1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Homosexual groups advocate at Christian colleges with Christian Council blessing

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Marcia, Mar 13, 2006.

  1. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    A literal interpretation of Genesis does not allow for these miracles because the whole point of the narrative is that through the natural means of an ark built by Noah and his family mankind and all the kinds of animals were saved from the water.

    :rolleyes:

    </font>[/QUOTE]Following Craig's "logic" expressed here: "A literal interpretation of the resurrection does not allow for miracles since natural law must have been obeyed since the Bible doesn't expressly say it was miraculous."

    "Jesus walking on the water was a narrative therefore it cannot be literal and miraculous."

    "Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead is given as a narrative therefore it cannot be literal and miraculous."

    Now I am not accusing Craig of believing in these miracles since I have never seen him specifically claim to do so... but if he doesn't then he makes Christ a master deceiver and falsifies the Christian faith altogether.
    OT.
    </font>[/QUOTE]We all believe in all the miracles in the Bible. The story of Noah’s Ark in the Bible is NOT a miracle narrative nor is there anything in the story to suggest that a miracle took place. Reading miracles into it to explain away the obvious fact that the story depicts the impossible is nothing by a sleazy cop-out.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Karen

    Karen Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2000
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting, Craig.
    Because when it suits you, ALL OF A SUDDEN, 1st century Christians are the ones ill-informed.
    Usually, you appeal to the first 1500 years of Church history, and how the modern church has departed from the truth that the early church had "in unison".
    P.S. You already know, although you make it sound like you don't, that believing that God inspired Genesis does not mean that Moses fell into a trance and his arm moved without his volition.
    One of the reasons I believe Moses wrote Genesis is because the Lord, in the Gospels, refers to Moses as the author of the Pentateuch.

    Karen
     
  3. Karen

    Karen Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2000
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Back to the OP,
    I will be able to give you a first-hand report. Because I will be at one of the colleges on the day the afore-mentioned group will be appearing there.
    I have solid confidence that this college will handle it appropriately and well.

    Karen
     
  4. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You didn't answer the argument because you can't.

    We aren't told that most of the miraculous acts of Christ and others in the Bible are miracles. We simply recognize that they are. The things you argue against pertaining to Noah and the Flood may have been taken care of by God's providence in ways not spelled out or God may have performed miracles to preserve them.

    We aren't told those details. Genesis records and others including Christ affirm that the event was literal history. Even your own comment is self-defeating. Miracles are by definition impossible.

    The only thing sleazy is your speculative accusations against the truth of what God said happened- none of which are based in the biblical text or any other objective source. The sleaziness is your reading God's power to do what He records by whatever means He chooses out of it. The sleaziness is the depths to which you are willing to sink to rationalize your lack of belief in what God declared true.
     
  5. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    “God said . . .” “God said . . .” “God said . . .” “God said . . .” “God said . . .” “God said . . .” “God said . . .” “God said . . .” :eek:

    I find this gross distortion of the truth to be decidedly unchristian for two reasons:

    1. God did NOT say anything of the sort.</font>[/QUOTE]
    Yes He did... of course you have already demonstrated your disregard for scripture so I am not surprised that citing what God said offends you so greatly.

    IOW's, if God disagrees with Craig then He is likewise stupid, ignorant, or dishonest. I am sure that He will be impressed that you said so.

    Your whole diatribe on the authorship of Genesis has been answered by scholars greater than either of us since those same doubt-based, naturalistic arguments were first promulgated in the late 19th century. Since you are a "conservative", I am sure you are familiar with "The Fundamentals". Moses' authorship and the arguments you cite are answered in those volumes.

    Those seeking to conform God to their own will always find ways to doubt rather than believe... to disparage scripture rather than have faith in it.
     
  6. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    The Bible does NOT say that God declared that the story of Noah’s Ark is an historic account of actual events.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. standingfirminChrist

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    3
    The Bible does indeed say it was an historical account. Read Matthew 24. The Lord Jesus Christ mentions the flood there. Are you calling Christ a liar?
     
  8. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Of course the 1st century Christians were grossly ignorant of scientific facts. And I never said or implied that the early church was in agreement about everything. Indeed, I have posted over and over again that they were in agreement about VERY FEW things. One of those VERY FEW things was the doctrine of conditional security and that this doctrine is clearly and explicitly taught in the New Testament.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Scott J wrote,

    :D

    Where do modern fundamentalists come up with this absurd nonsense? Questions regarding the authorship of Genesis date back prior to the 1st century!!!

    [​IMG]
     
  10. standingfirminChrist

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    3
    Also, 2 Peter speaks of the flood that lifted Noah off of the earth.
     
  11. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    If you believe the above hogwash why bother.
     
  12. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    It appears that Craig by the Sea and Super Baptist are in the same arc, or is that Ark.
     
  13. standingfirminChrist

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    3
    You may be onto something there, OR
     
  14. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    The truth is that we have today an old document commonly known as “The Book of Genesis.” We know for a fact that God did NOT write it because God is neither a grammar school dropout nor a liar, but we do not know who did write it. We know that the authorship of it is commonly attributed by the unlearned to Moses based upon ancient legends, but what could possibly be more ludicrous and lacking in any sense whatsoever than to believe that a dead man wrote about his own death! Am I replying in this thread to hopelessly ill 18th century patients in Saint Mary’s of Bethlehem or am I writing to sane people in the 21st century? (That is, of course, a rhetorical question because the answer to it could not be more obvious!). It is true, of course, that traditional Jews and uneducated first century Christians were under the absurd notion that Moses wrote it, but none of them were so insane as to believe that God wrote it.

    Contrary to the misconception of many on this message that Jesus was a grammar school dropout who believed that God put a pencil in the right hand of Moses and a pencil sharpener in the other and dictated to Moses the Pentateuch, I believe that Jesus was the Son of God and that he had enough sense and knowledge to know better than to believe such absolutely ludicrous nonsense. But, of course, both Jesus and Peter were familiar with the beliefs regarding the authorship of the Pentateuch and, rather than start an argument with the masses over the authorship of it, they spoke of it in the language of the day as being “the writings of Moses.” Needless to say, this neither implies nor suggests that either Jesus or Peter expected anyone living in the 21st century to make fools of themselves by grossly distorting the meaning of their words but expected them to recognize them as a very common form of rhetoric found in the Bible and other writings. Paul, a gifted writer who used many literary devises to express the truths revealed to him by the Holy Spirit, wrote,

    1 Cor. 1529. Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them? (NASB, 1995)

    Paul is using here precisely the same literary devise used by both Jesus and Peter regarding the authorship of the Pentateuch. Paul did not believe in or advocate Baptizing Christians on behalf of their dead, unsaved relatives, but he knew that that was a common practice in the Corinthian Church, and rather that get into a futile and vain argument over that harmless issue, he used that belief to show the Corinthians that deep in their hearts they knew that the resurrection was a reality.

    There is, therefore, absolutely no Biblical reason to attribute the authorship of Genesis to Moses, and only a hopelessly ill 18th century patients in Saint Mary’s of Bethlehem could possibly come to the conclusion, contrary to both the Bible and the most basic common sense, that God put a pencil and a pencil sharpener into the hands of Moses and dictated the Pentateuch to him.

    [​IMG]
     
  15. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :D

    Where do modern fundamentalists come up with this absurd nonsense? Questions regarding the authorship of Genesis date back prior to the 1st century!!!

    [​IMG]
    </font>[/QUOTE]Nothing but evasion... not surprising.
     
  16. standingfirminChrist

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    3
    So if we are not to believe Jesus words when he said the Pentateuch were the writings of Moses, that means our Lord is to have had guile in His mouth. He lied when He spoke these words.

    You sir are blaspheming God's Holy Word and His dear Son!
     
  17. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    “The pitifully ignorant and empty headed imbeciles who have no knowledge or intelligence with which to refute the evidence presented by the educated and wise and therefore resort to poking fun at the men themselves more than amply demonstrate their own depraved state of mind.” Julius R. Townsend

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    1 Cor. 15:29. Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?

    Are we to believe that Paul endorsed the Mormon practice of baptizing the dead? You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

    [​IMG]
     
  19. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    “The pitifully ignorant and empty headed imbeciles who have no knowledge or intelligence with which to refute the evidence presented by the educated and wise and therefore resort to poking fun at the men themselves more than amply demonstrate their own depraved state of mind.” Julius R. Townsend

    [​IMG]
    </font>[/QUOTE]So you are self-indicting now? You spend a good bit of bandwidth telling us how stupid we must be for disagreeing with you or those whose opinions you favor.

    Your hypocrisy shines through once more.
     
  20. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No... I doubt either of them would have believed Noah when he said that God had told him a flood was coming. None of the educated men of his day did you know... and they "must" have been right, huh?
     
Loading...