am

1267. Comment #78225 by Vaal on October 12, 2007 at 7:53 am

Wow, you guy's aren't still going around in circles with that windbag Revcort, are you? Completely pointless.

And the book of Fred chapter 3 verse 9 million, God said Yada Yada Yada Yada...

Yep, windbag present and accounted for. :D

Oops, one correction here. There are only a little over 31,000 verses in the Bible, nowhere near 9 million. Ha!

8. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78089 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 7:15 pm

BAEOZ

Let me get this straight. God has already decided our fate. But, we suck up to god because, oh wait, because he might be reaching out to us to tell us what? He's already decided. It doesn't matter if I kill a million puppy dogs, god has already decided if I go to heaven or hell. There is no free will. It's god's fault that I killed those puppy dogs. God is powerless too, because he's already decided and can't change. Further, he's an evil fellow who decided we're all bad because one person made an error, and he's punishing the lot of us. Nasty person this god.

Ok, one more. Sorry you see it that way BAEOZ. I don't think that's exactly the way I would say it, but, I won't argue. Yes, I would say you should definitely "suck up" to God. g'night

9. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78088 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 7:12 pm

goldy

So, no more condemning others, no more looking at others because they are not as you, becasue they don't believe the scriptures etc. It is, as it were, pre-ordained (unless he changes his mind, yadda, yadda). You cannot pass judgement on others, or impose your views on others, or condemn others for their actions (excet for wee things like the colour of their trousers, etc, etc)

I absolutely agree with you goldy. I do not blame you or judge you. But I do pray God will awaken all of you. (and I know most of you simply prefer I not waste my time in such endeavors :D)

Actually, this is another thing I have often told my students- it is not the fault of the sinner that they sin. They are this way by nature. I also tell them not to try to attempt to correct their morality- "They don't need your morality," I tell them. "They need to know the One who changed your morality."

And I hope this doesn't seem like I'm trying to "impose my views," though to many it does seem that way. I'm trying to explain them in hopes that God may do any changing that is needed.

Ok, I've posted too much tonight. It's bedtime here.

10. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78086 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 7:03 pm

goldy

God chose? OK, I'll ignore the bit about getting a wee minion to do things, but if he is, was and evermore shall be, there was no chosing. The chosen one always was going to do whatever it is he does because that is God's will. Since God is eternal, the choice was there since ever.
I therefore am an athiest by God's chosing, not mine. Muslims are thus by God's chosing, not theirs. All other religions, sects, etc, etc are all what they are because of God's chosing, not theirs. So how can some be wrong and some right? This is mainly at you, rev, as I think you have mentioned this before. Yet now yyou tell us that we had no choice in the matter adn neither, by nature of God's, errrr, eternal goddiness, had God. Things are because that is how they are. No reason to condemn anyone or anything to eternal damnation because, basically, that's blasphemy.
What a pickle, eh?

It is indeed a pickle, and it is one of the most difficult questions for a person who truly believes in the doctrines of grace to answer. I hate being called a Calvinist because I believe it gives too much credit to a man, but I must own up to the fact that I agree with those teachings and believe them to be true. By the way, for you who are atheists, I think Calvinism might appeal to your intellectual side because it does not dodge the hard questions or slip and slide around them, but uses sound argument from Scripture to answer tough questions.

So, how to answer that question...

The short answer is: The fact that God shows mercy to anyone is miraculous. The best advice I could give any person is to not blame God and get angry, but to seek Him and pray for mercy. He says that He will not refuse those who call out to Him. Are all things already set? Yes, they are. But does that mean our attitude should be, "Well, I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't!"? Not at all. How do you know that God is not using the very things you are enduring to reach out to you? We prefer to blame God instead of looking within ourselves to see what the trouble is. That's the best answer I can give.

11. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78075 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 6:28 pm

1239. Comment #78023 by epeeist on October 11, 2007 at 2:07 pm

Comment #78011 by revcort

I don't see those as contradictory at all walk. As a matter of fact, they are complimentary characteristics. He knows what will happen because He causes or allows it to happen. Why would He want to stop something from happening if He has already ordained it to happen perfectly? So, in short, they go hand in hand in my understanding of God.

This is quite an old one revcort. Lets explain it more detail.

If god is omniscient then he must know everything that has happened, is happening or will happen. This of course includes everything he does.

The question is therefore can he do something different. If he can then he is not omniscient, if he can't then he is not omnipotent.

You might also want to consider this one from Epicurus (see, the Greeks are useful reading):

I can see the logical progression there, and if we're talking about me, I'd totally agree with you. I could not be both omniscient and omnipotent simultaneously, but God can. It's the same type of argument for who created the Creator? But you assume that the one who created the very laws of logic you mention is also bound by them. Yet, He is not. He created the system, but He exists outside of it and is not bound by its laws.

I know you won't like this answer, but I really believe it is the truth. God's knowledge of His own actions is not based on foreknowledge but this knowledge is simultaneous with the power necessary to carry them out. He is the only completely autonomous being. Therefore, both His omniscience and His omnipotence are simultaneous functions of one another. As He knows it, He makes it happen.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

God is able to prevent or cause anything and everything. Does this make Him evil? Absolutely not. He is perfectly good and holy. However, the trouble we have is with our definition of evil. If my sickness causes good later, was it evil? For the moment it seemed evil, but it brought greater good. If the death of certain people cause others to turn to God, was that evil? Not necessarily according to God's definition. Our limited perspective makes us truly unable to absolutely define evil.

Another thing is this: (and you may all hate me for saying it) The Bible clearly teaches that all men are wicked at heart and deserving of death. What if God had killed me prior to my trusting Christ and sent me to hell? Would that have been evil? No. It would have been just. He chose to have mercy on me and allow me time to come to repentance. And now, though He has forgiven me, if I were thrown into prison tomorrow for a crime I didn't commit based on the conspiracy of evil men, would that make God evil? Not at all- He owes me nothing in this life. God always has a reason for everything, and His reason is always perfect, holy, just, and good. If He did such a thing, I would not accuse Him of evil because I would trust that He has a reason that is perfect.

So, the primary difficulty man has with "the problem of evil" is that man always defines evil according to his own fleshly passions and not according to either the greater good (God's big picture perspective) or according to God's justice.

12. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78067 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 5:48 pm

1245. Comment #78038 by walk on October 11, 2007 at 2:59 pm

revcort:

God ordains both the ends and the means.

You've really got to explain that one!

Well, what I mean is that God inspires people to pray for the very things that He intends to answer. You might say, "Well, the prayer does no good." But God ordained the prayer and chose to do whatever was done in response to that prayer. So, the prayer accomplished its purpose, God taught a person the value of prayer, and God's ultimate purpose was also perfectly served. The same can be said for how God works in evangelism or in and through His people in whatever they do. He assigns tasks, He inspires works, people obey, people serve as His vessels of mercy, and God's will is done. I suppose God could cut out the middle man (us) but that is not how He chooses to work. That is a pretty poor explanation, but that's the best I understand it at this moment.

13. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78037 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 2:56 pm

1241. Comment #78029 by walk on October 11, 2007 at 2:24 pm

Epeeist, Shuggy, Goldy, thanks for the help. Rev:

He has already ordained it to happen perfectly

It's nice to know we don't have to think or reason when making decisions, 'cause it's already been decided for us. I mean, heck, why bother to steer the car? Everytime I get behind the wheel the crash/no crash determination for the trip was ordained by Him eons ago.

No, you definitely must think and reason- and you will think and reason in ways that are according to your nature. That is the freedom God has given you. But the one thing you'll never do is choose God without Him first choosing you. Why? It's because it is not in your nature to do so. So, in order to be able to believe what I'm telling you about God, He must enable you to believe it. But, as far as what pants you wore to the office today, what sandwich you ordered for lunch, or how fast you drove home from work, those were all your decisions. It's freedom within a structure. The structure is God's will- and you won't overstep that boundary- but you are free to act within that structure, according to your own inclinations.

14. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78035 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 2:47 pm

1240. Comment #78025 by Mr DArcy on October 11, 2007 at 2:11 pm

revcort is right when he states:

the clear teaching of the Bible is that belief in Christ is necessary for salvation.

That clearly is the teaching of the Bible. The point however, is what credence is to be given to this book? Whether the Bible was written by bronze age people or yesterday makes no difference to its validity/ or lack of validity. What all our resident Christian contributors have ignored is why we sceptics do not accept what they assert about their holy book.

Christians are after all in a minority in this world, although they may make up the largest religion,(if indeed Christianity can be called a single religion). The fact is that most of the world's population is not Christian, and probably most have never heard of Christ.

revcort and his ilk may happily spout from scripture about who is to be condemned, in the meantime the rest of get on with this, our only, life.

You're exactly right MrDArcy. These are things that you must decide for yourself. I understand your animosity toward it. I'm just putting forth what I believe to be the truth. Do what you will with it.

15. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78032 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 2:44 pm

1234. Comment #78013 by Shuggy on October 11, 2007 at 1:38 pm

revcort:

Why would He want to stop something from happening if He has already ordained it to happen perfectly?

What use is intercessory prayer if God never changes his mind?

God ordains both the ends and the means.

16. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #78011 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 1:23 pm

walk

I'm not sure if you've addressed this before (it's certainly been mentioned on RDnet), but you do realize it's impossible to be omniscient AND omnipotent. If one already knows everything that's going to happen, they'd be powerless to change it. If they use their all-powerfullness to change something, then they didn't know everything that was going to happen.

I don't see those as contradictory at all walk. As a matter of fact, they are complimentary characteristics. He knows what will happen because He causes or allows it to happen. Why would He want to stop something from happening if He has already ordained it to happen perfectly? So, in short, they go hand in hand in my understanding of God.

17. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77990 by revcort on October 11, 2007 at 12:21 pm

Hey Bro John- ok, I hear your points. The first point is very good, and on track. I have been aware that my posting here at times has been excessive. That frequency has lessened of late for that very reason. Nevertheless, point taken- thank you for that.

Now, regarding your questions and suggestions...

"How do you cope with the fact that you can have two or three or maybe even four different sincerely committed Christians, who all revere the Scriptures as God's word – and yet, claiming all of them to be faithful – can come up with a different understanding of one text or other, or a group of texts?"

I understand there are differences of opinion. I do believe there is only one proper interpretation of these texts though, and there are simple ways to come to the correct conclusions. #1 pray for wisdom and guidance (this alone is too subjective) #2 do word studies in original languages, #3 look at the whole context, #4 read similar passages from other books, #5 check commentaries from as many sources as possible. Taking all of these into account, the clear teaching of the Bible is that belief in Christ is necessary for salvation.

Question #2

If the teaching that the Father planned to give us in the OT... in...his Son... WHY DID CHRIST HAVE TO PROMISE US THE SPIRIT WHO WOULD L E A D U S I N T O A L L T R U T H (?)

I know the answer of the Catholic Church to this question- and I've run up against it many times before. The argument usually goes like this: All revealed truth is inspired by God. All revealed truth is found within the Scripture AND the Church. Therefore, all articles of the catechism or Papal pronouncements are also inspired by God. The more recent messages take precedent over the older revelations. Therefore, the pronouncements of Christ's Church- the RCC- should gradually help to more clearly define and interpret the Word of God. Is that pretty close?

Can you see that this is an "evolutionary model" of God? Think about that. Here's what you're saying: God didn't get it right the first time, (in the law) or the second time (in the prophets) or the third time (in Christ) or the fourth time (in the Apostles' teachings), so now we must refer to the current authority of God in the world- His Church- in order to determine truth and doctrine.

Hey, that sounds pretty good. It was the very argument I was having earlier with a couple of my new atheist buddies here- they said Jesus changed the law- Jesus said He fulfilled the law and that not one jot or tittle of the law would go unfulfilled. My atheistic friends want to claim God changed. So do you. You use the person of the Holy Spirit to claim that God is continually refining His message to the world- but that's not what the Apostle John intended when he said that the Spirit will "guide us into all truth." In that same section of Scripture, Jesus said that the Spirit would "remind us" of the things Jesus taught. So, yes, the Holy Spirit guides, but the standard of truth has already been revealed- so, He will remind us of what Jesus taught. (and to be even more specific- He guided the Apostles to remember what Jesus taught so they could record it for humanity- and for the Church)

So, I believe that, while it may well be that God is continuing to reveal Himself to us through His people the Church, these revelations will never contradict the original revelation. Instead, even as the other writings that came over a 2,000 year period were consistent, all revelations will be consistent. Saying that God evolves is saying that He is becoming more complete and more perfect. This also implies that the Apostles didn't understand God as well as we do because they believed and taught different things about Him. Of course, the most damaging thing this implies is that God changes and was, therefore, at some time in the past, less perfect, less holy, less omnipotent, less omniscient, and was in need of a bit of growth of His own. (that's blasphemous of course, but that is the implication)

Regarding your other suggestions, I think they are great. I appreciate the other kind words you have offered too. Thank you for them. I also appreciate the gentile way you share these things, but I do feel like you're holding back a bit from what you really want to say. Perhaps you could email me privately and be more direct. (revcort@hotmail.com)

18. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77791 by revcort on October 10, 2007 at 2:30 pm

Hey Goldy, I went to check out Galbraith's Alehouse and got a kick out of this...

Ode to Galbraiths Alehouse

When comparisons made and some give a knock
Its ignorance only that gives them the shock
They walk in the door and in just a mo'
The smells and the service win them all o'er
They're used to the amber, so cold that it burns
But soon it's the flavour of ale that they yearn.

The brews are quite brilliant, sight, smell, taste.
They're served with an air of passion and grace.
From Bob's to the Bells, a dark Porter or two
There are seasonal tipples to see the year through.
And matched with the ales when you're right in the mood,
The kitchen's a winner, with real pub food.

Now the landlord's a gem and he's offered to shout
The regular patrons, who live round about.
So its hey diddle diddle, a turn on the fiddle
A jig and a reel on the floor
And the Bitter and Twisted that leaves them spellbound
As the cries all ring out for more!!

Anon

19. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77758 by revcort on October 10, 2007 at 12:14 pm

1195. Comment #77641 by Philip1978 on October 10, 2007 at 1:05 am

Revcourt, I wouldn't dream of trolling you, I saw your myspace and you have a good taste in movies, I couldnt bring myself to Troll a Star Wars and Lord of the Rings fan, it wouldn't be cricket!

You bring your religious point of view to the table much like Brother John or CHeard are allowed to, mostly its free speach on here unless you really start with the fire and brimstone! Plus we have seen your beefy photo and even being across the pond here in England I wouldnt dare take my chances hehehehe!

Ha! Here we go with the beefy photos again- you guys are cracking me up. I think I've been in one fight in my life (not counting against siblings) and that was in the 7th grade. I couldn't fight my way out of a wet paper bag!

I must say, I do love J.R.R. Tolkien (a good friend of C.S. Lewis you know) and I think Peter Jackson did a marvelous job with the LOTR movies. And, I've always loved the Star Wars movies. (fell in love with the original trilogy when I was a kid) The combination of George Lucas and John Williams is tough to beat. I do recognize some of what I believe to be some false religious overtones, but I try to filter that out as part of the whole fantasy genre.

20. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77753 by revcort on October 10, 2007 at 11:53 am

1199. Comment #77673 by phasmagigas on October 10, 2007 at 5:33 am

revcort.

posts between you and the other members are worthwhile as at least it allows us to consider our own arguments without everybody just nodding in agreement. i especially enjoyed the evolution bit which has fizzled out somewhat, and thats a shame as you were beginning to sound like you were actually accepting some of the points made. Trolls tend to post youtube type comments, if you hang around long enough you'll hear one or two trolls. you know stuff like 'you damn atheists, wot do u know, how can we come from slime, geddit?? you fools burn in hell'.(hey, even i can play at being a youtube creationist! smart eh!)

thats the type of stuff that an atheist can be exposed to regularly. I threw a few posts on youtube esp on the evo side, i stopped bothering as the short and very unpredictable posting format is dreadful and I was sick of being told to die or go and kill myself simply for desribing evidence for evolution, interesting that hate mail is always from the religious.

anyway as youve spent time chatting to non believers what do you think? what would you say to somebody who was ranting that those 'immoral atheists just want to eat steak all day and watch pornography and they deserve to burn in hell'?? (im guessing that there are some christians out there who would feel that was a reasonable description). Would you rather spend a day at some atheist gathering or a day at (fallen) ted haggards church for eg? edit, actually revcort, instead of teds church, what about a gathering of fundamental muslims (atheists are fundies according to many) instead, just how far do you think pro christian dialogue will go there before you are subject to animosity?

Ha! Forget about the fundamentalist Muslims altogether- I wouldn't last 30 seconds among them! I'm an infidel of infidels!

But, if given the opportunity to choose between spending a day with some of you and spending a day at Ted Haggard's church or many other mainline denominations' churches, I would pick one of you guys in a heartbeat. I'd have to get used to his language, but I think I'd be fascinated to spend a day with Goldy, or many of the rest of you for that matter- some more than others of course. :D

Let me just tell you what I tell my students about so many of these so-called Christian ministries, especially the ones on television. I tell them that at least 90% of it isn't worth watching and will do you more harm than good. I get so sick of hearing all of these preachers trying to raise money by playing some psychological mind games with little old ladies on fixed incomes. I've called these stations before and complained that what they are doing is shameful.

And this is really the crux of what has soured so many people toward the Bible and toward Christians- the ones who are so often in the public eye are freaks- not biblically sound and have usually picked some verse and taken it out of context in order to get people to give money or hyped up emotionally. The true saints are the ones you'll likely never hear much from, at least not on television. It makes me sick. I think somewhere in the Bible, these people believe that God said, "Thou shalt not think." It's disgraceful. I could go on, but I better quit.

Regarding evolution, I know there is evidence to support the science there, but I'm just not sold on the whole theory- especially the part that has to do with origins. I'm studying dating methods right now in my spare time- I'm very curious about this. My problem is that I'm having trouble finding an unbiased source. It seems everyone has some kind of political or religious ax to grind, but I'm attempting to wade through it.

21. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77608 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 8:35 pm

1189. Comment #77604 by BAEOZ on October 9, 2007 at 8:22 pm

Oh bugger, oxcytocin I accidently clicked the page and hit offensive on one of your posts. Sorry! Hope they don't think you're a troll.

Speaking of this, how in the world have I not been labeled a troll yet? I don't understand how I haven't been sent packing from here. (of course, I was banned from the main board on day 2 I believe) Is it possible to be banned from posting on articles? If so, how have I not? Perhaps I have gone from the label "troll" to the label "entertainment for the masses." :D

22. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77607 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 8:30 pm

1183. Comment #77597 by BAEOZ on October 9, 2007 at 7:57 pm

Revcort, how you going? Just reading your last post.
In it you appear quite egotistical. God did all these things for you but meanwhile millions suffered and died. It would seem you're quite special and your god capriciously cruel or you want to feel like your life has meaning. Anyway, that's what I got from reading it. Probably says a lot about me too. :)

Hey BAEOZ, I'm doing well- thanks for asking. :) To respond to your comment, I guess it would be very egotistical if I didn't also understand and believe that God could simultaneously work in every person's life in the entire world just as intricately as He has worked in mine. (and without even getting winded :D)

Now, regarding the suffering and death of millions, that's a bit more difficult to explain. Perhaps I can explain that one tomorrow. (it's off to bed for the moment though)

23. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77595 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 7:49 pm

1179. Comment #77585 by Goldy on October 9, 2007 at 7:13 pm

OK, Rev. Tell all - what made you turn to God thusly? What was it about the Gospels that resonated so much within you? Not like you hadn't heard them before. Your old post describing your science lessons, to me at least, indicate a predisposition to believe in something supernatural (like God...maybe not so much aliens and ghosties :-)).

When people say that about my daughter, I point out that God was NOT in the bedroom at the time :-) In fact, wife and I weren't even married and were in fact sinning :-) Great conversation stopper :-D
Anyway, jocularity aside - what were you doing before God apparently called to you? How was this calling done? By a person or by you reading a Bible, trying to swap one addiction for another? I am very interested - gospels have done nothing to me, though many have tried...

Hey goldy, ok- I'll tell all- the reader's digest version anyway- I don't think there's room here for all or that anyone would care to read it...

Salvation, for my own personal experience, started long before I was born. God placed me in a home where my parents had just become Christians not 2 years before I was born. I can't downplay this at all. Someone asked this question- and so did Richard Dawson- and I can't deny it- had I been born in a Muslim country, would I be a Christian? The answer is likely no. But, I would add, I wasn't born in a Muslim country by the grace of God.

Now, aside from my upbringing in church, I did have a rebellious heart that liked the idea of heaven but didn't like the idea of obedience. So, I played the game for a while. But God continually sought me out. I tried to play hooky from church. I tried to play sick. I tried to avoid God, but it seemed He wouldn't leave me alone. At the age of 12, I made a public profession of faith and was baptized, but I still wasn't finished running.

Through my early teen years, I continued following my own way, but I hid it well from my parents. I was pretty foul mouthed and loved perverted humor, among other things. I never really got into alcohol or drugs because they were more difficult to hide. All the while I was running, God still pursued after me.

Now, at the age of 17 I was attending a summer youth camp with my church and had a moment where I really thought that God was calling me to be a minister of some kind- and I thought it was music and youth ministry. I don't know if this was completely genuine or not, but I started down that path - and God followed after me. I went to college and seminary, claiming strong allegiances to God, but not following with my whole heart. but God still followed after me.

When I arrived here in Herrin, IL, I was on the ministerial path, and it was not without some fulfillment, but my heart was still not right. Oh, I had some good motives, or so I believed, but something was still missing. I would easily become discontent and want to go elsewhere- and run from any problem that came up. I was very weak in understanding Scripture and only truly sought after God in spurts.

I must say, that only in the last 5 or 6 years has God finally broken through. There was a moment at a conference in Nashville, TN where something happened that is difficult to explain. As we were having a time of worship, it's like God broke through to me. It was a flood of emotion, I must say. I don't cry much at all, but that moment the tears were indeed flowing. I felt a very strong sense of God's love and presence like never before.

3 years ago God began to challenge me on what I believed about Him. He began to challenge me that I simply was not thinking, not studying, and being very lazy in my faith. A friend of mine, a Calvinist, began to challenge me in a debate we were having on his web-site, and then later in person. I got very angry and defensive, and even at one point, decided to delete all of my comments from his site. He was not happy about that at all. Through all of this, I had begun some serious study on my own (aside from what I was forced to do in seminary) for the first time. My faith and understanding of God was shaken completely. It was at this time that God began to refine what I had always been taught. It was a period of nearly 3 years during which God was refining my beliefs. This past summer, everything seemed to come together and it was like an epiphany in my mind. Suddenly, the Scriptures that I had been studying for various reasons throughout my life came alive to me in ways that I never understood before. That was early in June of this year, and here we are.

So, the short answer to your question would be that I can see the hand of God throughout my life. He has been moving to this point. I'm not certain really at what point I consider myself to have been saved. Perhaps it was at 12. Perhaps it was at 17. Perhaps it was at 29 (in Nashville, TN). Perhaps it was just this summer. I'm not sure, but I know I am at this moment. God has always been working in my life and revealing Himself, changing me, and doing many things in my life. So, it isn't just one moment, but a series of events.

24. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77581 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 6:59 pm

Bonzai said

Revcort, please give us a good reason to worship your God other than fear. Fear seems to be the only valid motivation for any one "with good in his heart" to worship your God judging from the exchange you have with Brother John above. Fear, is not a noble instinct.

If you believe that God punishing sin and sending people to hell for not believing in Him and for rejecting the offer of grace given in His Son makes Him evil, then what should I say? Should I lie to you to make you love Him? If I lied and told you that He doesn't do this and you loved Him, would you really be loving the true God? (would you not rather be loving a god that makes you happy by not condemning sin or unbelief?) That is part of who He is, but that's not all of who He is. You must also understand that His call of salvation goes out to all people. The Gospel message is offered to ALL people- to all who will believe.

Now, how is it that I can love God and why should you? Well, for my part, the only answer I can give is that I love Him because He first loved me. He called out to me as the Gospel was preached to me. He brought me to life. He enabled me to believe. Why should anyone love Him? The only reason I can give is that He is God and is worthy of our love and adoration. His grace and mercy are clearly seen in Jesus Christ- in His death on the cross on our behalf. And the greatest reason to love Him is that He offers Himself to us- and to know Him is the greatest of all endeavors.

It's not just about heaven and hell for me. Heaven is not enough to make me worship God and hell is not enough to keep me from rejecting Him. To know God is the greatest of all gifts that can be given. I only know the smallest fraction of who He is, but that small glimpse gives me such a strong desire to know Him fully. That's all I've got.

25. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77580 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 6:44 pm

1173. Comment #77548 by walk on October 9, 2007 at 3:55 pm

Sorry for going totally off-topic, but I just saw an advert for the movie "The Golden Compass", starring Nicole Kidman, that is being described as promoting atheism to children. The movie (called specifically "anti-catholic") is based on one book of a trilogy called "His Dark Materials" by Philip Pullman. I haven't seen a mention here yet, but I'm sure RDnet will post something shortly. The plot supposedly leads to the killing off the "Authority" aka god.

Here's some info: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/aug/07082004.html

The wacky catholic spokesman Bill Donahue actually said (Fox chose him {?} to comment on the upcoming movie) "Have you ever met a happy atheist child?" - - - Whaaat?!! - - - Oh no, Bill, much better to teach a child there's a scary, all powerful guy in the sky who listens to your thoughts 24/7, and unless you follow his crazy rules he's going to burn you in hell forever! Now, THAT'S how to create a happy child!

There's gonna be a huge outcry over this movie, so - - let the games begin!

This kind of thing doesn't surprise me at all. I expect to see it more and more as the years pass. I read that article and Kidman is kidding herself if she thinks that this movie is not anti-Catholic. It's very obvious to me that it is. The evil "organization" that the heroes are fighting against is called, "the Magisterium." This is the same name used by the RCC to denote their central authority group, which consists of the Pope and his bishops. The primary threat that this organization is fighting is "the curiosity of a child." It seems pretty clear to me.

26. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77575 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 6:01 pm

1165. Comment #77480 by brother john on October 9, 2007 at 12:06 pm

Dear revcourt,

Can only answer very briefly. Must get on with my log on TGD (www.theheartofgod.co.uk) Recommend you look at it to get a better idea of my thinking.

To your answer n 947.
First. In your reply you do not mention what is one of its main points: that if God condemns people to Hell JUST BECAUSE they are not Christian because they cannot honestly and sincerely say that they do accept Christ – you present people with a monster God. No decent thinking person with good in their heart would consider following such a capricious God. I say to you as a brother in Christ: you must think deeply and prayerfully about that because it is a terrible error – and is not based on the whole counsel of Scripture as you put it.

And I say to my atheist webkin – that capricious God is not the God revealed by Jesus Christ.

Second. You take issue with my imaginary picture of the joy of the non-believer as, on dying, they see God as He is in all his love and beauty and experience joy in themselves beyond containing. That simple graphic human imagery is TRUTH. SCRIPTURE TRUTH.

I put it in such vivid picture language because I wanted it to speak to anyone who is receptive to the possibility. I did not want to repeat what are to them dusty dead texts they have heard a hundred times.
And. Here is the point IT IS BASED ON SCRIPTURE. It is based first
- On the fact that God IS Love, not just loving. That is Scripture.
- On the fact that God is JUST as even you noted. Scripture
- On the fact that the angels who spoke to the shepherds gave their message for "men ie people of good will". Scripture.
- On the fact that in Malachi God's Spirit tells us that GOD HAS NO FAVOURITES – and Jesus in the Gospel clearly says that not everyone who says "Lord ! Lord!" to him is acceptable to him. He wants more than words. Scripture.
- On the fact that Christ died for all. Scripture

One of our atheist contributors called you something like a "diehard old fundamentalist". Brother take that to heart. You are part of a sector of Christianity that, to others, seems to delight in casting others into the outer darkness.
You say you DON'T delight in it? I believe you. Then search your heart in obedience to God's Holy Spirit – the only way to get to the truth that is in the life-giving, freedom giving words of our Saviour.

This narrow understanding of Scripture damages God's good and holy and loving name. It damages our brothers and sisters who are turned away from God by such rigid authoritarianism - no doubt sincere assertions, but nonetheless wrong.

You used the phrase "Jehovah-God". Are you by any chance a Jehovah's Witness? "Jehovah" is a mis-vocalisation of the divine name revealed to Moses.

We Christians want to win others to Christ.() Just as much as Dawkins wants to win others to his faith.

We only stand a chance IF IF AND ONLY IF our thinking, our talking, above all our living is a FAITHFUL REFLECTION of the universally loving and great- beyond- our- imagining God who SO loves us – all of us – whatever our faith or non-faith allegiance may be.
Your brother in Christ.

You said, "In your reply you do not mention what is one of its main points: that if God condemns people to Hell JUST BECAUSE they are not Christian because they cannot honestly and sincerely say that they do accept Christ – you present people with a monster God."

I'm going to show you some Scripture where it states that God does this very thing...

Here's one of the most famous passages in the Bible, but verse 18 is usually left out of the quote- wonder why...

16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3:16-18)

Another...

1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the men of old gained approval... 6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him. (Hebrews 11:1,2,6)

Another...

12 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, 15 while it is said, "Today if you hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts, as when they provoked Me." 16 For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses? 17 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.

And another...

12 Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus. (Revelation 14:12)

And another...

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

another...

For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23 and For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

And one final...

10 let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by this name this man stands here before you in good health. 11 "He is the stone which was rejected by you, the builders, but which became the chief corner stone. 12 "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:10-12)

Ok, that's probably overkill BrotherJohn, but I wanted to be as clear as possible. I realize what I would like to teach Brother John. It would be great for me if I could tell people that no person will ever be judged or sent to hell based on not believing or not having faith in Jesus Christ. That would be a very popular belief indeed. And why not? There are no true consequences of sin here.

However, I can't teach that because that's not what the Bible teaches. The verses I have quoted here should make that clear.

Now, I know that the atheists here don't believe in God and, therefore, don't really care what the Bible says, but I ask you... after reading the verses I quoted, can you come away with any other understanding than what I've said here?

27. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77508 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 1:09 pm

Hey guys, I have many things to say, but I have too much to do at the moment to say them.

CHeard, I've been checking into your theory- and will be commenting back.

Regarding Creation Museum questions- I'll try to answer those soon.

I'll be back.

28. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77424 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 9:01 am

1156. Comment #77414 by Bonzai on October 9, 2007 at 8:31 am

Just visited revcort's myspace page and saw his picture. Wow.. doesn't look like anything I have imagined based on his cordial sounding even though logically challenged posts. He looks like one mean, beefy dude. It's all good debating religion online, I wouldn't mess with him in person. :--)

Oh yes, Bonzai, I'm beefy alright. Too beefy! :D But I appreciate the kind way you said that. But, intimidating in person? Ha! I'm the least intimidating person you'd ever meet. (just ask my 3-year-old)

I'm a kidder at heart- and that first picture on my page is just a silly picture I took at the local Dairy Queen. I guess I could change it to something more formal though. :D

29. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77423 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 8:57 am

1155. Comment #77409 by epeeist on October 9, 2007 at 8:16 am

Comment #77214 by revcort

Or, I guess you could just put in on par with Greek Mythology- a completely useless waste of reading time- except for some entertainment, a few chuckles perhaps.

You call reading the Illiad, one of the great epics of western civilisation a "useless waste of reading time".

So what's your take on Plato, Shakespeare or Confucius? Are these a waste of reading time too? Mallory, Francis Bacon, Jane Austen, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Hemingway, Steinbeck and others too many to number, centuries of great writing dismissed as only worthy of a bit of entertainment and a chuckle.

And then of course there is music and art...

Ah, perhaps I went too far epeeist. Quite right, it's not a complete waste of time. There is much there worth reading. I guess I should clarify. From a Christian's perspective, Greek Mythology has no eternal significance.

30. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77394 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 7:46 am

1146. Comment #77307 by Corylus on October 9, 2007 at 2:16 am

Revcort
(Comment 1141) - I am having trouble making your link work. In the meantime though as it appears you are willing to show us pictures of yours tis only fair that we show you pictures of ours :D

Can I ask you to check out the website of the National History Museum in London?

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/

I love the dinosaur picture on this page.

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/visitor-research/index.html

In fact, their reference materials on dinosaurs are fascinating.

http://internt.nhm.ac.uk/jdsml/nature-online/dino-directory/

You would think that with that amount of the critters about there would be more mention of them in the bible if they had really lived side-by-side with humans?? Oh well.

Oh, and remember what I said earlier about cost? Admission to this museum is free.

CHeard I read your blog entry - very interesting. Thank you for taking the time to write out.

Hey corylus, thanks for those links. I think my html (dis)abilities are the source of the trouble with my link. Sorry about that. Regardless, the address is correct, so you can copy/paste it into your browser and it'll work.

I admit that the Creation Museum is a bit pricy, though I would go again if given the opportunity. However, this is the first year of operation for that facility and it is privately funded. I could be mistaken, but I do believe that the museums you mention are funded by taxpayers, and, as such, would need no cost of admission. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe the Creation Museum is non-profit. I'll have to check that out.

31. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77390 by revcort on October 9, 2007 at 7:33 am

Richard Morgan said:

It seems to me that this guy, and people like him, are doing as much for the cause of atheism as many of our regular posters here. Or does this kind of contradictory gobbledygook make some kind of sense to people in the USA? And THAT is a genuine question not just one of my typically snide remarks.

Hey there Richard. Well, you were right about one thing for sure- I have nothing to hide. Now, it's difficult to know a great amount about a person just from a myspace page, but there I am, warts and all. I accepted you as a friend this morning by the way.

Yeah, I'm sure I have many hang-ups. I've never claimed perfection. By the way, the reason I didn't mention anything about posting here is because I wrote those things long before I ever found this site. I've spoken to many of those people personally and mentioned posting here to them. (so it's not like I'm leading a double life or something-ha!)

As for the apparent contradiction about watching T.V., I'm sure you find that very humorous- get to call me a hypocrite and all. I do still watch television occasionally, but I'm not spending nearly as much time on that as I did before. So, that's getting better. It gives me more time to spend with my family and do some more reading, which is a much better way to use my time.

If anyone else would like to visit that page, I welcome that. You know what you're going to get there of course- I'm just one of those crazy fundamentalist Christians. :D

32. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77214 by revcort on October 8, 2007 at 7:32 pm

BTW, I was reading a bit back through the thread to see what I missed. In regards to CHeard's take on the Nephillim, I agree with much of what he said there. (though, it seems to me that he believes it's all a myth anyway, so why interpret anything?)

On at least one point, I'd say that the majority of biblical scholars disagree with his his take. It's the whole business of some "council of gods" and the phrase, "Let us make man in our image." I would say that the vast majority say this is simply a reference to the trinity- the triune nature of God. So, that would be, "Let us (that is, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) make man in our image."

Or, I guess you could just put in on par with Greek Mythology- a completely useless waste of reading time- except for some entertainment, a few chuckles perhaps. I will say this- if that is a reference to multiple gods, then there's no sense in being a Christian. We're wasting our time. If I truly believed that, I could make a strong argument for becoming an atheist- whether I wanted to be angry about it or not. :D

Edit: Oh, one other thing, I'd say it's more like the "sons of God" are fallen angels that had been exiled to the earth. (not gods, and not implying that Adam could become a god. This was a lie that the Serpent told Eve to deceive her into taking from the forbidden fruit to begin with. Adam didn't actually become a god. (though, this whole greek council of gods and goddesses is much more entertaining. great comedy there.

33. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #77204 by revcort on October 8, 2007 at 6:54 pm

Hey everyone. Just returned from the Creation Museum- the museum created by Answers in Genesis and Ken Hamm. I must say, it was very well done, in my opinion. If I had not had my children with me, I could have done much more reading. Regardless, I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have about it, if I know the answers.

I thought some of you might be interested in seeing some pictures, so I posted some on my myspace page. (they're not very good, but it's better than nothing) A friend of mine will have some better ones up soon, and I'll link those. In the meantime, mine are at www.myspace/revcort. Click on my pictures and then on the Creation Museum Album.

34. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76692 by revcort on October 6, 2007 at 6:07 pm

1121. Comment #76689 by gr8hands on October 6, 2007 at 6:01 pm

I received a PM that revcort had admitted my statements about jesus changing the law were correct.

I reference his post 1088

Now certainly, I can admit there is a change. Obviously there is some change in this instance.

See? Was that so difficult? I am sorry that it took days and days to get that simple admission, but at least revcort made that small breakthrough.

Paul Creber -- thank you for taking up the mantle of reason. revcort spouts his nonsense as if he's some kind of expert, and without knowledgeable people to point out his errors, they might pass without comment.

He still bores me, so I'm not going to linger, but keep up the good work!

Ah gr8hands, I think I'm really beginning to love you man. (and I mean that seriously) But I will make a suggestion to you- you should try Paul Creber's approach, using only a slight amount of gentility. :D

Having said that though, if you will re-read (painful as it may be to muddle through my ignorant ramblings) you'll see that, though I did concede that small battle, I didn't give up the war. :D (and won't, of course- my "melon" grows thicker and more hardened by the second- hahaha!)

35. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76690 by revcort on October 6, 2007 at 6:01 pm

1112. Comment #76565 by hungarianelephant on October 6, 2007 at 9:44 am

revcort (72673) - thanks for your answer. I must say it's left me even more confused. First, when CHeard said almost exactly the same about interpretation, you said he was on the slippery slope to hell. Is that because his interpretation is, in your view, wrong?

Now, this is where, if I am being intellectually honest, I must ask this question. (and so must you- and you have) How can I know that my interpretation is the correct one? The only answer I can give here is that I must do my best to take into account the entire Word of God so as to avoid errors that can come from isolating one verse or section of verses and making that one thing what my faith is all about, which would be a mistake.

You ask the question, but then don't answer it. At best, what you're saying is that you are doing the best job at interpretation that you can. That's fair enough, but it doesn't make you right. Don't you see that?

I don't know if you answered my question about why the rule against covetousness still applies - maybe it was in your lost post. I'd be interested to hear your view.

You've nailed it pretty well there hungarinelephant (love that name man- makes me chuckle). All I can do is do my best. However, it is not like I'm all alone. There are many Biblical scholars who have gone before who help me. And of course, I strongly believe in the working of the Holy Spirit to aid me in understanding. (I guess I could explain how that works in my life- which would further freak you guys out) I don't disagree with CHeard and BrotherJohn about the biggest issues of all of course. But there are definitely disagreements on many things. It is unfortunate, and some would argue that we'd be better off presenting a united front. But I'd rather just lay it out there myself. If I disagree because of something I have read in Scripture (especially if it is something that is well established by theologians throughout Christian history), then I must correct it.

36. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76687 by revcort on October 6, 2007 at 5:52 pm

Corlyus

Idle curiosity on my part here Revcort.

Can you tell me how much admission costs to the Creation Museum?

Plus just how inflated are the prices in any food outlets attached and the gift shop? ( NB. I say 'just how' because this things are costly in every museum I have ever been in, but I would like some idea of scale.)

Are there lots of collection boxes in prominent points? (i.e. to pay for the upkeep of the museum). Also, are there notices up with the names of benefactors in prominents places or any other psychological incentives to give money?

I would like to be able to calculate how much cash they are making out of this one.

Cheers.

General admission for adults is $19.95, for children, the price is $9.95. Children under 5 get in free. Seniors get in for $14.95.

I don't know the other answers to your other questions yet, but I'll tell you when I get back so you can do some more idle speculation. :D

37. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76426 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 8:03 pm

I've been reading this evening about Antony Flew, famous atheist who has recently changed his mind and now says there is some kind of god or intelligent force that created everything, though he won't go along with a Christian or Muslim view of god. Apparently, his change of heart have resulted from evolution's inability to account for the complexity of life- and specifically questions related to DNA complexity. (I may not be framing his thoughts correctly, I realize) regardless, I'm wondering what the opinions of the atheistic community are about this guy? Is he just seen as on the brink of senility or what? Just curious.

38. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76412 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 6:44 pm

walk

(why is everything suddenly in bold letters?)

I made an error on one of my html tags and apparently it bolded the whole thread. I fixed my bad tag and the entire thread was fixed. I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that I always view this thread in reverse order, last comment first? That would be a strange glitch. I don't know. All I know is, I fixed the tag and it fixed the thread. :D Weird.

By the way walk, you are correct about the conclusions that have to be drawn from dinosaurs being mentioned in Job.

If indeed they are dinosaurs mentioned, how did they know about them? Were they doing archeology back then and discovered a skeleton? Did they look at cave drawings? Or, is the author exaggerating? Even if, as some people here think, the Bible is a fabrication, the writer had to come up with this idea from somewhere. I would also welcome some thoughts on this. It makes me think that all of the talk of millions of years between dinosaurs and man along with billions of years for the age of the earth is simply someone's speculation. (of course, I also want to believe that- I admit) I really need to study the dating methods that are being used today.

Another thing that made me question this was something I had read a discovery in Glenn Rose, TX of a human foot print inside a dinosaur footprint. Does anyone know about this? Was it a hoax? Did it happen later? What was the explanation? I know the "creationist" perspective on it- what is the other side?

39. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76349 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 3:18 pm

1103. Comment #76337 by Mr DArcy on October 5, 2007 at 2:44 pm

revcort, I hope you have a good weekend together with your fellow companions. I just hope that when you look at the exhibits of the museum, you will bear in mind some of the counter arguments that you have come across on this thread. Is the world only 6-7000 years old? Are all the geologists, palaeontologists, cosmologists, astronomers, physicists, biologists and others all wrong about the evidence of a 4.5 billion year old Earth?

I suspect your mind is already made up, but from one human to another, have a great trip!

Hey MrDArcy, I really appreciate that. I will bear those things in mind. I can be objective I think. Of course, many here would doubt that, but we shall see.

40. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76346 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 3:14 pm

1101. Comment #76324 by walk on October 5, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Rev, thanks for clarifying that you don't buy into that.

I admittedly didn't have corroboration for the dog domestication question on hand when I made the post (just remember reading it) but a quick search shows that most articles agree with the approx. 13,000 B.C. date (actually making it 15,000 years ago). Here are a couple:

http://archaeology.about.com/od/domestications/qt/dogs.htm

http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/data/2002/01/01/html/ft_20020101.1.html

Also, the reason I mentioned the man/dinosaur coexistence thing, is that I believe I read (not sure) that this is one of the erroneous facts put forth at creation museums.

Last things first... ;) Well, the reason the Creation Museum says that dinosaurs existed alongside humans is because there seems to be references to dinosaurs in the Bible. Now, I'll warn you that I've had people attempt to explain these references as a hippo or as a crocodile, but I'll let you be the judge of these. Here they are.

Behemoth

15 "Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. 16 "Behold now, his strength in his loins And his power in the muscles of his belly. 17 "He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. 18 "His bones are tubes of bronze; His limbs are like bars of iron. 19 "He is the first of the ways of God; Let his maker bring near his sword. 20 "Surely the mountains bring him food, And all the beasts of the field play there. 21 "Under the lotus plants he lies down, In the covert of the reeds and the marsh. 22 "The lotus plants cover him with shade; The willows of the brook surround him. 23 "If a river rages, he is not alarmed; He is confident, though the Jordan rushes to his mouth. 24 "Can anyone capture him when he is on watch, With barbs can anyone pierce his nose?

Now, this certainly sounds like an enormous animal of some kind. Some have said it sounds like a Brontosaurus or similar dinosaur. Again, I'm no expert here, but "he bends his tail like a cedar" and "the Jordan rushes into his mouth" seems hard to deny.

Leviathan

1 "Can you draw out Leviathan with a fishhook? Or press down his tongue with a cord? 2 "Can you put a rope in his nose Or pierce his jaw with a hook? 3 "Will he make many supplications to you, Or will he speak to you soft words? 4 "Will he make a covenant with you? Will you take him for a servant forever? 5 "Will you play with him as with a bird, Or will you bind him for your maidens? 6 "Will the traders bargain over him? Will they divide him among the merchants? 7 "Can you fill his skin with harpoons, Or his head with fishing spears? 8 "Lay your hand on him; Remember the battle; you will not do it again! 9 "Behold, your expectation is false; Will you be laid low even at the sight of him? 10 "No one is so fierce that he dares to arouse him; Who then is he that can stand before Me? 11 "Who has given to Me that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is Mine. 12 "I will not keep silence concerning his limbs, Or his mighty strength, or his orderly frame. 13 "Who can strip off his outer armor? Who can come within his double mail? 14 "Who can open the doors of his face? Around his teeth there is terror. 15 "His strong scales are his pride, Shut up as with a tight seal. 16 "One is so near to another That no air can come between them. 17 "They are joined one to another; They clasp each other and cannot be separated. 18 His sneezes flash forth light, And his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. 19 "Out of his mouth go burning torches; Sparks of fire leap forth. 20 "Out of his nostrils smoke goes forth As from a boiling pot and burning rushes. 21 "His breath kindles coals, And a flame goes forth from his mouth. 22 "In his neck lodges strength, And dismay leaps before him. 23 "The folds of his flesh are joined together, Firm on him and immovable. 24 His heart is as hard as a stone, Even as hard as a lower millstone. 25 "When he raises himself up, the mighty fear; Because of the crashing they are bewildered. 26 "The sword that reaches him cannot avail, Nor the spear, the dart or the javelin. 27 "He regards iron as straw, Bronze as rotten wood. 28 "The arrow cannot make him flee; Slingstones are turned into stubble for him. 29 "Clubs are regarded as stubble; He laughs at the rattling of the javelin. 30 "His underparts are like sharp potsherds; He spreads out like a threshing sledge on the mire. 31 "He makes the depths boil like a pot; He makes the sea like a jar of ointment. 32 "Behind him he makes a wake to shine; One would think the deep to be gray-haired. 33 "Nothing on earth is like him, One made without fear. 34 "He looks on everything that is high; He is king over all the sons of pride."

I'm certain this can be explained away, but this does sound like some kind of water-dwelling dragon- I have no clue which dinosaur it would describe best. I don't know what other kind of animal it could be, but I've had someone attempt to say it must be a crocodile.

Well anyway, I'm not totally sold on this, but the book of Job is considered by some to actually be older, in its writing, than even Genesis. Most scholars agree it is pre-flood. Of course, I know that none of you believe in a world-wide flood or Noah, but I'm just explaining the view that has been put forth for your information.

41. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76332 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 2:26 pm

1100. Comment #76318 by Bonzai on October 5, 2007 at 1:03 pm

Steve,

However, Satan knew the weaknesses of an intelligent species, so knew just what kind of book to get written, and when to get it written. With a single book he could delude most of that species to ignore everything else.

Let me guess, that book must be the Quran, right, rev? :-)

Hahaha! Sounds good to me Bonzai. I don't know who is responsible for the writing of the Koran, but if you begin to break it down as many break down the Bible, you'll see that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny anywhere near as well. I know a man who is translating the Koran into English. I'm looking forward to reading through it. It's not very long, from what I understand, and can be read relatively quickly. We had a man who came to our church named Usama Dakdok, who grew up in Egypt. He had some strong words indeed to say about the spread of Islam throughout Europe, the United States, and the rest of the world. You might look him up.

42. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76309 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 12:33 pm

Hey walk and bonzai, if it helps, though it likely doesn't, I do not subscribe to either of those theories.

#1 Suggesting that God planted false evidence is ridiculous. The evidence is there and it must be weighed and explained.

#2 Satan has no control over the geological evidence. Now, he might have some influence over some of the explanations given for it, but he has no power to create.

Oh, and walk, what is the evidence that dogs were domesticated by humans 13,000 years ago? (I'm serious about that- I'd like to hear that explanation if you or someone else here knows the answer)

43. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76275 by revcort on October 5, 2007 at 10:21 am

1081. Comment #76163 by Mr DArcy on October 5, 2007 at 12:19 am

Has anything changed? Does revcort still believe in a 6 day creation of the universe and a 6500 year old Earth? revcort's good on scripture, but has he read any of the science that argues very strongly against a young Earth?

Hey Mr DArcy- I have studied some of the science, but I'm still studying. I do intend to look further into the claims of evolution.

Oh, and here's something that is certain to get everyone here worked up. Since we have a three-day weekend here in the States (Columbus Day is Monday), I'm taking some adults and some students from our church to the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky (south of Cincinnati) I'll be sure to bring back a report on what I see there. I know you folks think I am unable to look at this kind of thing critically, but I do intend to evaluate the evidence they present and check it out elsewhere. (let the wrath begin.... now! :D)

44.