blackbird
-
Posts
7,801 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by blackbird
-
-
50 minutes ago, Yakuda said:
Jesus Is saying that. Do you know what the word AND means? You don't twist scripture you just ignore it. So let me get this straight you think if baptism was necessary for salvation scripture would say so but since you think it doesnt then baptism isnt necessary. Scripture must explicitly say something in order for it to be true right? Great! "You can see then that man is justified by works and not by faith alone". You will now regurgitate verse after verse which says we are saved by faith but no where does it say by faith alone. If they meant faith ALONE why didnt they say faith ALONE? You want to infer things that arent stated when it suits you but you ignore what's clearly stated when that suits you. This is why you're a raging heretics. You play with scripture like it's a toy. You people spread error everywhere you go. You spew false teachings. God have mercy on you.
Your problem is you listen to the false teachings of Rome to tell you how to understand the Bible. Why don't you admit it?
If you cherry pick one verse and interpret it in a way that contradicts countless other verses then you should know your interpretation is wrong. You are ignoring the mass of verses that say salvation is by believing in Jesus Christ. You cherry pick one verse in James and interpret it to fit in with your idea that salvation or justification is by works and ignore the rest of the Bible.
You do the same thing with one verse that that mentions believe and be baptized when countless verses demonstrate salvation is by faith or believing and baptism is not mentioned.
You then throw in your claim that they must say "faith alone" to satisfy you which is a complete erroneous idea. Over a hundred verses clearly teach salvation is by believing; nowhere does it say a verse must use the words "faith alone".
The words "faith alone" is only a summary of what Reformers believe. Nobody said those specific words have to appear in Scripture. The countless verses mean exactly the same thing as faith alone.
Salvation comes first before you can work for God. One is justified by faith alone. Read Romans. Once a person is saved or born again, then they serve God. You don't work to become a Christian. That is false religion. That is the difference between the world's false religions and Biblical Christianity. In Biblical Christianity, God saves the person and then he works or follows Christ. Rome has reversed that and eliminated grace through faith and instead added works (and sacraments, etc.)
God saves people by His grace. People cannot save themselves. I understand it is hard to believe that one doesn't save themselves by their own efforts, but that is what God's grace means. It is human nature to think man must be in control and do everything to "earn" salvation. That is not God's grace. Let God be God and stop thinking man must by his own efforts save himself or by some man-invented rituals or sacraments.
-
4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
The idea that humans are causing climate change has been accepted and is beyond reasonable doubt at this point.
Is that your only proof that it must be true? I get it; if an idea is accepted it must be fact. Sorry to inform you but many things have been later found to be false. Take a look at the Neanderthal pig's tooth and pre-human remains that were later found to be non-human or false claims. What the mobs believe proves nothing.
-
Another man has been arrested for going on a stabbing rampage in Vancouver. Several people were attacked and it turns out the suspect was out on bail or parole.
It was just a few months ago that another guy attacked people in Chinatown Vancouver and he was released from some kind of institution on a temporary pass even though he had a violent history.
Another violent offender was just released on bail in Vancouver as well. The police said they can't do anything because it is the courts that decide to release people. The police prefer that dangerous offenders be kept in custody, but they said they don't have the power to do that.
The legal system is failing citizens badly and something needs to be done.
-
3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
Canada is 12th on the per capita list.
I'm not sure why we're talking about fossil fuels percentage in greenhouse gases. Climate change is from anthropogenic causes. Flipper
Wow! The whole point of my post is to show that man does not emit enough CO2 to have any affect on climate change. You obviously didn't even bother reading it or never absorbed it.
Are you sure you know what the word "anthropogenic" means?
-
11 minutes ago, Aristides said:
Like I said, you have learned a damn thing in 2000 years.
Makes life really simple not having to ask any questions.
You're not making sense. You don't explain what you mean or why. I know from experience you don't engage in any meaningful discussions. So go away and don't waste my time.
-
1 hour ago, Aristides said:
Just goes to prove that science evolves as knowledge increases as opposed to religion which hasn't learned a damned thing in 2000 years.
Most religions are false. The Bible has the truth because it came from God, not fallible men.
Science is not infallible and has often been proven to be wrong. Man does not know everything, especially about such things as the origin of the universe and life. It would be wise to show a little humility and admit we don't know everything and maybe not much really. But to go against God's written revelation is really foolishness.
-
1 hour ago, eyeball said:
You know damn well what he means and it's irresponsible of you to fall for the sophistry that says carbon is necessary for life therefore there's nothing to worry about.
Water is responsible for life but it will also kill you.
Total man-made fossil CO2 emissions in the atmosphere is only 0.1 to 0.2% of total greenhouse gases.
Canada's fossil emissions are 1.511% of total world fossil emissions.
China, the largest emitter by far, emits 32.884% of total world fossil emissions.
So first it is highly unlikely that humans are causing global warming or climate change.
Secondly, carbon tax on Canadians will not do anything to slow or reduce climate change because our contribution to greenhouse gases is almost nothing.
List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia
-
1. Man-made CO2 is 0.1% to 0.2% of the total atmospheric greenhouse gases.
2. The fossil CO2 emissions of several countries in percentages of all fossil emissions for all countries for 2022 is:
Canada 1.511%
Australia 1.021%
Brazil 1.212%
China 32.884%
Japan 2.810 %
U.S. 12.600%
India 6.991%
Russia 4.956%
--- List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia
The total fossil emissions are so minute it is extremely unlikely in my opinion that this has an affect on climate change. It appears that 99.8 or 99.9% of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are natural. This is according to information on wikipedia.
China's emissions are 32.884% of total man-made CO2 emissions. So no matter what Canada does it will make no difference to the total fossil emissions in the world because Canada's emissions are only 1.511% of the world's fossil emissions. That should be obvious to any reasonable person who looks at these figures.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, eyeball said:
The fact so many people do accept it is dangerous. You people actually think there is another planet B up in heaven and you care about it more than this one, like it's disposable or something. That doesn't bode well for sustainability.
That's not exactly what Bible believers believe, but we do believe in a heaven and a hell, which are clearly taught in Scripture. Nobody claims the earth is "disposable". The Bible teaches to be good stewards of everything. In other words, be responsible. Do not pollute the environment. Carbon dioxide is not pollution. It is a necessary part of life on earth. When Trudeau says he is putting a price on pollution with the carbon tax, he is not being truthful. CO2 is not pollution. However that is another topic.
-
Evolution is a philosophical necessity of atheism.
An important issue in the debate is on the topic of irreducible complexity.
"A major contribution to the question of the credibility of evolution was Michael Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box," in which he drew attention to many marvelous micro-biological systems which exhibit what he termed "irreducible complexity." The importance of irreducible complexity is that Darwin had stated that if any case could be brought forward where development could not have been achieved by small successive advances, then his theory would be disproved. Irreducible systems provide that disproof. Evolutionists have fought irreducible complexity fiercely, but many scientists have become convinced that intelligent design is an undeniable feature of living organisms, and a strong "Intelligent Design" group has emerged. Many articles by Behe and the Design group can be found on the internet. Behe explains his stand in Evidence for Intelligent Design. One of his colleagues, William Dembski's "Still Spinning" illustrates the tricky tactics of the opponents of design and how they can be dealt with."
Studies in Evolution - Reformation International Schools (refcm.org)
-
6 minutes ago, Yakuda said:
Its true not everyone is saved but "Whoever believes AND is baptized..." will be according to Jesus.
You are applying a negative inference to that verse. In other words you are claiming Jesus is saying baptism is necessary for salvation but the verse doesn't say that. You are twisting the meaning. If it meant baptism was necessary it would say so, but it doesn't. Countless other verses say salvation is by faith. None say if you are not baptized you will not be saved. Show one verse that says if someone is not baptized they can't be saved?
-
16 minutes ago, eyeball said:
You're completely wasting your time posting anything that's informed by religion.
That may be true with you. Maybe someone else will get something from my postings.
You reject Biblical truth at your own peril.
However, not everyone is saved. I gave you the information to try to help but you rebuffed it. You can't say you were not told.
Just a little warning. God is merciful but those who reject his free offer of mercy and salvation have chosen their own path.
"18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? {repliest…: or, answerest again, or, disputest with God?} 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: {fitted: or, made up} 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? " Romans 9:18-24
-
1
-
-
52 minutes ago, Gaétan said:
The Conservatives have a long history of helping the wealthy by allowing them to evade taxes,
You are lying. Tax fraud is illegal behavior and it happens under every government. You falsely claimed the Conservative government was allowing them to evade taxes. You have given no proof that the politicians were complicit in tax evasion. That is an outright lie.
-
Canada's socialized health care system is failing Canadians. Four million Canadians do not have a family doctor.
So much for socialized health care.
Canada ranks last in primary health care access among 10 wealthy countries: report (msn.com)
-
17 minutes ago, Gaétan said:
The Conservatives have a long history of helping the wealthy by allowing them to evade taxes,.
Any proof?
-
This is proven by the fact the Liberal government is bowing to the anti-Israel NDP party and halting shipments of military aid to Israel while resuming sending millions of dollars to UNRWA which has been reported to have Hamas people among them. The Liberal-NDP government says it will not resume shipments until or unless the Israel government complies with "Canadian law", whatever that is supposed to mean. To bad they don't apply the same standard to UNWRA.
Canadian freeze on new arms export permits to Israel to stay (msn.com)
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, eyeball said:
No
Thanks. After all my work in finding the information and posting it, that's all I get from you.
-
5 hours ago, eyeball said:
Despite Christianity's attempts to stamp it out.
The church in Rome did oppose Galileo's claim several centuries ago, but I don't think there was a general attempt to "stamp it out" as you put it. Bear in mind the church of Rome was a false religious system that imposed a totalitarian system over the western world for over a thousand years until several centuries ago. In spite of that some of the world's greatest sciences did pursue science while believing in God and the Bible. The Reformation in northern Europe began 500 years ago and after a long struggle, managed to break away from the control of Rome in many areas. This resulted in the development of Parliamentary systems and far more freedom.
There is no conflict between genuine science and the Bible. One must just recognize God had a central part in the creation of the universe and mankind. Genuine science has its place within the realm of God's creation. Atheists or secular humanists just don't accept that and want to deny God his rightful recognition and place in the world.
Did you read the article I quoted just above.
Prof. Philip Stott said in part:
"The great pioneers of science, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Euler, Maxwell, Faraday, Kelvin and many others professed Christianity and accepted the Bible as God's revelation to mankind. Many spent much time studying the Scriptures. Newton claimed the most important aspect of his work was in showing the greatness of God. Maxwell noted that his great pioneering work in field theory was inspired by the Scriptural revelation of the way God himself is and works.
But during the twentieth century science was taken over to a very large extent by secular humanists. Such a world-view actually has no rational basis for expecting science to succeed. Yet secular humanists have cultivated the idea that science is essentially an atheistic domain which is at loggerheads with Christianity." -- Prof. Philip Stott
So some of the greatest scientists in history were Christians and professed to accept the Bible as God's revelation.
It was only in the past 100 years or so that science became dominated by secular humanists. That is why the paradigm changed in the 20th century and it became in vogue to dismiss God or the Bible as being relevant to science, particularly creation or where everything came from.
Why is that? Could it be a shift in beliefs to a more pagan or godless world? The Bible prophesied that this would happen in the latter days and that was prophesied almost 2,000 years ago.
"1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good. 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith."
2 Timothy 3:1-8
This was written over 1,900 years ago and it appears to have come to pass.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, eyeball said:
It's a theory, based on educated assumptions that are supported by empirical science.
It's taught to students because it's the best explanation we have for the great diversity and origin of species that we see all around us today and throughout the geological record.
I suspect the theory will continue to be taught until such time as a better explanation comes along or the authorities ban it.
1. Many scientists would dispute that it is based on educated assumption that are supported by empirical science. In fact it is not supported by empirical science.
2. That's not actually the reason it is taught to students.
3. That is true. It will likely continue to be taught.
It is interesting to learn that science developed in the Christian culture in Europe in the past several centuries.
Here is an article which explains the problem today.
quote
Scripture and Science General Considerations: Introduction
Science and Christianity have an intertwined history. Even atheist historians of science find themselves having to admit that it was only under the Christian worldview that one could expect nature to behave in a way that would make science a reasonable pursuit. In spite of the fact that some steps towards a beginning in science had been taken by other cultures it was only in the Christian culture of Europe, and in particular that of Reformation Europe, that science came to fruition.
The great pioneers of science, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Euler, Maxwell, Faraday, Kelvin and many others professed Christianity and accepted the Bible as God's revelation to mankind. Many spent much time studying the Scriptures. Newton claimed the most important aspect of his work was in showing the greatness of God. Maxwell noted that his great pioneering work in field theory was inspired by the Scriptural revelation of the way God himself is and works.
But during the twentieth century science was taken over to a very large extent by secular humanists. Such a world-view actually has no rational basis for expecting science to succeed. Yet secular humanists have cultivated the idea that science is essentially an atheistic domain which is at loggerheads with Christianity.
In fact there have been three main topics on which Christianity and science have come into obvious and serious conflict. It is largely on the basis of these three areas that the idea that science implacably conflicts with Scripture have been deliberately cultivated. These three areas are:
The theory of evolution: This originally dealt with ORGANIC EVOLUTION but logically proceeded to MATERIAL EVOLUTION leading to various theories of origins, the most popular currently being THE BIG BANG.
The age of the earth and the universe and their mode of formation: This topic embraces UNIFORMITARIANISM, GEOLOGICAL TIME and ASTRONOMICAL TIME.
The centrality of the earth in creation: This topic usually comes under the heading GEOCENTRICITY, GEOCENTRISM OR GEOSTATIONISM.
Geocentricity was the first major point of conflict. The inerrancy of Scripture was challenged and the ensuing "Galileo affair" had a profound effect on both scientists and Bible scholars. Since that time the scriptures have been interpreted ever less in accordance with understanding of ancient languages and ever more as a harmonisation with "scientific truth." The influence of geocentrism on science has been equally profound. The rejection of the possibility that the earth could have a special place in creation led to the Theory of Relativity, the rejection of the "aether" (the medium through which light propagates) and its consequences - Quantum Theory - the whole of "Modern Physics." It is also the basis for assuming that the laws of science discovered here will be the same elsewhere - probably a good assumption if the earth is not in a special position, a bad one if it is. The whole of astrophysics depends critically on this assumption.
Geological time, popularised by Charles Lyell, was the second major point of conflict between Christianity and science. In his famous book "Principles of Geology" Lyell argued for an age of the earth far greater than could be accommodated by scripture. Later editions ridiculed the book of Genesis, particularly the section on Noah's flood. Since Genesis is the foundation on which the whole of Christianity is built his book became an attack on the whole of Christianity.
Evolution is a very old hypothesis which was long rejected by the scientifically knowledgeable as untenable in view of the obvious necessity for a designer to account for the complexities of life. When Charles Darwin proposed Natural Selection as a mechanism which could produce ever increasing complexity without design it suddenly became possible to be as Richard Dawkins put it, "a fulfilled atheist." Since then evolution has become perhaps the most commonly used weapon in attacking the credibility of the Scriptures. Its influence on society at large has been immense. Karl Marx noted that Darwin’s book was the foundation for "Scientific Socialism" (Communism). Stalin pointed out that "Evolution prepares for revolution and creates the ground for it." Many would argue that no other "scientific" concept has had such influence on not only the progress of Christianity, but the whole of society.
There are other topics which could be considered relevant. Archaeology has at times presented challenges to the Bible. However archaeology is a question of history rather than science, and challenges have been answered as new discoveries have thrown light on one disputed point after another. I believe the stage has been reached where few, if any, now consider Archaeology a serious challenge to their faith or the credibility of the Scriptures. In the case of the three topics mentioned above this is certainly not so.
In "General Considerations" I look in more detail at the broad claims made above, present what I hope are thought-provoking insights into the workings of science, and also into the interpretation of scripture as influenced by science and scientists. I would suggest looking through these general consideration before going on to whichever of the topics on the side-bar you would like to consider further.
End of Introduction
Scripture & Science HOME | Reformation International College (refcm.org)
-
When I was in the shoe department in Walmart, I saw a pair of old worn shoes left on the floor. Obviously someone put on a pair of new shoes and walked out. There are lots of crooks around. Can't blame stores for checking. They probably lose a lot of money by shop lifters. I am not sure what the best way to do it is. We live in a world of many crooks. So businesses have to protect themselves somehow. Best to just go along with it and be agreeable.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, cougar said:
Equality was not meant for the world but for people. The incentive and investment is the greed that destroys the planet.
This is the human nature you are referring to - greed.
It will turn out capitalism was the most destructive order ever invented - destroyed the human mind, destroyed humanity, destroyed the climate in the fastest way possible and eventually destroyed the world with all life on it.
You don't appear to have learned much about politics, the world, or evils of Socialism. Here are a few questions for you.
quote
1. She has neither the strength to mow her lawn nor enough money to hire someone to do it. Here’s my question to you that I’m almost afraid for the answer: Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to mow the lady’s lawn each week? If he failed to follow the government orders, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrest and fines to imprisonment? I’m hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.
2. Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing your neighbor to physically mow the widow’s lawn, the government forced him to give the lady $40 of his weekly earnings? That way the widow could hire someone to mow her lawn. I’d say that there is little difference between the mandates. While the mandate’s mechanism differs, it is nonetheless the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.
3. Probably most Americans would have a clearer conscience if all the neighbors were forced to put money in a government pot and a government agency would send the widow a weekly sum of $40 to hire someone to mow her lawn. This mechanism makes the particular victim invisible but it still boils down to one person being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another. Putting the money into a government pot makes palatable acts that would otherwise be deemed morally offensive.
This is why socialism is evil. It employs evil means, coercion or taking the property of one person, to accomplish good ends, helping one’s fellow man. Helping one’s fellow man in need, by reaching into one’s own pockets, is a laudable and praiseworthy goal. Doing the same through coercion and reaching into another’s pockets has no redeeming features and is worthy of condemnation (see cartoon above).Why Socialism Is Evil | American Enterprise Institute - AEI
-
15 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:
6. Marxism is unethical? Ok...
You just say that as a coverup. You actually seem to believe the woke Marxist ideology
You believe Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto which is based on the ideology that there is a class struggle has been embraced by the woke as meaning society is divided between victims and oppressors. To you the liberals and progressives are defending the "victims" and the oppressors are the "Chuds" (or conservatives).
-
8 hours ago, cougar said:
There were no homeless during socialism and the main concept of communism is equality.
Socialism has always failed. It destroys incentive, destroys investment, and chases away hard work and prosperity. The world has never been "equal" and never will because that is not now things work. Communism has never worked. Communists have always set up systems to take care of themselves and forget everyone else. It can't work because it is against human nature. Human nature if left to itself destroys the work ethic.
Your mind is brainwashed to believe government can solve all problems and provide everything. That is the biggest fallacy. You will end up with disasters. That is why we have homelessness and tent cities. It is people like you who believe government intervention will solve everything. It actually does the opposite. It destroys business growth and prosperity and scares investment away.
-
8 hours ago, cougar said:
There were no homeless during socialism and the main concept of communism is equality.
One of the main reasons we have all the homeless people and tent cities now is because of the government interventionism or excessive control of home building, apartment building or building anything. There are so many regulations and red tape and approval processes builders must go through to get approval and the fees are so expensive. These regulations and costs are imposed by municipalities, regional districts, provincial and federal governments. Excessive taxation by all levels of government has been getting worse. Add to that now the carbon taxes which is going up every year. That's the Marxist-Socialist mentality of governments in Canada. They think they know better and most of the people believe it. They think government needs to babysit and look after everyone from cradle to grave. It's not possible. Government doesn't have the mentality or resources to look after everyone. That's not how the world can function. People have to grow up and learn to take care of themselves instead of expecting government or food banks to feed them and cloth them and shelter them. Some are mentally ill and need help. Some should be in mental institutions but they were shut down by the new woke ideology. Same reason criminals are constantly released.
The federal government is a kind of post-national United Nations government that believes Canadians must provide social assistance for the whole world and hence why we have given several billion dollars to the middle east for various causes the last few years.
You want to know why Canada is so far in debt. There's the answer. We are now paying so much interest on the debt that it is taking away from the money available for all the social programs.
Socialism is government trying to do everything by taxing, regulating and controlling every aspect of your life. No more freedom. That is why there is so much homelessness and tent cities. Government has meddled in the economy so much that it has destroyed the natural ability of the country to build homes and apartments for all the people. Very few can even afford to buy a home in Canada now. On a middle income, there is not enough money to save the huge down payment and not enough money to pay the thousands of dollars per month for a mortgage payment.
Total fossil emissions in the world is only 0.1% to 0.2% of total greenhouse gases
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted · Edited by blackbird
So consensus is now proof?
I looked at your link and it does not prove anything. Just a claim.
Funny the comments below your link oppose what you say.