blackbird

People such as myself who believe the King James Bible (1611) is inspired do so because God promised to preserve his word forever. "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6,7

You are making an assumption that being obscure is advantageous, which is false reasoning. The simple fact is the King James Bible is the only inspired Bible in the English language and is therefore the only reliable source of God's word to quote from. If one has difficulty understanding it, it may be because of unfamiliarity with the language used. It resolves itself if a person desires to investigate with the aid of reliable bible commentaries and a sincere desire to find out what a phrase or sentence means. The internet is a vast resource of information so one can find out what any word or phrase means very quickly just by looking up a bible commentary or doing a search. There are also other verses that often can be used as cross reference to help get the idea.

I don't have all the answers, but the fall of man is a well established doctrine of the Bible. Since the fall of Adam and Eve, man has been born with a depraved heart. That's why we have all the wars. I am not sure if the fall is the reason animals eat other animals. We know there is a food chain. Eating each other is how animals and fish survive. Often the large ones eat the smaller ones. This is possibly the way God intended it to be for the time being. After Jesus returns and sets up his reign on earth, it may be a different earth with animals not eating each other. There is going to be a new heaven and a new earth. Perhaps that is when things will be peaceful.

I don't agree with the reasoning. It seems depend a lot on who one wishes to believe and whether you are willing to believe in certain theories. The last couple paragraphs make the claim that a Creator would have to have been created himself. That is an incorrect assumption. Bible believers accept the teaching of the Bible that there is a God who is all powerful and eternal, without beginning and without end. You have to remember, God is not to be compared to a created being. God is a spirit which is outside the material universe. He is a being with infinite intelligence and power to do whatever he chooses to do. He is not a force field and can only be understood in terms of what has been told us in the Holy Bible. So he had the power to create everything in the universe. If he is eternal as the Bible teaches, he would not need to have been created. To believe in a Creator is perfectly reasonable and is based on what the Holy Bible teaches. A universe without God lacks the answer to one vital question, that is, purpose. Without God there is no central purpose or direction. We could go on endlessly quoting this scientist or that one, but in the end, I think it boils down to what one wishes to accept. I see it as far more reasonable to believe God created everything and created man and woman. They are far to complex as are countless other things, including sub atomic particles, energy, magnetic fields, etc. None of that could have come about by accident or natural causes. What would be the purpose of existence if it is all just random? But the Bible answers the question of why. God had a purpose in creating everything and creating mankind. Without God, what is the meaning of it all? There is none.

Just a side point. At the time of Darwin, the knowledge around biology and related matters was very limited compared with today. This article explains why biology supports intelligent design and current knowledge, not available at the time of Charles Darwin's book, shed new light on the subject. http://reformation.edu/scripture-science-stott/evolution/pages/015-intelligent-design.htm

I have been reading a bit on the website I gave a link to you for. The subject of irreducible complexity is an interesting one. There are certain systems in nature and the human body that fit into the category of irreducible complexity. For the theory of evolution and random chance processes to work something must be able to make gradual changes. There are things which are classified as unable to fit into this theory of gradual improvement because there is no conceivable way to make gradual changes to reach the goal of a workable system. This means systems which fall into this classification of irreducible complexity cannot be developed by the evolutionary process. You may wish to take a look at this article. http://reformation.edu/scripture-science-stott/evolution/pages/015-intelligent-design.htm

Here is some substantiation. I give only part of article, but have included the link. " "Evolution, in the extended sense, can be defined as a directional and essentially irreversible process occurring in time, which in its course gives rise to an increase of variety and an increasingly high level of organization in its products. Our present knowledge indeed forces us to the view that the whole of reality is evolution - a single process of self transformation." For many years this was the accepted view. It is still the view put forward in popular literature, the media and school text-books. But in "scientific circles" it has become an embarrassment. It contradicts the best established law in the whole of science. The Law in question is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In language easily understood this law guarantees that any physical system subject only to natural processes follows a downward path to ever lower levels of energy, it becomes more disorganized - it suffers decay. For many years supporters of the theory attempted to overlook the contradiction between evolution’s requirement (self transformation to ever higher levels of organization), and the Second Law’s exactly opposite requirement, by claiming that the Second Law applies only to "closed systems" in which no energy enters from outside. Few now try to support this discredited position, (see, for example, The Mystery of Life's Origins) and changes in the definition of evolution itself have been brought in to address the problem. Another difficulty for the theory has come from microbiology. As scientists have learned how to examine life in ever greater detail, Darwin’s picture of organisms consisting of a few simple chemicals has given way to one of mind-boggling complexity even in the most humble of creatures. The lowly E coli bacterium possesses not only miniature electric motors of outstanding efficiency, but also the apparatus to build, repair, maintain and operate them - as well as the electricity-generating system to power them. As it has become possible to calculate the probabilities of evolution’s mechanisms producing evolution’s supposed results, ever growing numbers of scientists have become convinced that there are problems which the theory is unable to cope with. Many are now seriously considering intelligent design as an alternative. As the founder of the "cult" of evolution, Charles Darwin and his magnum opus, the Origin of Species are presented for study. A more modern text, an Introduction to Evolutionary Biology by Chris Colby shows the enormous change which has taken place in evolutionary thinking in the last century. My annotations are rather full and attempt to show what I see to be the weakness of much of modern evolutionary thinking. I recommend this annotated work as showing the case for and against the modern theory. The antipathy between evolution and Christianity is sometimes denied. This idea is examined in "Creation, Evolution and the Christian" . The weakness of evolution as a "scientifically" defensible position and the truth that it is largely a religious question is very ably presented by Philip Johnson, professor of law at the University of California, Berkley. Johnson's position deserves some explanation. The "scientific" press is a tightly controlled unit which does not allow any neutral discussion of evolution, the time scale or Einstein. Any paper questioning orthodoxy, or submitted by a scientist known to be skeptical of orthodoxy, is simply denied publication. Any scientist questioning the orthodoxy is ostracized and outcast. Scientists are then able to set up a vicious circle to exclude debate. Such questions could only be seriously considered if they were discussed in the reputable journals. Any attempt to bring such discussion to the journals is prevented by editorial policy. The situation was brought into the spotlight in the chapter "The Scientific Mafia" in "Velikovski Reconsidered." A recent example can be seen in Persecution of Richard Sternberg. Philip Johnson is a highly respected professor of law. The secular humanist watchdogs apparently anticipated no danger from this field. They did not, apparently, set up a similar exclusion principle for lawyers. Johnson was able to question Darwinism by comparing the strength of the evidence put forward to support it with that required by a court of law - without the weight of his entire profession descending to crush and stifle him. His position is expressed very simply in an interview with Citizen Magazine. Johnson's examination of the stand of influential liberal Reformed Christian scientists can be seen in "The Hostage Takers." The internet has many of his articles examples being "What is Darwinism," a well reasoned account of what evolution really is - a philosophical necessity of atheism. "The Church of Darwin" is a look at Darwinists aims for education. "Shouting Heresy in the Temple of Darwin" and "Darwinism's Rules of Reasoning" reinforce his analysis of the way Darwinists operate. Johnson has been involved in may debates -on the subject. An example ("How Did We Get Here?" with Kenneth Miller) reproduced here is typical. Many more of his contributions on the subject can be found on the Internet. 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. Non-biologists have increasingly entered the evolutionary arena. Examples are given from well know mathematician, and philosopher David Berlinski, ("The Deniable Darwin" and "Keeping an Eye on Darwin" ). Physicist Lee Spetner in A Scientific Critique of Evolution demonstrates an important point for anyone wanting to enter the arena. The claims of the evolutionist are expounded with intimidating authority, and a superior knowledge of the scientific literature is needed to show up their fatuous claims for what they are. Despite the evolutionist's bluster and the total commitment of the scientific establishment to supporting it, I believe most would concede that evolution is in its weakest and most unconvincing state for many years. (See for example, Atheism In Decline Everywhere) " For the full article and more links: http://reformation.edu/scripture-science-stott/evolution/index.htm Plenty of food for thought.

I found professor Philip Stott's website. The link on Evolution says in part: "Evolution, in the extended sense, can be defined as a directional and essentially irreversible process occurring in time, which in its course gives rise to an increase of variety and an increasingly high level of organization in its products. Our present knowledge indeed forces us to the view that the whole of reality is evolution - a single process of self transformation." For many years this was the accepted view. It is still the view put forward in popular literature, the media and school text-books. But in "scientific circles" it has become an embarrassment. It contradicts the best established law in the whole of science. The Law in question is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In language easily understood this law guarantees that any physical system subject only to natural processes follows a downward path to ever lower levels of energy, it becomes more disorganized - it suffers decay. " http://reformation.edu/scripture-science-stott/evolution/index.htm

This is a complex topic which I can't try to debate from a scientific argument right now. Time constraints don't permit it right now. There are many articles dealing with various aspects of this topic at creation.com or creation.org Creation scientists debunked theories of evolution. I heard a slide presentation by professor Philip Stott. He is a scientist and mathematician. He explained how the random chance processes could not produce "evolution" because the length of time required to produce life is just too great. You gave a telephone number. That is infinitesimally easier than random chances producing life because the chance of selecting a telephone number are not in the same league as the building blocks of life. The chances of producing the building blocks of life by random is so small that there is not enough time to do it. The chances are way up in the exponential powers that are huge. It is not as simple as a group of numbers falling into place. There are many things that would need to occur at the same time which is too unlikely to occur.

They had to convert to Judaism to be saved because that was the system of worship God commanded at that time. There were many heathen systems of worship around at that time and some offered human sacrifices. Jews have been hated for 2000 years by many people, partly because they say the Jews crucified Christ or God. Hatred is one of the human failings that comes from the fallen nature. It is a another reason why we need to be regenerated or born again by faith in Christ. It is wrong to hate the Jews. The Bible commands us to love them. So those who hate the Jews are going against the Bible and teachings of God. I know you are correct about that at the time Christ was on earth. The non-believing Jews hated Christ and demanded he be crucified. But I am not sure that today they are in the same way of thinking. Many of them believe in Christ and have become christians.

Just to add to your comment a bit, the Old Testament is an account of the history of the Jews and God's dealings with them. The book of Genesis gives an account of the creation of everything including Adam and Eve. The Jews in Old testament times worshiped the one and only true God or Yahweh or Jehovah. The true believing Jews believed in a future messiah during this period of time. They were not called christians but were nevertheless followers of the true God of the Bible, as were Moses, Abraham, Isaac, King David, etc. The Old Testament prophesied the coming of Christ in several places. Isaiah ch9:6 and I think Isaiah ch14 and other places. But you are correct the christian religion did not exist as what we call "christianity" but the worship of the same God existed prior to Christ coming to earth. When Christ came, the old Jewish religion was replaced by christianity. You are correct in that. But the Jewish religion was a predecessor to christianity. The Old Testament gives all the details about this. The Old Testament Jewish system included the tabernacle where they offered the blood of animals as sacrifices for sin. This is the system God commanded them to follow at that time. These Jewish animal sacrifices were a picture of the sacrifice of Christ, a once for all sacrifice for sin. Once Christ came, there was no more need for these Old Testament sacrifices and that system was abolished in christianity.

Non-Jews could be saved prior to 2000 years ago in Old Testament times if they converted to Judaism. When Christ came, the Old Testament system of worship ended and true worship of God required becoming a believer in Christ. There were some Jews in Old Testament times who were converted to Judaism. I can't comment much on your claim that Jews attack Christians. I have a book called "God's First Love" by Friedrich Heer that chronicles the past two thousand years of anti-Semitism in Europe. Of course this culminated in the holocaust of six million Jews in the gas chambers. The persecution of the Jews in the last two thousands years was a huge dark part of history. I am not aware of Jews attacking christians. If it happened, it would probably be rare because Jews lived among large gentile populations in various countries and were in no position to attack christians. Jews were heavily persecuted through Europe and Russia as well. That's why many did not waste time emigrating to get back to the land of Israel once it was re-established. I don't know if Jews 'hate' Christ. They work with christians in the west and are accepted as part of society. The ones in Israel also know the west, particularly the U.S. and Canada to some extent, are more friendly and allied with Israel than their neighbours. Jews today just believe Jesus Christ is not the messiah. But there are a certain number of them who converted to Christ. Others are still waiting for the messiah to arrive.

You didn't mention marriage between one man and one woman. This is a biblical teaching, particularly in the New Testament. You find there are other cultures/religions where they believe in polygamy. We also don't offer human sacrifice or practice cannibalism, things that were done by some heathen tribes or civilizations. Christian civilization has brought us changes that never existed prior to the work of missionaries bringing the gospel to the world. Other examples are the barbarism of people like the vikings, barbarians of various sorts. We also have adopted a certain respect for individual rights or human rights and justice systems based on principles taught in the Holy Bible. Love for people and individuals is a characteristic of God and is taught in the Bible, misinterpretations of the Old Testament aside. Many other countries in the world who do not have a Judeo-christian foundation often do not respect human rights even to this day. " God proclaiming his omnipotence and demanding everyone supplicate themselves before him (her/it); I would say that is very radical or extreme." This idea would come from a lack of knowledge about who God is and his character and power. When a person understands some of the basic characteristics and nature of God, he will then understand why it is perfectly reasonable to kneel before God in a reverent frame of mind and supplication. There is more to it than can be copied to this page so I will give a link and encourage you to take a look through it. This page describes the nature and character of God. http://www.gospeltruth.net/natandcharofgod.htm

Since Christ came 2000 years ago, the gospel was open to Gentiles. The apostle Paul explains this in Romans. Prior to Christ's coming, the Jews were God's chosen people. Some of the promises God gave regarding the Jews are still in effect. But they cannot be saved without believing in Jesus as their Savior. Today God wishes for all to be saved. Jews are not the chosen people for salvation today. It is available to anyone who believes. Now you've made it clear I must go back and read about Noah and the flood in Genesis.

Quote 10 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. 22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 1 Corinthians ch1 18-24 King James Bible (1611) Quote 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians ch2 vs10-14 KJV (1611) This teaches that the natural man will not understand the things of God (which are in the Bible) because they are spiritually discerned. One must be given eyes or vision that comes from God. If one is sincere and wants to know, I believe God will give him spiritual eyes and understanding. kingjamesversiononline.org

Simply a lack of understanding of what the Bible is all about. I've explained it above about Israel and God having a covenant relationship.

The answer is those verses you quoted only applied to Israel at a particular time in ancient history. God chose Israel as his chosen people and gave them the land and commanded them to do certain things which you quoted. None of that applies to anyone today. God had a covenant with the children of Israel and those regulations was the way they were to live. They are not applicable to people or christians living today. Much of the Old Testament is a history of God's dealing with Israel and those things can only be looked at from that point of view. No christian church believes that they apply to christians. That period ended at least two thousand years ago. The only exception would be the ten commandments listed in Deuteronomy and Exodus. These are believed to be reiterated in the New Testament and most christians believe the ten commandments are a guide. There is nothing radical or extreme in the ten commandments and some of them are incorporated into the legal system.

Scientists do not have hard evidence either for or against creation by God as far as I know, other than the fact the universe is extremely complex and the evidence in the creation points to creation in the opinion of those who believe in a creator. I am speaking about the normal type of scientific evidence where one could point to a series of evidences and see a clear conclusion. Some claim accidents or chance, but that requires a great leap of faith to believe and I know of one scientist who has debunked evolution on the basis of mathematics laws of probability. He says it is impossible because of law of random chances processes eliminates the possibility of evolution because the time required is too great according to calculations. If you support the idea of the universe being created by accident or chance, you still have to find a way to explain how sub atomic particles were formed and where the laws of physics came from that govern how the particles operate. It is hard to imagine how that came about by chance. There is no rational explanation for that as far as I know, apart from a Creator and designer. Even energy, magnetic fields, and gravity itself would be very difficult to explain apart from a Creator. Where could those things possibly come from? But some scientists who have gone into this in great depth have come to the conclusion there had to have been a creator. The alternatives to a creator are only theories. None of it explains how something could come into existence from nothing. Nothing does not cause something to exist. Some might argue that the universe always existed, but that still doesn't explain how all the complex laws of physics and sub atomic particles and where it all came from. This is not blind faith as some suppose. This is pure logic that there had to have been a Creator or God to design it all and bring it into existence by supernatural power. That's the key word, Supernatural. If you are interested in reading a bit about this you can look at creation.org There are countless links to articles on this subject there as well as books and DVDs one can buy.

That is an easy question to answer. The language is the language I quote from the King James Bible (1611). It is the only version of the Bible in English which is based on the Received Text and is therefore the only inspired Bible. All other modern versions are based on corrupt manuscripts of Westcott and Hort if you are interested in looking into it. You could get "New Age Bible Versions" by Gail Riplinger or watch some youtube videos defending the KJV. No I don't want to hinder anyone's understanding. According to a book I have called "New Age Bible Versions", the King James Bible (1611) a computer analysis method has found the King James Version actually easier to read and understand than some other modern versions. There are more short words and short phrases in the KJV than some other modern versions. I have examples of more difficult words which have been put into some modern versions.

The fact is that Israel was God's chosen people. I know that doesn't sit well with a lot of people, but the Bible shows clearly that Israel was God's chosen people at that time. It gives the genealogy of the 12 tribes of Israel. Jacob was the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Abraham's son was Isaac and Isaac's son was Jacob whom God renamed Israel. Jacob had twelve sons that the twelve tribes of Israel came from. Ephraim and Manaseh were half tribes that go to make up the twelve tribes. The rescue of the animals by Noah was a supernatural event and Noah would have had to have God's supernatural intervention to do it. The father of the Jews and the Arabs was Abraham. Abraham wife Sarai couldn't have children earlier in her life and told Abraham to sleep with their handmaiden, Hagar, an Egyptian woman. So Abraham slept with her and she had a son named Ishmael. Ishmael is the father of the Arabs. Later when Sarai was about 99 and Abraham was about 100, God intervened and Sarai had a son they names Isaac. Isaac was the father of the Israel or the Jews. So both Jews and Arabs share the same patriarchal father, Abraham. Both Arabs and Jews are also descendants of Shem, who lived before Abraham. Shem's father was Noah. That is why Jews and Arabs are called Semites. The word Semite comes from Shem. So you can trace these people right back to Noah. Fairy tale? NO!

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork." Psalm 19:1 Simply look around you. Everything that exists has been created by God. Nobody knows when the Lord will physically return, but it is guaranteed to happen.

Logic and the laws of physics have no meaning with supernatural acts occur, when God operates the supernatural. You keep forgetting God created the laws of physics and created the universe. He is not limited to what he can do. Recall some of the supernatural events that took place when Moses was getting ready to leave Egypt with the children of Israel. Didn't you see the movie "Ten Commandments". Most people have seen that if they haven't read Exodus in the Bible.

Actually God is in control and according to the Bible is planning to return to put down all evil and create a new earth. A day of reckoning is coming. The only way to be spared is to be born again and receive forgiveness and remission of sins.

Again, you are making nonsensical assumptions. God has given a complete and final revelation in the Bible. The ten commandments says thou shalt not kill. It is a basic teaching of the Bible. That does not change. So God will not be saying to anyone to kill those who don't believe in him. That is not how God operates. There are people who sometimes claim god spoke to them personally and told them to do some evil thing, but this doesn't come from God. It is more likely from the devil. So people who properly understand the Bible and obey it will not be doing anything that should concern you. It's people who follow other false religions, a cult, or their own imagination that might concern us. We have seen plenty of that in the world.

So are you admitting to asking a trick question? A meaningless question or a nonsensical question? I thought I made it clear. God who created everything is also the judge of what is right or wrong or morality. One cannot stand before God and tell him what is right or wrong. That is foolishness. Perhaps you don't understand who God is. That's more likely the issue.