blackbird

God is absolutely knowable. This article explains it. "Within all of us there exists a strong desire to be known and to know others. The most important Person to know is our Creator. In fact, Jesus taught that eternal life is not just a span of time; it is a relationship: “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3). The key to truly knowing God is found in what God has revealed about Himself in the Bible. He wants to be known (see Acts 17:27). The problem is our sinfulness. We are all sinful (Romans 3), and we fall short of the standard of holiness required to commune with God. We have “changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things." Romans 1:23 KJV So, in order to truly know God, we must first acknowledge our sin and repent of it (see Acts 3:19). In turning from sin, we must turn to Jesus Christ, the only Savior from sin. In Jesus alone is salvation (Acts 4:12). We receive Jesus by faith: “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:" John 1:12 KJV Jesus’ death and resurrection provided for the forgiveness of our sin, and He alone is the way to a personal knowledge of God: “6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 KJV Jesus revealed to us who God is, so in knowing God we must look to Jesus: “he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?” (John 14:9–10; cf. John 17:6). Every work that Jesus did was in obedience to the Father in heaven (John 5:19). Every word Jesus spoke was straight from the Father (John 12:49). To know God, we must know Jesus. Another key ingredient in truly knowing God is reading the Bible, God’s Word. In the Bible we have God’s revelation of His character, His promises, and His will. It is through the Bible that we know that God is "a God full of compassion, and gracious, longsuffering, and plenteous in mercy and truth" Psalm 86:15 KJV It is through the Bible that we know that God is a "God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:" Deuteronomy 10:17 KJV It is through the Bible that we know that God is "17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. " 1 Timothy 1:17 KJV Truly knowing God also comes through our commitment to obey what we read in the Scriptures. We were saved unto good works (Ephesians 2:10), and, as we obey the Lord, we become part of God’s plan of continuing to reveal Himself to the world. We are salt and light on this earth (Matthew 5:13–14), designed to bring God’s flavor to the world and to serve as a shining light in the midst of darkness. Jesus Himself placed the greatest importance on loving God with all we are and loving our neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 22:37–40). These are the keys to truly knowing God. Of course, those who know God will also be committed to prayer, fellowship with other believers, sincere worship, and walking in the Spirit. Jesus taught His disciples about the Holy Spirit, contrasting the world’s ignorance of Him with the disciples’ knowledge: “Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." John 14:17 KJV. It is through the Spirit of God: “15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: " Romans 8:15, 16 KJV Through Christ and the indwelling Holy Spirit, our lives can be filled with God, and we can experience the joy of truly knowing Him." What is the key to truly knowing God? | GotQuestions.org

We see this a lot in comments under this thread. Then there is the one who constantly attacks God with outlandish, false names and comments. I'm sure God certainly doesn't need me to defend him, but some truths about God should be said to clarify what the truth is in the midst of the mud being thrown out. I will state a bit from the famous book by John Calvin, one of the great Reformation leaders headquartered in 16th century Geneva. The book is called Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I - IV. "In particular, the miserable ruin into which the revolt of the first man has plunged us, compels us to turn our eyes upwards; not only that while hungry and famishing we may thence ask what we want, but being aroused by fear may learn humility. For as there exists in man something like a world of misery, and ever since we were stript of the divine attire our naked shame discloses an immense series of disgraceful properties every man, being stung by the consciousness of his own unhappiness, in this way necessarily obtains at least some knowledge of God. Thus, our feeling of ignorance, vanity, want, weakness, in short, depravity and corruption, reminds us (see Calvin on John 4:10), that in the Lord, and none but He, dwell the true light of wisdom, solid virtue, exuberant goodness. We are accordingly urged by our own evil things to consider the good things of God; and, indeed, we cannot aspire to Him in earnest until we have begun to be displeased with ourselves. For what man is not disposed to rest in himself? Who, in fact, does not thus rest, so long as he is unknown to himself; that is, so long as he is contented with his own endowments, and unconscious or unmindful of his misery? Every person, therefore, on coming to the knowledge of himself, is not only urged to seek God, but is also led as by the hand to find him. On the other hand, it is evident that man never attains to a true self-knowledge until he has previously contemplated the face of God, and come down after such contemplation to look into himself. For (such is our innate pride) we always seem to ourselves just, and upright, and wise, and holy, until we are convinced, by clear evidence, of our injustice.… vileness, folly, and impurity. Convinced, however, we are not, if we look to ourselves only, and not to the Lord also —He being the only standard by the application of which this conviction can be produced. For, since we are all naturally prone to hypocrisy, any empty semblance of righteousness is quite enough to satisfy us instead of righteousness itself. And since nothing appears within us or around us that is not tainted with very great impurity, so long as we keep our mind within the confines of human pollution, anything which is in some small degree less defiled delights us as if it were most pure just as an eye, to which nothing but black had been previously presented, deems an object of a whitish, or even of a brownish hue, to be perfectly white. Nay, the bodily sense may furnish a still stronger illustration of the extent to which we are deluded in estimating the powers of the mind. If, at mid-day, we either look down to the ground, or on the surrounding objects which lie open to our view, we think ourselves endued with a very strong and piercing eyesight; but when we look up to the sun, and gaze at it unveiled, the sight which did excellently well for the earth is instantly so dazzled and confounded by the refulgence, as to oblige us to confess that our acuteness in discerning terrestrial objects is mere dimness when applied to the sun. Thus too, it happens in estimating our spiritual qualities. So long as we do not look beyond the earth, we are quite pleased with our own righteousness, wisdom, and virtue; we address ourselves in the most flattering terms, and seem only less than demigods. But should we once begin to raise our thoughts to God, and reflect what kind of Being he is, and how absolute the perfection of that righteousness, and wisdom, and virtue, to which, as a standard, we are bound to be conformed, what formerly delighted us by its false show of righteousness will become polluted with the greatest iniquity; what strangely imposed upon us under the name of wisdom will disgust by its extreme folly; and what presented the appearance of virtuous energy will be condemned as the most miserable impotence. So far are those qualities in us, which seem most perfect, from corresponding to the divine purity." ------ Another part: "Here, again, the infinitude of good which resides in God becomes more apparent from our poverty. In particular, the miserable ruin into which the revolt of the first man has plunged us, compels us to turn our eyes upwards; not only that while hungry and famishing we may thence ask what we want, but being aroused by fear may learn humility. For as there exists in man something like a world of misery, and ever since we were stript of the divine attire our naked shame discloses an immense series of disgraceful properties every man, being stung by the consciousness of his own unhappiness, in this way necessarily obtains at least some knowledge of God. Thus, our feeling of ignorance, vanity, want, weakness, in short, depravity and corruption, reminds us (see Calvin on John 4:10), that in the Lord, and none but He, dwell the true light of wisdom, solid virtue, exuberant goodness. We are accordingly urged by our own evil things to consider the good things of God; and, indeed, we cannot aspire to Him in earnest until we have begun to be displeased with ourselves. For what man is not disposed to rest in himself? Who, in fact, does not thus rest, so long as he is unknown to himself; that is, so long as he is contented with his own endowments, and unconscious or unmindful of his misery? Every person, therefore, on coming to the knowledge of himself, is not only urged to seek God, but is also led as by the hand to find him." -from CHAPTER 1. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD AND OF OURSELVES MUTUALLY CONNECTED. —NATURE OF THE CONNECTION. Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin For the complete section, in fact, for the complete book free online: The Institutes of the Christian Religion (ccel.org) This exposition of Biblical truth concerning God shows the depravity and foolishness of some of the nonsense we see on the forum attempting to defame God. I would urge such posters to repent and seek forgiveness in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior while there is still time. Turn to His written revelation, the King James Bible (in English) and read and believe the gospels and rest of the Bible.

"To the skeptic, the proposition that the genetic programmes of higher organisms, consisting of something close to a thousand million bits of information, equivalent to the sequence of letters in a small library of one thousand volumes, containing in encoded form countless thousands of intricate algorithms controlling, specifying and ordering the growth and development of billions and billions of cells into the form of a complex organism, were composed by a purely random process is simply an affront to reason. But to the Darwinist the idea is accepted without a ripple of doubt - the paradigm takes precedence! (Michael Denton)" -from the book Darwin's Universe, From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing - Survival for Nothing by Yan T. Wee. This book is available on Amazon but also a used copy is available on Alibris.com. We are not going to settle this on here. Believing in the King James Bible (1611) and in the God of this Bible is a matter of faith. So if you are serious in wanting to get to the bottom of this you will have to investigate it, maybe spend a few dollars for a book, and do some reading yourself. I don't see any way to convince you on here. You can choose your own path or perhaps you already have chosen and closed you mind. You are incorrect in saying or implying all scientists believe in the theory of evolution. That is not a fact. The great majority might but it is not a universal belief. The book I mentioned makes a very strong case against evolution. There is no way I can print the whole book on here. And by the way, the book quotes and gives references to many highly educated scientists, scholars, and scientific articles in publications. By the way the so-called peer review process in the scientific community is run by secular humanists and so they do not accept the premise of Biblical creation. Therefore it is nonsense to use that as any kind of guide on the truth or falseness of the creationist point of view. Of course a creationist or Biblical point of view is not going to be accepted by them. They are driven by a purely secular humanist paradigm. That is part of the world system which is by nature anti-Bible and anti-Biblical God. Satan is a real person and for now, he controls or drives the world system.

You have proven repeatedly that your mind is closed on the subject. You simply do not accept the Biblical account of creation or the supernatural. You also reject any articles or videos I point you to as being unscientific. The supernatural is beyond science although creation.com has many articles that consider evolution or other questionable science from a scientific point of view. Not all scientists accept the theory of evolution. But you want to determine what subject I am to bring up and it has to be according to your world view, which is extremely biased and non-productive. So where do we go from here?

quote What does the Bible say about good versus evil? Answer Among the most universal beliefs across all humanity is the concept of “good versus evil.” Every culture in every era has held to some version of this struggle. The definitions of the terms good and evil vary wildly, as do opinions on how they interact. Still, belief in some difference between that which is “good” and that which is “evil” pervades all of mankind. When all options and ideas are compared, only the Bible provides a perspective on good and evil that is fully coherent and fully livable (Psalm 25:6–15). According to the Bible, “good versus evil” is not a matter of opinion. Nor is it an evenly matched struggle between two beings or forces. Scripture does not indicate that the boundaries of good and evil change. Nor does it claim the conflict between them will last forever. Of special importance is that the Bible does not suggest some people are good, while other people are evil. Rather, the Bible teaches that good and evil are defined in reference to a perfect and unchanging God. Every person must grapple individually with the presence and temptations of evil. Scripture notes that all evil, without exception, will ultimately be punished and defeated. And it tells us there is an ultimate standard of goodness to which we should aspire—a standard grounded in a person, rather than a theory. Good and Evil Are Objectively Distinct According to the Bible, there is a real difference between good and evil. Some worldviews claim all moral distinctions are based purely on preference. Atheism, for instance, allows no objective basis for defining anything as “good” or “evil.” In a godless universe, there are only things a person prefers and things a person does not prefer. This is a key reason why philosophies embracing atheism always tend toward violence and tyranny: there is no sense of higher authority and no reason to moderate the whims of those in power. The idea that defining good and evil depends on preferences or situations is commonly called moral relativism. Scripture rejects this idea as false. The Bible defines some things as “good” and other things as “evil” (Isaiah 5:20; Romans 12:9). This dichotomy is reflected in the consistent use of themes such as light versus darkness (Isaiah 9:2; Matthew 4:16; John 1:5; Ephesians 5:8). The ultimate fate of all people depends on whether they are aligned with a good God or opposed to Him (1 Corinthians 6:9–11; Revelation 21:8). Discerning between good and evil is possible only in reference to a single, unchanging standard: the perfect nature of God. God is not subject to morality, since He is the source and benchmark for it. Nor is morality subject to change, since God’s perfect nature is eternal and unchanging. Counters such as Euthyphro’s dilemma fail, since they do not distinguish between an eternal, unchanging God and the fickle deities of ancient Greek religion. Good and Evil Are Not Balanced A frequent component of fiction and fantasy is the idea that good and evil are equally balanced, evenly matched forces. According to this view, neither is ultimately in control. Either may eventually win. This is the concept of dualism, which suggests a perpetual balance between the forces of good and evil. In some cases, dualism implies that opposing beings, such as God and Satan, are deadlocked in a struggle for control and power. Some worldviews teach that all good and evil will eventually be balanced. This is related to Eastern ideas such as karma, which implies that good and evil are inherently imbalanced but will one day be evened out. Scripture rejects dualism as false. The Bible indicates that God is absolutely supreme and in no danger whatsoever of being defeated (Job 42:2; Psalm 89:8; Galatians 6:7). What Satan does, he is “allowed” to do, but he cannot act to overpower God (Job 1:12; Revelation 9:1; 20:7). Biblically, evil is destined only for defeat and destruction. Not one single act of evil will escape judgment; every sin will either be paid for by Christ on the cross (2 Corinthians 5:21) or by those who reject Christ (John 3:36) as they experience an eternity in hell (Revelation 20:11–15). unquote For the full article go to: What does the Bible say about good versus evil? | GotQuestions.org I find search engines and these articles extremely useful. Where else would one learn this much in such a short time with minimal reading. One can also utilize the scripture references to dig deeper into the information.

If you back a vicious animal into a corner, you can expect anything.

"Allowed"? Do you think western missiles should be used to attack anywhere in Russia? That is how wars escalate and become world wars. Russia says it is a red line and they may choose to retaliate with an attack against NATO and with nuclear weapons. Do you think the west should take the risk of starting World War III which would end with a nuclear holocaust and possibly wipe out half or much of the world's population? Do you think Russia would absolutely not send nuclear missiles to European and north American cities? They have thousands of nuclear missiles.

Trudeau says Ukraine can strike deep into Russia with NATO arms, Putin hints at war (msn.com) It sounds like this could trigger World War III. Does Trudeau really know what he is talking about? How is he qualified to say Ukraine can do this without triggering a war between Russia and NATO (the west)? Putin has stated that is a red line. Of course sending long range missiles deep into Russia could have serious consequences for NATO, Europe, America, and Canada. Does Trudeau really understand this? How close are we to WWIII after Putin's latest threat to the West? (msn.com)

This is what a Darwinist would believe in. The head is a photo of Darwin. According to Darwinists, his ancestors would look like the rest of the body.

I put the word Darwinist into a search window and it gave me the definition for Darwinism. Obviously a Darwinist is someone who believes in Darwinism.

Do you know how to use a search engine to look up the definition of words? quote Dar·win·ism [ˈdärwənˌizəm] noun the theory of the evolution of species by natural selection advanced by Charles Darwin. Similar: natural selection unquote darwinist definition - Search (bing.com)

How do you know?

Another Darwinist 2.0 fairy tail. Scientists have discovered why humans no longer have tails (msn.com) Darwinists must constantly throw out these stories to try to keep the gullible from believing in the Biblical account of creation. This one is a tall "tail".

Immigrants say it's not their fault. LOL. What would we expect them to say?

The media seems to periodically publish another fictitious article as if it is genuine science, but in reality is only fiction or speculation. That is much the same as Darwinism. If one cares to look, Charles Darwin really knew little to nothing about biology or science around his claim of how life came to be as it is today. Biology in the 1800s was actually very primitive and had very little knowledge. But fast forward to today and we periodically see a new strange speculation on the news feed such as this one: "Alien life may not be carbon-based, new study suggests Self-sustaining chemical reactions that could support biology radically different from life as we know it might exist on many different planets using a variety of elements beyond the carbon upon which Earth's life is based, a new study finds. On Earth, life is based on organic compounds. These molecules are composed of carbon and often include other elements such as hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur. However, scientists have long wondered if alien life might evolve based on significantly different chemistry. For example, researchers have long speculated that silicon might also serve as a backbone for biology. Related: The search for alien life "It's important to explore these possibilities so that we have an idea of what all forms of life can look like, not just Earth life," study senior author Betül Kaçar, an astrobiologist, bacteriologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told Space.com" Alien life may not be carbon-based, new study suggests (msn.com) Once a society rejects the Biblical account of creation, which was a supernatural event, in favour of man-made speculation or theories, then they are on a slippery slope. The theory of evolution or Darwinism is a downward spiral for society in many ways. It is a rejection of absolutes and truth. It leads to a hopeless existence and living for nothing because according to these defeatists there is nothing. Life was just a cosmic accident. Now they are coming up with speculation that life could have developed in other ways besides the kind of life we know of on earth. They are so easily deceived into believing anything.

Watched a lengthy CBC report on the affordability crisis in Canada. There are rent strikes, evictions and large rent increases. Much of these apartments buildings are owned or controlled by large corporations and investors. Some buildings are becoming more run down and upkeep and renovations have been neglected for years. What is the solution? Often once they get tenants to leave, the building is renovated and receives large rent increases to cover the costs as well as a return for investors. The companies who are the landlords have said they do not see themselves as some kind of social agency or subsidized rent service. The investors behind the companies see it as a business like any other business and feel they deserve to get a fair return on their investments the same as any other company. This seems to be clearly a responsibility of the federal government which created this housing shortage and rent/mortgage crisis. How did this situation develop and what has been the federal government's part in creating this crisis? It is getting to the point where the only solution seems to be the federal government nationalizing these apartment buildings. This it could become a Communist system like east Germany was. On top of all this, immigration has been huge and is adding tremendous pressure on housing because of the lack of availability in major cities in Canada. Affordable housing is vanishing. Are these landlords to blame? | CBC.ca

I am pro life for pre-born babies. But first degree murderers are not the same thing. It appears you don't understand the difference between capital punishment for first degree murder and killing innocent babies.

"Dr Robert Carter, is a marine biologist and geneticist. He’s studied Darwin’s work, examined the Galapagos Islands firsthand, and debated the origins of life with skeptics." If Darwin Knew This, Would He Still Be a Darwinist? · Videos · Creation.com You are completely incorrect to say Dr. Carter is not qualified. He is about as qualified as one can get on the subject of Darwin and evolution. You simply don't want to watch or listen to anything contrary to your own personal view. Very narrow-minded IMO .So you want me to watch something on your tube that you recommend but say you won't watch anything I recommend. Hardly reasonable or fair. Only your opinion counts.

When we start looking at the complexity of a single cell, we begin to see this is a vast manufacturing plant with various processes and structures which is controlled by a vast information system. quote This article is about the biological macromolecule. For other uses, see RNA (disambiguation). A hairpin loop from a pre-mRNA. Highlighted are the nucleobases (green) and the ribose-phosphate backbone (blue). This is a single strand of RNA that folds back upon itself. Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a polymeric molecule that is essential for most biological functions, either by performing the function itself (non-coding RNA) or by forming a template for the production of proteins (messenger RNA). RNA and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) are nucleic acids. The nucleic acids constitute one of the four major macromolecules essential for all known forms of life. RNA is assembled as a chain of nucleotides. Cellular organisms use messenger RNA (mRNA) to convey genetic information (using the nitrogenous bases of guanine, uracil, adenine, and cytosine, denoted by the letters G, U, A, and C) that directs synthesis of specific proteins. Many viruses encode their genetic information using an RNA genome. unquote This is just part of an article. RNA - Wikipedia At this point I think it is fair to believe this extreme complexity had to have a designer-Creator. I don't believe there is any known mechanism that could be called evolution which would design and produce such an incredibly complex cell or basic life structure. I believe this type of thing falls into the category of irreducible complexity. I would conclude evolution had no part in this.

This is where I would question that. Take a look at this short 4-1/2 minute video clip on ATP synthase operating in a cell. If one accept evolution as a fact, then how could all this kind of machinery come into existence? I don't think there is any clear answer on that. Also, where did the very molecules come from? All of these things require vast amounts of information stored in parts of the cell to operate. I don't think how all that came to be has been understood. Bing Videos

The fact is a living organism cannot even exist if it didn't have a complex structure to begin with. So where did they come from?

When you say Darwin's original hypothesis, I assume you mean his theory of evolution by natural selection. In advocating natural selection, I don't think he had any evidence at all to back that up. When you say evolution is one of the best supported theories in science, have you read or watched any videos that refute evolution from a rational or scientific point of view? You obviously believe science supports evolution. Did you watch the 48 minute video I gave the link for? What do you think of the subjects he addressed in the video? He mentions irreducible complexity. Do you understand there are very complex things in a cell for example that could not be reduced in complexity to a simpler cell? So how could evolution produce something that complex? Is there any information anywhere that describes how evolution could produce something as complex as the machinery in a cell?

I admit that sentence was not correct. I was not meaning to "lie" or mislead you. I apologize. What I should have said was scientists have added to the theory since the 1960s. I should have said Darwin's theory was made without him having any knowledge of biology because there was practically no knowledge of biology at the time of his theory. I apologize for that incorrect statement. I will agree with you most scientists still hold to the basic belief of the theory of evolution based on natural selection as far as I know. I think we really need to examine this very closely to understand what exactly it is saying. I admit I have very limited knowledge. But I do understand there is shocking complexity (as the scientist in the video calls it) in the most basic life forms such as a cell. I am going to watch the video link I gave again and pay as close attention as I can.

Very sad that you cannot see the difference between killing innocent babies and cold-blooded first degree murderers who deserve capital punishment. You have more sympathy for murderers than innocent people. Twisted.