I was feeling much better, until I saw the length of this post.... >.< Okay... got my tylenol close at hand, so let's do this.
You don't think it's a good thing to destroy the wicked?
If you consider innocent CHILDREN to be wicked, there truly is no hope for you.
(1)*****Preoccupation with physical appetites (Luke 17:27)
Huh? Are you talking about FOOD appetites, or sex? Either way, I don't see how that could be sign of the end of the world.
(2)*****Rapid advances in technology (Genesis 4:22)
So progress is evil?
(3)*****Grossly materialistic attitudes and interests (Luke 17:28)
All through history, people have been greedy. The world is still here.
(4)*****Uniformitarian philosophies (Hebrews 11:7)
I don't even know what this means, to be honest with you.
(5)*****Inordinate devotion to pleasure and comfort (Genesis 4:21)
HUH?! So now it's bad to feel good?!
(6)*****No concern for God in either belief or conduct (2 Peter 2:5; Jude 15)
No comment, since I don't believe in your God.
(7)*****Disregard for the sacredness of the marriage relation (Matthew 24:38)
Marriage was around long before Christianity came around, so this holds no water whatsoever.
(8)*****Rejection of the inspired Word of God (1 Peter 3:19)
Ah yes, the good old "Worship me or burn." Yup, there's a God worthy of my worship (Sarcasm)
(9)*****Population explosion (Genesis 6:1, 11)
Hmm.... maybe this is happening because people aren't practicing safe sex....
(10)*****Widespread violence (Genesis 6:11, 13)
Again, this has been a problem all through human history. The Earth is still here.
(11)*****Corruption throughout society (Genesis 6:12)
See above.
(12)*****Preoccupation with illicit sex activity (Genesis 4:19; 6:2)
I'm just dying to know what your definition of illicit sex activity is.
(13)*****Widespread words and thoughts of blasphemy (Jude 15)
I'm sure this has been an ongoing problem for a LONG time as well.
(14)*****Organized Satanic activity (Genesis 6:1–4)
"Satanic" meaning anything that doesn't involve your God, right?
(15)*****Promulgation of systems and movements of abnormal depravity (Genesis 6:5, 12)
I'm not digging out a dictionary right now, so to this I'll say "Whatever"
These conditions prevailed in the days of Noah and they are all rapidly growing again today. There is good reason, therefore, to believe that these present times are those which immediately precede the return of the Lord Jesus Christ.
So because people are thinking for themselves, it's bringing about the end of the world?
Do you have that same compassion for the unborn?
If you're referring to abortion here, I hate to tell you this, but a clump of cells with no brain or nervous system is NOT alive!
Animal rights has become another form of idolatry (Enyart).
Oh noes!! People are treating animals with love and respect! Give me a break!
Alcohol isn't evil. Drunkenness is sin (Eph 5:18).
"Scripture has much to say regarding the drinking of alcohol (Leviticus 10:9; Numbers 6:3; Deuteronomy 29:6; Judges 13:4, 7, 14; Proverbs 20:1; 31:4; Isaiah 5:11, 22; 24:9; 28:7; 29:9; 56:12). However, Scripture does not necessarily forbid a Christian from drinking beer, wine, or any other drink containing alcohol. In fact, some Scriptures discuss alcohol in positive terms. Ecclesiastes 9:7 instructs, “Drink your wine with a merry heart.” Psalm 104:14-15 states that God gives wine “that makes glad the heart of men.” Amos 9:14 discusses drinking wine from your own vineyard as a sign of God’s blessing. Isaiah 55:1 encourages, “Yes, come buy wine and milk…” full text: What does the Bible say about drinking alcohol / wine? Is it a sin for a Christian to drink alcohol / wine?
http://www.gotquestions.org/sin-alcohol.html
It's my body and I'll do what I want with it.
Excerpt, Ronald L. Dart Born to Win Radio Program:
"The whole idea behind sin offerings in the Bible is for a man to acknowledge His sin and to recognize that there is a price to be paid for it. Now God didn't make a very big deal out of it.
All it took was a little goat [or lamb]--that, that little fella had to die because you sinned-- would have an effect on a normal person, I should think. For the most part when we do something wrong nothing happens...at least that's what we think. and it calls to mind a passage in 'When a crime is not punished quickly, people feel it is safe to do wrong.' Ec. 8:11, NLT)."
So the poor little lamb died a horrific death because a HUMAN sinned??? What???
Blood is a symbol. It is ineffectual to remove sin (Heb 10:4). Life is in the blood (Gen. 9:4; Lev. 17:11, 14; 19:16; Deut. 12:23; Matt. 27:4, 24). Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin (Heb. 9:22).
Seriously, I'm in shock that there's people who still think like this.
"The children of Israel were to put the blood of the lamb outside on the door. Upon seeing the blood, the death angel would pass over the house. I believe there is a picture given here that will answer a question that is asked many times: What will happen to the little children of believers at the time of the Rapture? If small children are in the house when the Lord comes for His own, will He take the Mom and Dad and leave the little ones behind? This chapter shows us that God will not leave the young ones behind.
So.... if Children who were too young to learn about God are taken anyway... what about those tribes in Africa that have never heard of God themselves? Are they going to be raptured as well, or are they hellbound heathens even though they don't know any better?
Inside the home the family is eating the lamb, and by faith they are partaking of Christ. The young children do not know what is taking place. Will they be left behind in Egypt when Israel goes out from the land? If a little one has not yet reached the age of accountability, will he be slain? Oh no, friend, the blood covers everyone in the family. God will not leave small children behind at the time of the Rapture any more than He left them behind when the Israelites were redeemed and left the land of Egypt."
I thought we were all children in the eyes of God....
"The plagues may be viewed as God’s intervention to seek the release of the Hebrew people. They also represented God’s challenge to the Egyptian religious system. To the Egyptians, the Nile River was a god. From it came the power and life of the Egyptian culture. They worshiped the Nile and the abundance of resources that it provided. Since the first nine plagues seem to be a natural progression of God’s attack on the Nile River, all of these plagues relate to God’s challenge to the Egyp-tian religious system.
Following are the ten plagues, as recorded in Exodus 7:14–12:30:
1. The Water of the Nile Turned into Blood (Ex. 7:14–25). This first plague probably was the pollution of the Nile River by large quantities of fine, red earth, brought down from the Sudan and Ethiopia by abnormal flooding. The pollution of the water provided a favorable environment for the growth of micro-organisms and parasitic bacteria. Their presence could have led to the death of the fish in the river (Ex. 7:21).
In addition to depriving Egypt of water and fish—an important part of their diet—the plague also had a religious effect. The Nile River, god of the Egyptians, had been confronted by the power of the Redeemer God of the Hebrew people.
The Nile River near Luxor, Egypt. God turned the waters of this river into blood to punish the Egyptians for not freeing His people (Ex. 7:14–25).
2. Frogs Cover the Land (Ex. 8:1–15). Seven days after the first plague, frogs came out of the river and infested the land. The frogs would have been driven from the Nile and its canals and pools by the polluted water. When Moses prayed to God, the frogs died in the houses, courtyards, and fields. The frogs were symbols of the Egyptian goddess, Heqt, who was supposed to help women in childbirth. This plague was another demonstration of the superior power of God over the gods of Egypt.
3. Lice Throughout the Land (Ex. 8:16–19). Insects of various kinds are common in Egypt. It is not easy to identify the exact pests involved in the third plague. Various translations have lice (KJV, NKJV), gnats (NASB, NRSV, NIV), and maggots (REB).
4. Swarms of Flies (Ex. 8:20–32). Many kinds of flies are common in Egypt. The mounds of decaying frogs would have provided an ideal breeding ground for these pests. Some scholars suggest that the swarms mentioned here were a species known as the stable fly, a blood feeder that bites people as well as cattle. This fly is a carrier of skin anthrax, which is probably the disease brought on by the sixth plague.
5. Pestilence of Livestock (Ex. 9:1–7). Either the frogs or the insects may have been the carriers of this infection. The livestock of the Israelites were miraculously protected (Ex. 9:6–7). This was the second time God had made a distinction between the Israelites and the Egyptians in the plagues He sent (Ex. 8:22–23).
6. Boils on Man and Beast (Ex. 9:8–12). This infection was probably skin anthrax, carried by the flies of the fourth plague. The festering boils broke into blisters and running sores.
7. Heavy Hail, with Thunder and Lightning (Ex. 9:13–35). Egypt was essentially an agricultural country. By destroying the crops, this plague and the next struck at the heart of Egypt’s economy. Moses’ warning gave the Egyptians a chance to save their remaining livestock, and some acted upon it (Ex. 9:19–20). The severe storm caused great destruction (Ex. 9:24–25). The flax and barley were ruined, but not the wheat because it had not yet been planted (Ex. 9:31–32). This would suggest early February as the time of this plague. Again the Israelites received special protection. There was no hail in the land of Goshen, where the Hebrews lived (Ex. 9:26).
8. Swarms of Locusts (Ex. 10:1–20). The destruction from the previous plague was fresh in the minds of Pharaoh’s advisors (Ex. 10:7). The eighth plague must have followed the hail very closely. Heavy rainfall in July–September would have produced conditions favorable for locusts in March. These locusts, swarms of foliageeating grasshoppers, probably were driven into the Egyptian delta by strong winds. They wiped out the vegetation that had survived the earlier destruction. Again, as after the seventh plague, Pharaoh confessed “I have sinned” (Ex. 10:16). But again, after the plague was withdrawn, Pharaoh hardened his heart and would not let the people of Israel go (Ex. 10:20).
9. Three Days of Darkness (Ex. 10:21–29). This darkness could have been caused by a severe dust storm. For three days darkness covered the land (Ex. 10:23). This storm would have been intensified by fine earth deposited over the land by previous flooding. This plague probably occurred in March. Again, the Israelites were spared the effects (Ex. 10:23). By showing God’s power over the light of the sun—represented by one of Egypt’s chief deities, the sun-god Ra—this plague was a further judgment on the idolatry of the Egyptians.
10. Death of Egyptian Firstborn (Ex. 11:1–12:30). The tenth plague was the most devastating of all—the death of the firstborn males in Egyptian families. The Hebrews were spared because they followed God’s command to sprinkle the blood of a lamb on the doorposts of their houses. The death angel “passed over” the houses where the blood was sprinkled—hence, the name Passover for this religious observance among the Jewish people. Only a supernatural explanation can account for the selective slaughter of the tenth plague.
I don't recall there being any archeological evidence for the existence of Moses, no writings by Egyptians about any such plagues OR the liberation of their "slaves", etc, etc..
He could have. He chose to reveal the wickedness of Pharaoh's heart.
So he was wicked by staying true to his own faith? And due to the Pharaoh's decision to NOT bow down to the Hebrew God, He decided to kill all their innocent children. What a nice God.
If you assault your neighbor, you may go to jail. If you hit the President, you may be sent away for a long time. If you offend a perfect and holy God, you will go to hell for eternity (Geraci). God is just. His judgment is right.
Ah, yes. An eternity in Hell for a lifetime of sins. I guess I'll say hi to George Carlin for you when I get there.
You do not appreciate the exceeding sinfulness of sin or the holiness of God (MacArthur).
No, I don't.
Your sister is not God. Man is forbidden to murder (Ex 20:13; De 5:17). God is the giver of life so he may take life.
Hmmm.... so he was lying in the OT when he told Man to stone disobedient children to death?
If you had a picnic and ants invaded, would you step on them? Some men act like puny ants (McGee).
Actually, I'd pick up my basket and move someplace else. (I might kill one or two that were crawling on ME, but aside from that, I'd leave the little guys alone. They're just trying to survive)
Of course it makes no sense to men but that is God's way. Man's religion makes sense to man. Trust in Christ is not a religion. It is a relationship.
You mean it makes sense to YOU. "Believe or Burn" is NOT a relationship. It's tyranny.
This is a Greek pagan view of God. This is not the God of the Bible. Time is real. Happenings are real. Choices have real consequences. God has a plan. He is calling out a people for his namesake.
So you just admitted that God isn't all powerful.
Man was created for fellowship with his creator. Adam walked and talked with God. For love to be real, choices have to be real. Although Adam sinned, God provided a way back to himself. Paradise lost will be paradise restored (Hanegraaff). Heaven will be filled with a redeemed people who love the Lord. We will not want to return to a sin-filled world again. Look around. Can you see the effects of sin on our world?
Adam and Eve didn't know the difference between right and wrong. Therefore, they were NOT created to be perfect beings.
Lucifer fell. His fate was set. Angels cannot be redeemed. But men can.
If God created Humans and God created humans, how come one can be redeemed but not the other? That doesn't sound very fair to me.
Look at the Grand Canyon. Does it look like something drastic happened there? It is the result of a catastrophic, worldwide flood. Do you really think that the little Colorado river carved out the Grand Canyon?
Um... no. The Grand Canyon formed over approximately 17 million years through water erosion from the Colorado River. Try again.
See:
In the Beginning: Evidence for Creation and the Flood
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
Creation Science is not real science. Sorry.
In the book Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study4, creationist researcher John Woodmorappe suggests that, at most, 16,000 animals were all that were needed to preserve the created kinds that God brought into the Ark.
So millions of different species are alive today even though only 16,000 animals were brought onto the ark? Somehow I doubt that.
The Ark did not need to carry every kind of animal—nor did God command it. It carried only air-breathing, land-dwelling animals, creeping things, and winged animals such as birds. Aquatic life (fish, whales, etc.) and many amphibious creatures could have survived in sufficient numbers outside the Ark. This cuts down significantly the total number of animals that needed to be on board.
Okay, first of all, do you have ANY idea how many crawling species of insects there are in the world? How the heck did Noah get to Australia to get all the species that live there? Also, IF there was a worldwide flood, all the fish would die. Sorry, but there are FRESHWATER fish, and there is SALTWATER fish. Freshwater cannot survive in Saltwater and vice versa.
Another factor which greatly reduces the space requirements is the fact that the tremendous variety in species we see today did not exist in the days of Noah. Only the parent “kinds” of these species were required to be on board in order to repopulate the earth.5 For example, only two dogs were needed to give rise to all the dog species that exist today.
Okay, now I'm really curious to know what two dogs were there that were able to eventually birth St. Bernards vs. Pocket Poodles.
Creationist estimates for the maximum number of animals that would have been necessary to come on board the Ark have ranged from a few thousand to 35,000, but they may be as few as two thousand if the biblical kind is approximately the same as the modern family classification.
I'd love to know exactly how people came up with those numbers.
As stated before, Noah wouldn’t have taken the largest animals onto the Ark; it is more likely he took juveniles aboard the Ark to repopulate the earth after the Flood was over. These younger animals also require less space, less food, and have less waste.
I'm sure he would have loved getting a baby hippo or a baby walrus from the mother. And again, how did he get all the animals from overseas? Australia and Madagascar have the most unique animals on the planet, and there's still species being discovered every day in the deep jungles.
Using a short cubit of 18 inches (46 cm) for the Ark to be conservative, Woodmorappe’s conclusion is that “less than half of the cumulative area of the Ark’s three decks need to have been occupied by the animals and their enclosures.”6 This meant there was plenty of room for fresh food, water, and even many other people..." full text: How Could Noah Fit All the Animals on the Ark?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/really-a-flood-and-ark
Uh huh.... I'm sure the animals loved being crammed into there like sardines, being unable to move. How did he keep the cats from eating the mice?
This verse tells us that Noah didn’t have to search or travel to far away places to bring the animals on board. The world map was completely different before the Flood, and on the basis of Genesis 1, there may have been only one continent. The animals simply arrived at the Ark as if called by a “homing instinct” (a behavior implanted in the animals by their Creator) and marched up the ramp, all by themselves.
If this is true, why are there no kangaroo's living in the wild of America? Were they all magically whisked back to their natural habitat after the flood?
Though this was probably a supernatural event (one that cannot be explained by our understanding of nature), compare it to the impressive migratory behavior we see in some animals today. We are still far from understanding all the marvelous animal behaviors exhibited in God’s creation: the migration of Canada geese and other birds, the amazing flights of Monarch butterflies, the annual travels of whales and fish, hibernation instincts, earthquake sensitivity, and countless other fascinating capabilities of God’s animal kingdom.." full text: How Could Noah Round Up So Many Animals?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/really-a-flood-and-ark
Animals have much more finely tuned instincts and senses than us lowly humans. There's nothing paranormal about how they are able to do the things you've mentioned, trust me.
...The Hard Facts
A biblical model of animal migration obviously must start with the Bible. From Genesis we can glean the following pertinent facts:
This should be good...
1.“And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive” (Genesis 6:19–20). The Bible is clear that representatives of all the kinds of air-breathing land animals and birds were present on the Ark. A technical term used by some creation scientists for these kinds is baramin—derived from the Hebrew words for created kind. Within these baramins is all the information necessary to produce all current species. For example, it is unlikely that the Ark contained two lions and two tigers. It is more likely that it contained two feline animals, from which lions, tigers, and other cat-like creatures have developed.
You've GOT to be kidding me.
2.Another lesson from Genesis 6:20 is that the animals came to Noah. He did not have to go and catch them. Therefore, this preservation of the world’s fauna was divinely controlled. It was God’s intention that the fauna be preserved. The animals’ recolonization of the land masses was therefore determined by God, and not left to chance.
How the heck could they get to Noah if there was an OCEAN seperating them from him and the ark??? Unless Noah was alive MILLIONS of years ago when the dinosaurs still roamed the earth on Pangaea, that's... not... POSSIBLE!!
3.“Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat” (Genesis 8:4). The Bible is clear that the Ark landed in the region of Ararat, but much debate has ensued over whether this is the same region as the locality of the present-day mountain known as Ararat. This issue is of importance, as we shall see. The Bible uses the plural “mountains.” It is unlikely that the Ark rested on a point on the top of a mountain, in the manner often illustrated in children’s picture books. Rather, the landing would have been among the mountainous areas of eastern Turkey, where present-day Mount Ararat is located, and western Iran, where the range extends.
Is this going to start referring to that dumb rock formation that people say is Noah's ark?
4.It was God’s will that the earth be recolonized. “Then God spoke to Noah, saying, ‘Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you: birds and cattle and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth.’ So Noah went out, and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him. Every animal, every creeping thing, every bird, and whatever creeps on the earth, according to their families, went out of the ark” (Genesis 8:15–19). The abundance and multiplication of the animals was also God’s will.
The biblical principles that we can establish then are that, after the Flood, God desired the ecological reconstruction of the world, including its vulnerable animal kinds, and the animals must have spread out from a mountainous region known as Ararat.
The construction of any biblical model of recolonization must include these principles. The model suggested on the following pages is constructed in good faith, to explain the observed facts through the “eyeglasses” of the Bible. The Bible is inspired, but our scientific models are not. If we subsequently find the model to be untenable, this would not shake our commitment to the absolute authority of Scripture.
With so few humans and animals left on earth, that would cause deformities in the children when they started getting together with relatives. If farm animals start inbreeding, it causes deformities and disease. Trust me, I've witnessed this with my own eyes, having grown up on a farm.
These dogs then began to spread out from the Ararat region to all parts of the globe.
Yes, I'm sure the Dingo's swam to Australia. They must have had some darn powerful muscles in those legs.
I'm sure you could articulate your sin in nice words (Ro 14:23).
Even the nicest way of putting it would be pushing the limits of the rules of this forum. I'd rather not risk getting banned, thank you.
Queen of D'enial.
each:
Okay, this ticked me off somewhat.... Tell me, who the heck are you to tell me that my life is NOT happy and peaceful?! Leave the 'judgement' up to your 'God', and don't go telling me I'm in denial when you are NOT living MY life!!
Wow, I can't believe I responded to this thing!! I've gotta go down some tylenol now >.<
