Theory of Evolution

[bbyrd009]

facts are just steps toward truth..

or away from it, ya; "atom bombs bring peace," etc

 

[amadeus]

I my opinion, that is where quite a bit of what we are spoon fed at schools belong......One other thing I just thought of, is that facts are just steps toward truth..

I believe that many things treated like facts and called facts are not facts at all. You may have noticed such usage of the word "fact(s)" on this forum. The only facts available really, as I see it, come with the "face to face" vision as per I Cor 13:12 when and if we receive it. I believe that that believers live by faith in the unseen, but in part their faith is in error and in part it is correct. They themselves often or even always don't know the difference between what they only believe and what they know [facts]. When they have that perfect "face to face" vision [if they ever do] then they no longer live by faith but by knowledge. Does anyone get to that point before the dirt is thrown over his face?

 

[Dcopymope]

well, but listen to yourself now, "Ezekiel saw God." When he plainly stated he saw a human anyway. And that was "the appearance of the likeness of the Lord's Glory" right?

Plus the "four" cherubim...well, we can go into that later, but these "four" really set the stage, and inform us what the vision is about. God is not represented by "four." Ezekiel is not saying that he saw God there, and a vision about something else entirely is being read with expectations imo

.......The likeness of God on his throne

 

[pia]

well to Christianity Esau is the "bad guy" right

I don't know.....I have just heard a few things about this, can't pretend to comprehend nor have I asked for understanding on this....Which I could apply to thousands or millions of other things, I am quite sure.....I may have a read of it later if i get the time...thanks :)

 

[pia]

vision as per I Cor 13:12 when and if we receive it.

Yes, as well as that assurance of the fullness of Love, we didn't know existed (certainly I had zero clue)...Once you become aware of that Love, it cannot be taken from you...many will try, but as He also informs us :" Love never fails"... :)

 

[pia]

or away from it, ya; "atom bombs bring peace," etc

Good point :)

 

[bbyrd009]

.......The likeness of God on his throne

look, you can believe that if you like, prolly even some good points in there ok, but imo "the appearance of the likeness of the Lord's Glory" is a fair ways from "God." Matter of fact we might even compare this quite favorably to "made in God's image," imo.

I believe that is Christ, myself, a la If you have seen Me, you have seen the father, and i personally doubt that God can even be seen in all His Glory, but maybe i'm wrong too.

so imo Ezekiel's vision was about Christ, not God the father.
And i might go even further, and say that that is your place even, once you have constructed Ezekiel's Temple. perhaps.
you are to be like a god, right

so i would put you there before i put God there

 

[bbyrd009]

Once you become aware of that Love, it cannot be taken from you...many will try, but as He also informs us :" Love never fails"...

well certainly God never fails, ya, but Adam was intimately aware of that Love, right, and had it taken from him?
of course you are surely much closer to the Last Adam than the first, and so your comment is really for a different context, right.

i mention this bc the Bible does the same thing, and it is hard to illustrate without a specific example such as this

 

[Dcopymope]

look, you can believe that if you like, prolly even some good points in there ok, but imo "the appearance of the likeness of the Lord's Glory" is a fair ways from "God." Matter of fact we might even compare this quite favorably to "made in God's image," imo.

I believe that is Christ, myself, a la If you have seen Me, you have seen the father, and i personally doubt that God can even be seen in all His Glory, but maybe i'm wrong too.

so imo Ezekiel's vision was about Christ, not God the father.
And i might go even further, and say that that is your place even, once you have constructed Ezekiel's Temple. perhaps.
you are to be like a god, right

so i would put you there before i put God there

God himself descends from heaven with his tabernacle to dwell with his creation in the end, so I would fact check your assertions of God not being able to be seen in all his glory, as he clearly will be seen by all on the new earth. Sin will no longer exist, so the circumstances will be very different than what it is in this current world.

 

[pia]

but Adam was intimately aware of that Love, right, and had it taken from him

Not so, they gave up the connection they had to the Love and the Life in God, because what they did was out of agreement with God, so they were no longer One with Him....They decided something against Him.
Anyway, while I agree that in the flesh I am closer to the first Adam, that is not so with my spirit...We have been offered what Adam didn't have...The indwelling of the Spirit of God.......Adam was able to have face to face time, communion with God in the cool of the day for a while...We have been offered 24/7 access to Him, through the 2nd. Adam, who, if we are born from above, we join in becoming a New Creation of which Jesus was the firstborn Son, a different human than the first Adam was....this all goes a lot deeper than the church teaches, but then they do like us dependent upon them ..

 

[bbyrd009]

God himself descends from heaven with his tabernacle to dwell with his creation in the end, so I would fact check your assertions of God not being able to be seen in all his glory, as he clearly will be seen by all on the new earth.

you might interpret that, many ppl do, but this does not mean that what you have in your mind will come to pass though. And it even contradicts other Scripture, right? Not saying i know, but i suspect a more spiritual, less literal fulfillment there, as the choice of terms for "God" there even suggests imo
Strong's Greek: 2316. θεός (theos) -- God, a god

when one would expect "Immanuel" ("God with us") to be there, in your interpretation i think?

 

[bbyrd009]

Sin will no longer exist, so the circumstances will be very different than what it is in this current world.

If sin no longer exists, you have a problem, bc no sin implies no free will. What i see happening many times is that "you all" is interpreted individually, and "you" is interpreted in common--i think these are often even both translated as just "you"--occluding the fact that sin no longer exists in the regenerated who have left the world, right now, not everyone extant in some imaginary "then."

Iow the Revelation is interpreted as applying to only one generation. Also "very different circumstances" must then be posited, when "there is nothing new under the sun."

 

[Dcopymope]

If sin no longer exists, you have a problem, bc no sin implies no free will.

If you are going to define free will this way for the creation, then you also have to do the same for the creator. God is holy, without sin, so therefore he has no free will. He is just some automaton, or robot.

 

[Dcopymope]

you might interpret that, many ppl do, but this does not mean that what you have in your mind will come to pass though. And it even contradicts other Scripture, right? Not saying i know, but i suspect a more spiritual, less literal fulfillment there, as the choice of terms for "God" there even suggests imo
Strong's Greek: 2316. θεός (theos) -- God, a god

when one would expect "Immanuel" ("God with us") to be there, in your interpretation i think?

Acually you got it wrong yet again. The word used for "God" in Matt 1:23 you cite here is in fact the exact same word used in Revelation referring to God descending from heaven and bringing the city with him. If you want to try and allegorize everything, then you should at least stop relying so much on what your dictionaries say, start letting the Bible speak for itself, and let the holy spirit give you your interpretation, instead of men's dictionaries. Jesus Christ is the word made flesh, the word was God, and was with him in the beginning. So yes, God was literally with us on this current earth in the flesh and will be again in the future, as the express image of the Father, and revelation states that he, the Father, "God himself" will be with us on the earth to come with his son who John refers to as the "lamb". The glory of God himself, the Father will be the light of the city, and the Lamb is the light thereof, of his Father, as he states in Revelation 21:23 clearly referring to two district beings.

(Rev 21:23)
23And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

 

[tooldtocare]

The two (2) humans you see below are living today, side by side.

One did not evolve into the other.

Evolution is not what caused the two totally diverse development but rather help from an outside source; in my view of things; how about you?

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

yet you have no problem believing that i could select for, say, a new breed of dog or whatever
how long before we forget that dogs came from wolves?
or that coywolves did not exist 100 years ago? completely different species, any biologist could unerringly identify all three by their taxonomy, do not be deceived.
But of course as long as you feel compelled to insist that there is "not one," even when one is shown you, how could you see it?

Not really "a separate species" as most North American wolves have levels of coyote DNA. Early settlers (in the 1700s) had difficulty distinguishing wolves from coyotes. "Species" are not bound in iron--they are a convenient way of classifying animals but the boundaries are fluid (not to mention somewhat arbitrary). If you are speaking of homology, one must remember that a Great Dane and a miniature Schnauzer are members of the same species but are quite different in size and body type.

 

[Wafer]

The problem is not that evolution is unscriptural, it is that evolution is unscientific.

Science is defined by the scientific method. Step 1 is "Observe something." Evolution has never been observed, and there is nothing that one can point to and say "There! That is evolution." Any time you think you have seen an example of evolution, the evolutionists will tell you "No, it doesn't work that way."

Evolution does not exist. Every bit of evidence offered so far has been fraudulent.

Correction: There is something we call evolution, but it is not what evolutionists are talking about. For example you can line up cars from the first one to what we drive now and show an evolution in car design. But that is not "theory of evolution."

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

The problem is not that evolution is unscriptural, it is that evolution is unscientific.

Science is defined by the scientific method. Step 1 is "Observe something." Evolution has never been observed, and there is nothing that one can point to and say "There! That is evolution." Any time you think you have seen an example of evolution, the evolutionists will tell you "No, it doesn't work that way."

Evolution does not exist. Every bit of evidence offered so far has been fraudulent.

Correction: There is something we call evolution, but it is not what evolutionists are talking about. For example you can line up cars from the first one to what we drive now and show an evolution in car design. But that is not "theory of evolution."

What the evolutionists say does not and cannot work. If you want to stymie an evolutionist, say, "Okay, we're going to suppose for a moment that it is true--describe the process by which one species becomes another species, with all the steps included." They will not (because they cannot) answer you. Even if they try, you've got them because you can poke holes in whatever they propose.

 

[Wafer]

What the evolutionists say does not and cannot work. If you want to stymie an evolutionist, say, "Okay, we're going to suppose for a moment that it is true--describe the process by which one species becomes another species, with all the steps included." They will not (because they cannot) answer you. Even if they try, you've got them because you can poke holes in whatever they propose.

Colin Patterson: Can You Tell Me Anything About Evolution That Is True?
Colin Patterson: Can you tell me anything about evolution that is true?

 

[SkyWriting]

Interested in knowing how other Christians think and feel about the Theory of Evolution.
I uploaded a PDF. I have a lot of files and information I believe the Holy Spirit imparted this information upon me. Freely I have received so freely I give. I believe this information and much more that I have received is important in helping us in the end times. Through government and science I believe the mark of the beast will be developed. It is time for us Christians to get out of the matrix of the serpent! It is a time of casting down lies and building the Body of Christ!
It is a time for unifying , getting rid of denominations and those things which divide us. Our Judaeo Christian faith is not a denomination but an experience in time and it is time to sift through all of mans doctrines and find the truth which the WORD OF GOD proves and supports!
I believe I understand the Mark of the Beast and its image which eventually will tie into this post and my Existence of God! God Bless!​

God plans and executes the the orbit of each electron.
Nothing is random. Things change.