Pastor attempts to walk on water, eaten by crocodiles
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
I know this is horrible, but this reminds me of the guy that went and lived with grizzlies and got eaten by one. It honestly cracks me up, which probably makes me a horrible person ... but holy cow ... what did you think was going to happen?
"We still don’t understand how this happened because he fasted and prayed the whole week.” said Deacon Nkosi, who is one of the church members.
Hmmmm.
Hmmmm.
I'm sure he does, poor fella is infatuated with me. Every evening when he gets the chance to log on here after a hard day of dropping cones, he quotes me about a dozen times.
Religion can be foolish or it can lead to wisdom. Atheism is only foolish since it is entirely based on blind faith.
Those trying to "prove" God's existence get too full of themselves. All the proof they need is already there (in Christ) and trying to go beyond that massive demonstration of his miraculous Life & Almighty God's supremacy over known existence is bound to end in the same failure.
No offense, but that attitude is why a lot of youth have left the church over the course of the last 40 years. They have questions, and the adults say, "the Bible proves it" They then asks, "what proves the Bible?", then the standard response is, "the Bible does". That circular reference is the bane of many a youth becoming a non-church goer.
Apologetics need to be taught in conjunction with scripture. If you don't have a mindful, intelligent response for big bang, evolution, and the historic adaptation of modern science, you will lose that youth to agnosticism, or worse.
Agreed. What's missing in apologetics is presenting it as a counterbalance to situational relativism.
History is not relative, it happened. The Bible is as much a history book as a Faith document. It explains accurately a lot of "what" happened (History) yet is very limited explaining the "how" (Faith).
Yet, we are still encouraged to prove God's Trustworthiness by testing his Word both practically (in our lives) and historically (measuring Biblical prophecy to actual recorded historical events)
Relativism can't meet that standard, and this is where Christian apologetics fails to reach many youth just as you described.
So atheism (belief in nothing) is real. Faith (the evidence of things unseen) is blind?
So...as we exist...we are not real. We do not have Spirits (can't see them) We do not Love (can't see it either) nor do we think (can't read or see a thought) correct?
However what we do actually "see" killing, hatred, bigotry.. is therefore false and non existent. After all these things are in fact based in "reality" of what we actually "see". Correct?
So, a simple logical charting of your argument provides no other conclusion one can reach.
Your definition is that a belief in nothing (atheism) is proof of it's existence. Yet (Faith) in things "unseen", is proof of their non existence?
Last edited:
From the looks of things, the Crocodiles may have been fasting also. Don't tempt "Mother Nature".
I couldn't think of a more false statement. Christianity isn't blind faith. It's tested faith. Atheism itself cannot be based on reality, you can't prove a negative. Perhaps you meant agnosticism.
Can I read your mindful intelligent response to Big Bang, evolution, and the historical adaptation of modern science please?
Nope, I don't have it all written down. I can go through about 25 hours of powerpoint presentations with you, though.
Hebrews 11:121st Century King James Version (KJ21)
11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
I'd argue Leftist ideology (and atheism) is all based on what some Godless Professor...(for those who attended College) or the Godless popular culture has taught us.
We're not born disbelievers, we're taught that (disbelief)
The reason I say that is I'd venture that at one time or another virtually every current non believer at one time or another believed, or at least was introduced to the Gospel and at whatever time in their lives they decided to reject it THAT is when they became ardent non-believers.
Most of us are born with a heart for our Creator and to know who that is. We are turned away from that yearning for various reasons.
A dog is naturally loyal to it's Master and protective of anyone who tries to harm him/her. We are naturally anxious to know our Creator, but we become easily convinced to reject that part of our nature in favor of selfishness and Human arrogance.
Like a Dog trying to live without it's Master. He simply becomes wild, unruly, and eventually dies from lack of discipline or care.
We are the same way when it comes to rejecting our Master.
Last edited:
Class 1 starts out with something like: I'm not here to prove the existence of God to you. Noone can do that. I will give you many arguments against today's science, and many arguments for the God of the Christian Bible's existence. This won't be proof either way. It will be up to you to take this information, and make a decision for yourself. I can't give you the right answer. My pastor believes in old earth. My associate pastor believes in youth earth. I used to believe in youth earth, but now I'm in the "I don't know how He did it" category.
Some topics covered:
- comparison of worldviews (including postmodern humanitarianism (you proscribe to this)
- history of science, starting with Charles Lyell, Nicolaus Steno, and Darwin.
- Overview and arguments against Big Bang
- Charles Lyell, Nicolaus Steno, Geologic Column, and Darwin
- Overview and arguments against Evolution
- The many mistakes over time by science with fossils
- Dinosaurs
- US History starting in 1950's
- DNA - proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a creator
If the "big bang" was a random chance event...why has it happened only once?
Creation is duplicated many times over and over again. Species propagate one after another, and there is a "pattern" to all created things.
There is nothing "random" about the precision seen in nature, yet the big bang suggests a totally "random" occurrence that's only happened once....yet with such "random" precision that it's never happened "randomly" or accidentally again?
Me too TarHeelEer....
I don't think it's something we can measure with our current standards of limited time/distance instruments.
We cannot define infinity...where it started or where it ends?
We're talking about this realm where our Creator exists (beyond our limits of time and space) that we simply do not understand and have no way of comprehending with our finite minds based on a logical start and end of things.
No offense, but that is one of the dumbest posts I've seen in a long, long time.
Atheism, or maybe more appropriately, agnosticism, basically says "show me some evidence to consider before I have faith or a belief in something. My belief is based on some credible evidence."
I'm not trying to prove a negative ... I'm saying I don't think there is a God ... I'm not saying that I know there isn't one.
I can't prove there isn't one any easier than you can prove there is.
Let me ask you this. How much of Genesis do you believe? Which parts should be taken literally and which shouldn't?
Of the original authors, can you vouch for their honesty and integrity? Do you know for certain who they even are?
If your kids were sick, would you take them to the doctor or just pray for God to heal them? If it isn't the latter, why not? Do you not have faith that God would answer that prayer and cure them?
Most should be taken literally, but it takes deep thought to understand the literalness. Light is created before the sun and stars. I know what that light is, but... what is a day at that point? From whom's point of view is it a day? Gravitational time dilation makes it even more complex. Op will point to the supposed conflict between Genesis 1 and 2, and we'll tell him that Genesis 2 is not a time-lapse account, but a story. Now moving on...
There were at least four authors to Genesis. Moses wrote some and compiled the writings. Since Jesus told us we should, I kind of believe Him:
Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” John 5:45-7
I love the "he wrote of Me" part. Don't you?
I take my kids to the doctor when my nurse wife says we need to. I also pray over those sicknesses. I also pray over sicknesses for friends that are beyond our doctors. While not all situations end the way we want, I have been told many eye witness accounts of situations beyond our control that were resolved the way we want. A brain doctor friend of mine has told many wonderful stories, the best being a young girl that told him what was happening in the room next door while she was functionally dead, but was eventually resuscitated.
Do I rely on God's grace on this world? No. Do I lean on Him? Absolutely.
You quote John ... but can you vouch for his honesty and integrity?
You also danced around the Genesis question quite a bit ... "most" "should" be taken literally, but ....
Which parts? Why is there a but?
How do you know which parts should be taken literally and which shouldn't?
Do you really believe people lived to be hundreds of years old?
You say that Christianity is tested faith ... but based on what? And just because a young girl told him what was happening in the next room while she was dead doesn't prove Christianity at all. It doesn't prove any of the religions at all.
Those were christian crocs. Right before attacking, they gave thanks to the lord for the meal they were about to receive!
Now that's funny.
No pics, but the irreverent humor on display here is on the level of @PriddyBoy. I said he was sick, now he's infectious.
Still very funny post...made me belly laugh!
Jesus, and by default his disciples, didn't leave any options for their belief/disbelief: Did exist. Jesus either is as stated in the Bible, or is the biggest liar ever to lived, and should be thought of worse than Hitler. His disciples would be the second biggest liars, including John. But yet, those disciples believed in His cause enough to be martyred for it. That's another one of my apologetics topics. Forgot about that.
A day shouldn't be taken literal because it can't. We know a day as 24 hours, based on the revolution of earth on its axis. Daytime is known as the time we on earth point towards the sun. When the sun doesn't exist yet, what is a day? Those situations, which are very few (I haven't really researched it, haven't needed to) where it can't be taken literally is the only time it shouldn't be.
Yes, people lived to 100's of years old. Our DNA base is devolving, not evolving, as time goes by(Idiocracy). In addition, there were environmental factors protecting them.
We aren't smarter than we were previously. We're more technologically advanced. Big difference.