Salvation

[bahiista]

---

sorry pod kaau if harsh ang dating sa ako gpost but one thing will remind of these, you truly know kung kinsa tong tinnod o hypo through sa response ato nga post.
Im thankful to my God for your endeavor to proclaim the salvation....padayon bro!
Blessings.

[akosabni]

save this thread

save the world

[FISHPEN]

You would love reading this

An Atheist Professor of Philosophy speaks to his Class on the Problem Science has with GOD, The ALMIGHTY.

He asks one of his New Christian Students to stand and . . ...


Professor : You are a Christian, aren't you, son ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor : So you Believe in GOD ?
Student : Absolutely, sir.
Professor : Is GOD Good ?
Student : Sure.
Professor : Is GOD ALL - POWERFUL ?
Student : Yes.
Professor : My Brother died of Cancer even though he Prayed to GOD to Heal him..

Most of us would attempt to Help Others who are ill.

But GOD didn't.

How is this GOD Good then ? Hmm ?


( Student is silent )



Professor : You can't answer, can you ?

Let's start again, Young Fella.

Is GOD Good ?
Student : Yes.
Professor : Is Satan good ?
Student : No.
Professor : Where does Satan come from ?
Student : From . .. . GOD . . .
Professor : That's right.

Tell me son, is there evil in this World ?
Student : Yes.
Professor : Evil is everywhere, isn't it ?

And GOD did make Everything. Correct ?
Student : Yes.
Professor : So who created evil ?


( Student does not answer )


Professor : Is there Sickness ? Immorality ? Hatred ? Ugliness ?

All these terrible things exist in the World, don't they ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor : So, who Created them ?



( Student has no answer )



Professor : Science says you have 5 Senses you use to Identify and Observe the World around you.

Tell me, son . . . Have you ever Seen GOD ?
Student : No, sir.
Professor : Tell us if you have ever Heard your GOD ?
Student : No , sir.
Professor : Have you ever Felt your GOD, Tasted your GOD, Smelt your GOD ?

Have you ever had any Sensory Perception of GOD for that matter ?
Student : No, sir.. I'm afraid I haven't.
Professor : Yet you still Believe in HIM ?

Student : Yes.
Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn't exist.

What do you say to that, son ?
Student : Nothing. I only have my Faith.
Professor : Yes. Faith. And that is the Problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as Heat ?
Professor : Yes.
Student : And is there such a thing as Cold ?
Professor : Yes.
Student : No sir. There isn't.


( The Lecture Theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events )


Student : Sir, you can have Lots of Heat, even More Heat, Superheat, Mega Heat, White Heat,

a Little Heat or No Heat.

But we don't have anything called Cold.

We can hit 458 Degrees below Zero which is No Heat, but we can't go any further after that.

There is no such thing as Cold.

Cold is only a Word we use to describe the Absence of Heat.

We cannot Measure Cold.

Heat is Energy.

Cold is Not the Opposite of Heat, sir, just the Absence of it.


( There is Pin - Drop Silence in the Lecture Theatre )



Student : What about Darkness, Professor ? Is there such a thing as Darkness ?
Professor : Yes. What is Night if there isn't Darkness ?
Student : You're wrong again, sir.

Darkness is the Absence of Something.

You can have Low Light, Normal Light , Bright Light, Flashing Light . . ..

But if you have No Light Constantly, you have Nothing and it's called Darkness, isn't it ?

In reality, Darkness isn't.

If it is, were you would be able to make Darkness Darker, wouldn't you ?
Professor : So what is the point you are making, Young Man ?
Student : Sir, my point is your Philosophical Premise is Flawed.
Professor : Flawed ? Can you explain how ?
Student : Sir, you are working on the Premise of Duality.

You argue there is Life and then there is Death, a Good GOD and a Bad GOD.

You are viewing the Concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure.

Sir, Science can't even explain a Thought.

It uses Electricity and Magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.

To view Death as the Opposite of Life is to be ignorant of the fact that

Death cannot exist as a Substantive Thing.

Death is Not the Opposite of Life : just the Absence of it.

Now tell me, Professor, do you Teach your Students that they Evolved from a Monkey ?
Professor : If you are referring to the Natural Evolutionary Process, yes, of course, I do.
Student : Have you ever observed Evolution with your own eyes, sir ?


( The Professor shakes his head with a Smile, beginning to realize where the Argument is going )


Student : Since no one has ever observed the Process of Evolution at work and

cannot even prove that this Process is an On - Going Endeavor,

are you not Teaching your Opinion, sir ?

Are you not a Scientist but a Preacher ?


( The Class is in Uproar )


Student : Is there anyone in the Class who has ever Seen the Professor's Brain ?


( The Class breaks out into Laughter )


Student : Is there anyone here who has ever Heard the Professor's Brain, Felt it, Touched or Smelt it ? . .. ..

No one appears to have done so.

So, according to the Established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that

you have No Brain, sir.

With all due respect, sir, how do we then Trust your Lectures, sir ?


( The Room is Silent. The Professor stares at the Student, his face unfathomable )


Professor : I guess you'll have to take them on Faith, son.
Student : That is it sir . . .

the Link between Man & GOD is FAITH.

That is all that Keeps Things Moving & Alive.

[bahiista]

nice one bro... heard ko ani sa FM radio sa una.. FR FM...

[krushuddel]

I received this message a long time ago on my email..It's a good one. Thank you FishPen

[akosabni]

^ is faith, the link between man and god, a two way street?

i mean, most of us will say, we have faith in god, but can we also say, god has faith in man?

[Super Bisdak]

Yes it's faith!

Nice post bro.

God bless us!

[Super Bisdak]

^ is faith, the link between man and god, a two way street?

Ang definition sa faith bro kung basihan nato ang Bible,

Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

the link between man and God is Jesus. Pinaagi sa Iyang kamatayon iya kitang gipasig-uli ngadto sa Amahan.

i mean, most of us will say, we have faith in god, but can we also say, god has faith in man?

Dili mohaum ang phrase nga "God has faith in man" kung atong i-abay kini sa Heb 11:1, tungod sa hinungdan nga ang tanang butang nasayran na sa Ginoo ug dayag ang tanan diha Kaniya. Ang haum hinoon bro, "God is faithful to His promises to man".

God bless!

[Mr.Ho_chia]

Sir we are talking Science here, They dont just vote whimsically, behind them is knowledge gained thru experience and extensive studies. Questioning these credentials is like running towards a solid wall. Dont hang religion and any affiliations upon their neck sir, becuase you are already judging their motives w/c you have no access. They made a decision w/c one to accept and reject base on objectivity,knowledge,and experience and for all you know these people believe in god but choose to set aside their affiliation for the sake of objective conclusion.

of course anyone can question their expertise but dont you think that the people in this community had already done it? In Fact the verdict is already made. But of course we have persistent losers such people do exist in this world,sure they can continually push their theory but they need more evidence if they want to smash the present accpeted theory,thats how science work sir. Now since what Creationist are proprosing isnt as strong and convincing as they think,rational people must resort to objective thinking and accept the present model theory.

Sure people's mind do change but these people are scientist sir,maybe they will change their mind when a convincing evidence is already laid out in the open.

i really dont want to drag this discussion to creation vs evolution kind of thing because thats not our topic.


of course he is a blood-thirsty god,your scripture suggest so, He can be holy,just and at the same time a blood-thirsty god according to your bible,he even commanded Moses to ripped off the wombs of thepregnat woman and dash the innocent child to a wall.


I dont know why you keep on denying it when the obvious fact is written in your bible.


oh hehe,thats not the answer that i want sir, If you can prove that Abraham was there during the formation of judaism in your bible then i will accpet that i am wrong BUT since you cant provide one then my im correct in saying that Abraham was not jewish. Can the Arabs also say the same thing? that Abraham is an Arab by virtue of lineage traceable in scriptures?

Correct,that shedding of blood started even before Moses who formed Judaism and thats my point. To say that the shedding of blood is originally from Judaism is incorrect. To claim that Adam n Eve and according to you the shedding of blood is not a pagan ritual is really doubtful. You see any religion would always trace their roots to the beginning of time(creation) and claim that the ancient rituals are part of its present rites. My point is even pagan can claim that Adam n Eve are their first parents and the rituals they observe came from them. In other words sir,its anybodys ball game,why? beacuase organize religon came in late and history can prove that Pagans have more right to say that any rituals(including God shedding blood for adam n eve) and concepts of belief that existed before any highly organize religon such as Judaism is part of pagansim.


no sir, i am not suggesting that any more blood must be shed.


Fine with me, if you want to maintain that position. But i just want to say this to you, you are in flagrant violation of one of the major doctrine of christianity. I might then be talking to the wrong person,why? because i am questioning a certain principle of that doctrine w/c you have no idea at all.


I have read the bible sir and rejected its barbaric conception of who god is. I believe that god is holy,just,love and kind and i also believe that he can pardon sin w/o any blood being shed because his power is not dependent on any blood or any material sources.


humanistic point of view? Do you really understand those words? Making God into a man and giving him human attributes such as blood, and leveling his mindset that of a man by proposing that He gets so angry and demands blood is to me perceiving god through a humanistic point of view.


So god has a blood,what a humansitic and pagansitic point of view. Greeks believe that god can become man. Jews have a very different idea of what the title son of man is. The idea that a god can become man came from greeks w/c paul and other early gentile christian adapted because of the influence of the greek philosopers who were the trend setter of that time.

Yah, right sir, they have evidence in determining the age of the universe. let me guess, it is neither empirical nor demonstrable science, right? so what do you call that? SELF DETERMINATION based on a suggestive information? ah, I have a better term ---- FAITH! that it should be true.

Really we can no longer question their conclusions? really sir? With all due respect to you sir and your idol-scientists, I would agree with you if only it is an empirical science, like the law of gravity, the thermodynamics law, the law of inertia, the law of biogenesis. etc. all are demonstrable and can't be argued, you throw something up it's surely gonna fall back down any place on earth, that we can not challenge. but for something else, concocted by wondering minds the floor of science is open. Funny how you can close your mind on such a vague point, while all other scientist welcome challenges so that science may prosper. well, it's your stand never to question scientists. Remember Ernst Haeckle? the great evolutionist fraud? people in his time was like you, never question a known man of science, after 150 years his peers learned that he deceived many just to further his love for the evolution theory, bringing a lot of other people like you in his time believing the lies in their graves, too late.

It has always been like that, for as long as GOD's name is attached to a certain thing it is no longer science it becomes religion, no matter how far out the theory and how distorted it can be, even with a lot of other unresolved issues, it is better to have them than none at all and be stocked with creation and GOD. But any logical and reasonable mind just can not ignore the fact that there is reasonable doubts in the evolution theory that includes your aging the earth or universe. We can not dismiss the fact that creation provides adequate evidence that can substantiate the earth's age which i have pointed out in my previous posts.

what I am trying to suggest sir is you may go on with the evolution theory which you are most comfortable with but try to see the other evidences that is in front of you, before you make a life changing decision.


looking at the GOD of the Bible as a loving, caring but at the same time a HOLY and a JUST GOD is very clear in scriptures but human minds can make conclusions especially if they get scriptures out of context,

I am not denying it, GOD is not blood thirsty, that he would want each blood and like a vampire sip it to HIS satisfaction. GOD shed HIS own for our sake, shedding of blood means death, the just compensation for our own doing, our sin. and GOD provided an avenue of escape for you and me, so if HE is indeed blood thirsty as you wanted HIM to be, why offer HIS own death, shedding of HIS own blood for our sake?

I can not question what you want to believe, it is your right sir. If you want to debone scriptures and chopped it to your liking then it is your choice. I read the Bible too and I take scriptures as it is, in all its entirety, because I want to understand and know my GOD, His nature and His character, so I may please HIM because that gives me joy.

I don't fit GOD and scriptures to what I like and what pleases me, I fit me to what GOD is saying in scriptures so I may please HIM for it gives me joy unspeakable to serve my GOD

I wasn't the one who make GOD a man, giving HIM blood and clothing HIM with Humanity, it is written in scriptures.... Read John the entire chapter starting with chapter one. HIs name is Immanuel means GOD with us. The Word (JC) beccame flesh and dwells amongst us.

this is the problem sir, if we debone scriptures and fit it to our humanistic point of view, we are and will be missing a lot of points and big time.

I don't believe like what the Greeks and pagan believes, they are copy cuts GOD done that already. Isiah already prophesied the birth of Christ way way long before paul and the early christians spoke of Christ.
remember? unto us a child is born, unto us a child is given, Great councillor, a mighty king, the prince of peace, and HIS name will be Emmanuel which means GOD with us? funny how you missed that.

John 1... In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was GOD.......... and the Word became flesh and dwells amongst us. Get the implications sir? hmmmmm.......

so before we all make some accusations about the apostles and the early christians, let's check our scriptures otherwise we will end up injecting our very own humanistic view to prove ourselves right and fit GOD to our liking.

[Reason2believe]

Yah, right sir, they have evidence in determining the age of the universe. let me guess, it is neither empirical nor demonstrable science, right? so what do you call that? SELF DETERMINATION based on a suggestive information? ah, I have a better term ---- FAITH! that it should be true.

Really we can no longer question their conclusions? really sir? With all due respect to you sir and your idol-scientists, I would agree with you if only it is an empirical science, like the law of gravity, the thermodynamics law, the law of inertia, the law of biogenesis. etc. all are demonstrable and can't be argued, you throw something up it's surely gonna fall back down any place on earth, that we can not challenge. but for something else, concocted by wondering minds the floor of science is open. Funny how you can close your mind on such a vague point, while all other scientist welcome challenges so that science may prosper. well, it's your stand never to question scientists. Remember Ernst Haeckle? the great evolutionist fraud? people in his time was like you, never question a known man of science, after 150 years his peers learned that he deceived many just to further his love for the evolution theory, bringing a lot of other people like you in his time believing the lies in their graves, too late.

It has always been like that, for as long as GOD's name is attached to a certain thing it is no longer science it becomes religion, no matter how far out the theory and how distorted it can be, even with a lot of other unresolved issues, it is better to have them than none at all and be stocked with creation and GOD. But any logical and reasonable mind just can not ignore the fact that there is reasonable doubts in the evolution theory that includes your aging the earth or universe. We can not dismiss the fact that creation provides adequate evidence that can substantiate the earth's age which i have pointed out in my previous posts.

what I am trying to suggest sir is you may go on with the evolution theory which you are most comfortable with but try to see the other evidences that is in front of you, before you make a life changing decision.


looking at the GOD of the Bible as a loving, caring but at the same time a HOLY and a JUST GOD is very clear in scriptures but human minds can make conclusions especially if they get scriptures out of context,

I am not denying it, GOD is not blood thirsty, that he would want each blood and like a vampire sip it to HIS satisfaction. GOD shed HIS own for our sake, shedding of blood means death, the just compensation for our own doing, our sin. and GOD provided an avenue of escape for you and me, so if HE is indeed blood thirsty as you wanted HIM to be, why offer HIS own death, shedding of HIS own blood for our sake?

I can not question what you want to believe, it is your right sir. If you want to debone scriptures and chopped it to your liking then it is your choice. I read the Bible too and I take scriptures as it is, in all its entirety, because I want to understand and know my GOD, His nature and His character, so I may please HIM because that gives me joy.

I don't fit GOD and scriptures to what I like and what pleases me, I fit me to what GOD is saying in scriptures so I may please HIM for it gives me joy unspeakable to serve my GOD

I wasn't the one who make GOD a man, giving HIM blood and clothing HIM with Humanity, it is written in scriptures.... Read John the entire chapter starting with chapter one. HIs name is Immanuel means GOD with us. The Word (JC) beccame flesh and dwells amongst us.

this is the problem sir, if we debone scriptures and fit it to our humanistic point of view, we are and will be missing a lot of points and big time.

I don't believe like what the Greeks and pagan believes, they are copy cuts GOD done that already. Isiah already prophesied the birth of Christ way way long before paul and the early christians spoke of Christ.
remember? unto us a child is born, unto us a child is given, Great councillor, a mighty king, the prince of peace, and HIS name will be Emmanuel which means GOD with us? funny how you missed that.

John 1... In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was GOD.......... and the Word became flesh and dwells amongst us. Get the implications sir? hmmmmm.......

so before we all make some accusations about the apostles and the early christians, let's check our scriptures otherwise we will end up injecting our very own humanistic view to prove ourselves right and fit GOD to our liking.

Sir i believe that we are no longer ON topic. For some reason our discussion had step a little farther from where it should be.


I believe we talked about TIMELINE, you proposed that Creation timeline is the determining factor on where we should base HISTORICAL events and not the ACCEPTED secular timeline(A.D B.C B.C.E C.E). Creation timeline, if my memory serves me right suggested that this earth is young and even some sect draw a timeline that this earth is 60,000 yrs old base on the given birthdates and AGES found in the bible. Now, secular and even religious historians dont base their conclusions on that timeline sir but on the timeline use by most respected scientists,that is the secular timeline. We dont see A.D and B.C or B.C.E and C.E inside the bible. So i was kinda confuse when you say that we should not take this timeline because it is base on faith. This timeline is not base on faith sir. You should know that of all people,why? because it is a timeline on where Jesus is use as a historical reference.

But you know what no need for you and me to go on with this timeline discussion because you already accpeted the fact that paganism came before Judaism. And you are right on the buck sir because secular and religous history also agrees with it.


I also read scriptures and was a fine student of bible hermeneutics until i discovered something and of course God has given us a mind,so akong gigamit ang akong utok, i cant continue pretending that the bible has no errors and manipulations. One might ask, where is your faith? well sorry,I dont base my faith on emotions and fear and semantics,hehe.


From old testament to new testament we see that blood is needed for the forgiveness of sin. What do you call that? When you habitually ask for alcohol for sure you are alcoholic,now when you habitually ask for blood what do you call that? so who's interpreting the bible according to his humanistic point of view?

then you said that shedding of blood is not to appease god? Sir along with bible hermeneutics nagtoon pod ko ug Basic theology. So from what i learned, you are wrong in saying that blood is not to appease the justice of god. You ask your pastor or better buy a systematic theology book in OMF literature or PCBS and read it for yourself. i hope wala nila gi revise,hehe.


maybe this will be my last reply to you in this particular discussion kay obviously imong tubag is layo naman sir mo sulod naman ka ug Evolution and Creation.