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!

Real Gospel or Pseudo-Gospel?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Mike Gascoigne, Jul 30, 2003.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 5
  1. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    John, that's a joke (and a very old one). Joshua
     
    #21 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
  2. John Wells

    John Wells New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    What are you referring to as "a joke," you, your erring god, your fairy tale, or all three?
     
    #22 John Wells, Jul 31, 2003
  3. John Wells

    John Wells New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    NeilUnreal,

    Good choice of a board name! It goes well with your theology! :eek: Please send me your Dick Tracy code ring that will enlighten me as to when Jesus is speaking metaphorically where there is no evidence of such. Jesus is very clear when teaching a parable. How do you answer Jesus' admonition to "believe Moses?"
     
    #23 John Wells, Jul 31, 2003
  4. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    The line about God correcting the mistakes and making woman is an old joke that I've heard in almost every sermon I've listened to on that text. It always gets a reflexive chuckle from the congregation.

    If you want a serious answer to how those of us who don't read Genesis 1-11 literally view the nature of sin, read it. If not, don't.

    Joshua
     
    #24 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
  5. John Wells

    John Wells New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joshua,

    You don't present it as a joke. It's followed by:

    "That is how our Scriptures begin. Much work has been done in an attempt to homogenize these two stories, but it is perhaps best to simply let them stand on their own." - Joshua Villines

    I see no indication that it is a joke. Maybe when spoken verbally, with the right pause, wink, etc. it could obviously be construed as a joke, but not in the way you have written it.
     
    #25 John Wells, Jul 31, 2003
  6. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    I should probably take it out then. Those are the written notes for a series of lectures I gave - so it was spoken out loud. Since it's distracting, I'll edit it.

    Joshua

    P.S. Editing done.
     
    #26 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
  7. NeilUnreal

    NeilUnreal New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2001
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    0
    It goes well with my whole life! [​IMG] Believe it or not, it's been my nickname for over two decades now!

    Part of the "Dick Tracy" code ring is what the scriptures mean when they say Christ will write God's laws on our hearts.

    And now, this being a cursed world, I must toil... [​IMG]

    -Neil
     
    #27 NeilUnreal, Jul 31, 2003
  8. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Rev Joshua - I not only "caught" that joke, I've used it myself. But can see where others, knowing your bent for a more leftist outlook on, well, about EVERYTHING, might have missed the tongue-in-cheek.

    I'd encourage everyone to use our little emoticons to show humor, eyes rolling, smilies, et al [​IMG]

    We may disagree, but we are still all brethren and cistern! :rolleyes: ;)
     
    #28 Dr. Bob, Jul 31, 2003
  9. Mike Gascoigne

    Mike Gascoigne <img src=/mike.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    1
    Those aren't simple questions, so I'm going to have to rely on answers I've already written:

    Regarding Sin

    Regarding Salvation

    Joshua     </font>[/QUOTE]Joshua,

    This is a useful summary of a number of doctrines that have been developed during the history of the church, but none of it addresses the question of death before sin, which is what you need if you want to be an evolutionist.

    Mike
     
    #29 Mike Gascoigne, Jul 31, 2003
  10. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought your question was about sin and salvation.

    As for death "before" sin, I would think the first lecture addressed that as well. One can accept the biblical accounts as descriptive of our present situation, without using them to describe how we got here. Sin isn't necessarily a result of a fall, but is instead intrinsic to the nature of a broken, mortal world.

    Joshua
     
    #30 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
  11. Mike Gascoigne

    Mike Gascoigne <img src=/mike.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    1
    In that case, why should God bother to tell us how we got here?

    This is just fine for evolutionists who believe that the world has always existed in its present state of death and destruction, but it's not good enough for Christians, because the nature of God is to make things perfect, as it says a number of times in Genesis, "God saw that it was good".

    Mike
     
    #31 Mike Gascoigne, Jul 31, 2003
  12. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mike,

    If the nature of God is to only make things that are perfect, then Satan and the first humans must have been made by someone other than God.

    I don't know how the world originally came into being, and do not need to. Right now the world is a place that is broken, and our sin is a barrier to our relationship with God. The creation myths in Genesis express this well, as does the rest of Scripture. I'm satisfied with that.

    Joshua
     
    #32 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
  13. Mike Gascoigne

    Mike Gascoigne <img src=/mike.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joshua,

    In the beginning, even Satan was perfect, but he rebelled and took other angels with him.

    The first man and woman were also perfect, because at the end of the sixth day "God saw every thing that he had made, and behold, it was very good".

    If God doesn't make things perfect, why should we want to worship him? I wouldn't want to go to church, just to blame God for the mess we are in. I wouldn't see any point in it.

    Mike
     
    #33 Mike Gascoigne, Jul 31, 2003
  14. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mike, then we are having a discussion of semantics here. If "perfect" means "able to mess up / be messed up" then yes, creation is perfect. Any way you slice it, God created the world in such a way that it is now broken.

    Joshua
     
    #34 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
  15. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem always reverts to the evidence.

    The typical Christian Evolutionist does not accept evolution out of a desire to tear down the established doctrine; he does so because the evidence has compelled him to accept evolution. Those of you who disbelieve in evolution can at least accept that in the mind of the theistic evolution that event has occurred, he has been convinced by the evidence.

    Any faithful christian who perecieves a statement of the bible to be out of touch with the facts will generally do one of two things: reinterpret what the bible verse means, or decide to take it non-literally.

    Some propound the theory that the christian should, instead, change his opinion about the facts. Well, sometimes he can and sometimes he can't.

    I like to use the verse about insects having four legs as a sample of this problem.

    Lev 11:22-23
    These of them you may eat: the locust in its kinds, and the devastating locust in its kinds, and the cricket in its kinds, and the grasshopper in its kinds.

    23 "But all other winged insects which are four-footed are detestable to you.
    NASU

    Very few of us are able to change our opinion about the facts about legs on bugs.

    So we either decide to not take this literally or reinterpret the verse.

    Thats the way we do things.

    The Christian evolutionist is in the same situation with regard to evolution. The evidence, he thinks he realizes, is compelling.

    So he either decides to not take Genesis One literally or reinterprets what it means.

    What else can he possibly do?
     
    #35 Paul of Eugene, Jul 31, 2003
  16. Mike Gascoigne

    Mike Gascoigne <img src=/mike.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joshua,

    By re-defining "perfect" in that way, you are making it look as if God is somehow culpable, and to some extent responsible for the mess that WE have made of the world.

    You still haven't given me a doctrine of death before sin, and I don't find it in your first lecture, unless there is something that I haven't understood.

    Mike
     
    #36 Mike Gascoigne, Jul 31, 2003
  17. Mike Gascoigne

    Mike Gascoigne <img src=/mike.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    1
    Eugene,

    It's much worse than that. The Christian evolutionist has to re-interpret all of Christian theology.

    First there were fish, and they died. Then there were reptiles, and they died. Then there were mammals, and they died. Then there were ape-like creatures, and they died. Then there was man, and he sinned, and then he died. But his death had got nothing to do with his sin, because he was going to die anyway.

    Sin is no longer a life and death issue, although it can mess up your life. The problem is, I would never have become a Christian if someone had told me "Jesus can fix up your messed up life". My life wasn't messed up, at least I wasn't into crime and drugs or anything like that, so why should I need Jesus? You end up with a gospel for junkies, but it doesn't mean that much for anyone else.

    If you think the evidence for evolution is "compelling", as you put it, why not think of it this way. You weren't actually there, millions of years ago, when evolution was supposed to have happened, so the evidence you have is only circumstantial. You don't have any hard facts, so why not just be an agnostic as far as evolution is concerned? At least that gets you off the hook, and you don't have to re-interpret all of Christian theology.

    You won't be alone in that position. There are lots of agnostics in the creation/evolution debate. Once I went to a lecture, given by Patrick Moore, the famous astronomer and TV presenter. He knows so much, you can ask him a question about almost anything and he can give you an answer. Someone asked him "How do you think life began?" and he said quite emphatically, without any sign of embarrassment "I don't know how life began". That was his honest opinion, and he was declaring himself to be an agnostic.

    Mike
     
    #37 Mike Gascoigne, Jul 31, 2003
  18. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmm. I don't see the dire necessity to reinterpret "all of Christian theology". Why not simply see Adam as being different from the rest of creation because of the divine "breath" by which he became a living soul? Why not view him as uniquely immortal and in the garden, which he would have been priveledged to extend to the whole earth, had there been no fall? Why not view the "death" that came on the whole earth as being death for the human species?
     
    #38 Paul of Eugene, Jul 31, 2003
  19. Mike Gascoigne

    Mike Gascoigne <img src=/mike.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    1
    Paul,

    This would mean that Adam and Eve are in the garden, full of the bones of their dead ancestors, and the Lord tells them not to eat the forbidden fruit, otherwise they will die. Then they say "That's OK, we are going to die anyway, everybody dies", and they take the forbidden fruit. It's a different story from what we have in Genesis, don't you think?

    Mike
     
    #39 Mike Gascoigne, Jul 31, 2003
  20. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mike, I'm not redefining perfect - you are. You said that everything God makes is "perfect." Since God made the world, that means that "perfect" means capable of messing up (Adam & Eve) and of being messed up (the world in general).

    As for death, presumably death has been part of the system since the beginning. The myths in Genesis connect mortality to the brokenness of the world and to sin - which makes since. That which is mortal is flawed, temporal, and imperfect.

    Joshua
     
    #40 Rev. Joshua, Jul 31, 2003
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 5
Loading...