What's a good website for believing Christians to discuss prophecy?

[jasong]

.

[The Carnivore]

http://rr-bb.com/forum.php

[jasong]

Originally Posted by The Carnivore

http://rr-bb.com/forum.php

Thanks for the tip, seems like a good site.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by jasong

Thanks for the tip, seems like a good site.

I guess that reading something like The Skeptics Society is out of the question?

I find it interesting that even the Pope has acknowledge that Evolution is not incompatible with Christianity.

At the end of the day, Science is, like any religion, a "Leap of Faith". Science simply has more discipline, and questions itself more deeply without as much dogma.

[jasong]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I guess that reading something like The Skeptics Society is out of the question?

I find it interesting that even the Pope has acknowledge that Evolution is not incompatible with Christianity.

If the Pope thinks Christianity can be slotted in with Evolution, that proves that he is a liar.

The Bible teaches that we are separated from God by sin and can only be saved by the blood of Jesus through His death. The death is retro-active, and is useful for everyone, dead, alive or unborn.

The problem with evolution is that it teaches that death existed long before human beings showed up. If death existed before human beings, it is not connected to sin and means Christ's death was worthless.

Therefore, evolution may be true, and Christianity may be true, but they cannot simultaneously be true.

At the end of the day, Science is, like any religion, a "Leap of Faith". Science simply has more discipline, and questions itself more deeply without as much dogma.

True, except scientists are a little too eager to reject intelligent design.

[chappy]

Why is it that Christians have such small views of the possibility of G-d?

As if such a beings actions could be limited by the conceptions of a human understanding?

Perhaps the Idirans were right when they laughed at the notion of a mortal being having an immortal soul, it's just not logical.

JasonG, I would posit that your statement that Christianity is incompatible with Evolution is based more upon a small-minded and frankly silly version of God rather than any real textual evidence. Further, if God exists and Evolution didn't happen, then She's got some 'splaining to do.

[chappy]

Memes always make people agree:

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by jasong

True, except scientists are a little too eager to reject intelligent design.

Depends on what you mean by intelligent design. Stuff at and before the big bang is something that modern science has no known way to probe. If some preacher/minister walked up on the street to me and said "hey, you know the universe and all it contains was intelligently designed by some thing or 'person'-like entity who created the big bang and all that follows from it", I would have no way to refute that. (Now, because I cannot refute it, that does mean it's not science -- but it may well be true for all we know.)


Science cannot rule out an intelligent creator/deity/whatever-title-you-prefer. What we can rule out is that the Earth is only 6,000 years old or whatever fact is being disputed these days. Theology (in the broad sense I've described in this post) and science are utterly orthogonal -- we can't say whether or not they're compatible, much less make any actual judgement one way or the other.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by jasong

If the Pope thinks Christianity can be slotted in with Evolution, that proves that he is a liar.

The Bible teaches that we are separated from God by sin and can only be saved by the blood of Jesus through His death. The death is retro-active, and is useful for everyone, dead, alive or unborn.

The problem with evolution is that it teaches that death existed long before human beings showed up.

You seem to be more than a little confused.

Evolution is entirely compatible with a young earth. There's excellent scientific evidence that the earth is old, but there's no reason a priori that you couldn't have a young earth with evolution. If we didn't have the geological record but we had modern microbiology we might plausibly believe in a young earth with evolution.

But let's continue to lump those together as old-earth evolution. If Jesus came to earth to die for our sins, and his death was retro-active, then what's the problem with old-earth evolution? If Jesus' grace is enough to save Moses and Elijah, why could it not be enough to save even those who had died earlier? Why should He be so limited?

[henryzz]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

Depends on what you mean by intelligent design. Stuff at and before the big bang is something that modern science has no known way to probe. If some preacher/minister walked up on the street to me and said "hey, you know the universe and all it contains was intelligently designed by some thing or 'person'-like entity who created the big bang and all that follows from it", I would have no way to refute that. (Now, because I cannot refute it, that does mean it's not science -- but it may well be true for all we know.)


Science cannot rule out an intelligent creator/deity/whatever-title-you-prefer. What we can rule out is that the Earth is only 6,000 years old or whatever fact is being disputed these days. Theology (in the broad sense I've described in this post) and science are utterly orthogonal -- we can't say whether or not they're compatible, much less make any actual judgement one way or the other.

6000 years is what you get if you add up the numbers in the Bible in a certain way. This includes various assumptions. For example, in the days of many of the Bible's genealogies it was standard to only list the important generations.
I would argue that the Earth is probably fairly young(maybe 10s of thousands of years). We have no proof. Millions sounds unlikely though.
Everyone worries way too much about this sort of thing. At the end of the day you could state the critical things that Christians believe in a few sentences. These are likely to need a page to explain them to non-Christians The Nicene Creed does a decent job of this.

We cause so much division by arguing over pointless stuff. I get why people want to study stuff in detail but guessing when there is limited info is pointless and divisive. The Bible is not a scientific document.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

But let's continue to lump those together as old-earth evolution. If Jesus came to earth to die for our sins, and his death was retro-active, then what's the problem with old-earth evolution? If Jesus' grace is enough to save Moses and Elijah, why could it not be enough to save even those who had died earlier? Why should He be so limited?

I have some concerns about this argument.

According to the two best-known tourist guides to Hell, those who lead blameless lives before the life of Christ, the so-called "virtuous pagans", were not saved and therefore ineligible to go to Heaven. Rather, they lived in Limbo, which is described as a rather pleasant environment.

Those are only two accounts, the later based heavily on the earlier, and there is precious little other evidence, either physical or documentary. Nonetheless, the evidence we do possess would indicate that your assertion about Moses and Elijah may not be accurate.