Welcome to TruthTalkLive.com!

Today’s Issues, From a Biblical Perspective!

Are You a Red Letter Christian?

Posted by truthtalklive on February 20, 2008

Sitting in for Stu today is Gary DeMar with American Vision (www.garydemar.com)

If you want to call in today, please use his number 1-800-982-GARY (4279)

AddThis Button 


222 Responses to “Are You a Red Letter Christian?”

  1. Willie W. said

    I’m sorry if this is off-topic, but I’m just wondering- do these people ever debate non-Christians or do they just preach to the converted? I’m talking about Hanegraaff, McFarland, DeMar, and the rest of the militant apologists that seem to turn up here from time to time.

  2. John said

    Well, there was this one time, awhile ago, that they invited a Wiccan Witch on for a brief discussion………

  3. Willie said

    That figures. Thanks John. You know it seems to me that these guys are very afraid of us. I’m not talking about the Christians who post here- I think they are sincere and clearly they enjoy debate to some extent- it’s their leadership that appears to be afraid of engaging the “other side.”

  4. John said

    The “other side”?
    You mean all of us heretics, eh?
    I would hesitate to call the staff of Truth Talk Live the leadership of the Christians here.

  5. Willie said

    The Christian leadership EVERYWHERE is afraid of atheists ANYWHERE. They just won’t debate. That seems awfully suspicious to me.

  6. Bill said

    DeMar is a hypocrite. He’s a Christian reconstructionist who decries redustributive taxation. He advocates executing homosexuals and denying religious liberty to nonChristians. On the program he favorably cited a book (Chilton’s Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt Manipulators) that defends antebellum Southern slavery as Biblical. He’s more of a statist than either Tony Campolo or Jim Wallis because he’s to give government the power to control people’s personal lives and to punish them for expressing differing views.

  7. too far Christian said

    If a debate is desired by the “atheists” here, then contact AiG, ICR, etc. and they will debate. They have debated Hugh Ross, Richard Dawkins, etc.

    As far a Christian reconstructionists, how can we be when we’re taking the founding father’s own words in context. Seems all the liberal left is doing is reinterpreting our “living” constitution.

    America hasn’t seen intolerance and government meddling – but we will if Hillary or Barack get into office.

    Communism here we come! Good by freedom!

  8. Fred said

    If the founders wanted a Christian nation all they had to do was reword the First Amendment to : Congress shall make no law that contradicts the Bible.

    Instead they gave us a free society ruled by secular laws. We are more free today than we ever were. The conservatives did not want us to be so free. Slavery is the purest form of free market Capitalism. The liberals, the free thinkers, the non-fundamentalists are who we thank for our progression away from Gary DeMar’s ideal Christian society of 1790.

    Why would we want to go back even fifty years, when the conservatives fought tooth and nail to keep segregation and Jim Crow in power? Who fought and died for the Civil Rights Act? Liberals did. The guys in the white hoods were Konservative Kooks Konglomerated.

    We need to be vigilant and take our obligations as citizens seriously so that Gary DeMar’s fantasy world doesn’t visit us here in the real world.

    That’s my $.02 worth.

  9. Chris C. said

    Well stated Fred.

    Too Far Christian: If you think the election of one man or woman would turn this nation into a communist state you are mistaken. Fortunatly for all of us, we have checks and balances (despite Bush and Cheny’s best efforts to ignore them) that prevent any one person our group from taking over the country. That means no communism, and no fundamentalist religion either!

    All of which is a total aside to the fact that Barack and Hillary are not communists, nor socialists. Read a book on political theory and stop all of this right-wing fear mongering by throwing out words like Commie! Pink-o! Socialist!

  10. Bill said

    too far Christian Says:

    “As far a Christian reconstructionists, how can we be when we’re taking the founding father’s own words in context.”

    Do you even know what a Christian reconstructionist is?

    “America hasn’t seen intolerance and government meddling”

    I don’t deny that America has been one of the world’s freest nations, but this is an utterly ignorant statement. Ever heard of the Alien and Sedition Act, the Fugative Slave Law, the Espionage Act, the Japanese-American internments, McCarthyism?

    “Communism here we come! Good by freedom!”

    If you think Clinton and Obama are communists then I doubt if you know the difference between Karl Marx and Groucho Marx.

  11. too far Christian said


    I’d say that was -$0.01 worth.
    It’s not about conservative versus liberal. In all due respect, it was Bible believing Christians that fought to free slaves and end slavery. Just like it is Bible believing Christians that are fighting against racism today – http://www.OneHumanRace.com

    Chris C.,
    Who is in control of the Senate and House? Whether you admit it or not, if Barack or Hillary are voted in, America will have a rude awakening concerning freedom. It will be Christians who are under attack at that time. All we have to do is cross our northern border and see the result of a liberal leadership. Since you are not a Christian, nor conservative, the only of your that will be affected is your money.

    Lets look at Barack and Hillary’s agenda – more government control, more taxes, less individual freedom, redistribution of wealth, silence of religious viewpoints, etc., etc. , etc. It may not be fullblown communism, but it is in the making.

    The Roman empire never thought it would fall either. Seems it was wrong. And it fell from the inside.

  12. Fred said

    Sorry, Too Far Christian, but you are wrong. History shows us that the Krazy Konservative Killers were Bible believing Christians, too. So it is about conservative and liberal.

    Keep the change.

  13. Anonymous said

    “The conservatives did not want us to be so free. Slavery is the purest form of free market Capitalism.”

    Talk about fear mongering!! Now we conservatives want to revert to slavery? I don’t think so.

    Liberal thinking smacks of socialism. Just a few examples…

    The liberal says, “the government knows best” regarding what our children can be exposed to and taught in our schools. The conservative says “I as a parent know best”.

    The liberal says, “the government knows best” regarding social programs and welfare. Take care of even the people who don’t want to take care of themselves. (Give them a fish) Make them rely on the government for their welfare thus creating a system they must rely on for survival. The conservative says create a system that “teaches them to fish” yet hold people accountable while encouraging them make it on their own.

    The liberal says, don’t push your morals on people (not realizing they are doing exactly that by making that statement). Liberals will say if they want to have sex in the streets, in public bathrooms, (recent ACLU case) let them. Liberal judges give light sentences to pedophiles and rapists, (where is the cry from our feminists about such?). Liberals say outlaw guns. While the conservative says moral laws (yes even murder is one of those!) create order and maintaining reasonable moral laws protect our society from becoming loose and rampant. Conservatives say, make the punishment fit the crime. Repeat offender pedophiles and rapists should be put away for life. Conservatives say if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them, no thanks.

  14. WW said

    then contact AiG, ICR, etc.

    You mean CRI I presume…but in any regard, no, they will not debate. My sources say they have been contacted many times on behalf of several prominent atheists and scientists and they refuse to even acknowledge the invitations. Do you have other information? When has AIG or CRI engaged in an actual debate with anybody ever?

  15. too far Christian said


    No, what history shows is the stupid white racists known as the KKK where in fact Arians, part of a cultish sect that didn’t resemble true Biblical Christianity in the most remote way.

    What about the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan? They also say they are truly following the Bible and Jesus Christ.

    There are many groups that do evil things in the name of Christ and even say they are following the Bible. Yet, are they really?

    And not everyone that calls themselves a conservative are in fact Bible believing Christians. There are conservative Jews, conservative Muslims, conservative agnostics, etc.

  16. too far Christian said


    No, meant ICR – Institute for Creation Research.

    You can visit their sites and see the past debates that have occurred between ICR & AiG staff debating evolutionary scientists and atheists.

    John Lennox had a “discussion” with Dawkins. Don’t put forth inaccuracies regarding debates for they are occurring.

  17. Fred said

    Too Far, you are wrong again. The KKK was a Christian organization.

    Read more history books, dude!

  18. Bill said

    too far Christian Says:
    “Lets look at Barack and Hillary’s agenda – more government control, more taxes, less individual freedom, redistribution of wealth, silence of religious viewpoints, etc., etc. , etc. It may not be fullblown communism, but it is in the making.”

    In light of Gary DeMar’s agenda you’re straining gnats. DeMar wants a theocracy. I don’t like higher taxes but
    DeMar and the people associates with want to make it criminal offense to espouse and practice nonChristian religions. Many reconstructionists make it a capital offense as they want to make homosexuality a capital offense.

    Communism is a political philosophy based on the ideas of Karl Marx. And not all socialism is communism. But the Democratic agenda is far from either communism or socialism. You’re just namecalling.

  19. Fred said


    If you can reconcile your conservatism’s history of terrorism and racism with their being for small government then go for it.

    Your speculation about liberals is laughable.

  20. Willeye said

    I see ICR now- my mistake. I thought you might Hanegraff’s non-profit profit machine.

    You can visit their sites and see the past debates that have occurred between ICR & AiG staff debating evolutionary scientists and atheists.

    I have visited there sites any
    debates from AiG (perhaps I am overlooking), and just some old junk from the seventies at ICR. But I am talking specifically about the current crop of loudmouth apologists- Strobel, Hanegraaff, McFarland, Witherington; even that fruitcake GaryDemar. Where are THEIR debates??? These folks are quite comfortable going on Stu’s show, preaching to the converted, then picking up their check; but they somehow can’t quite play ball on a real court where they might be exposed for what they are.

  21. Brad said


    Such hostility – where does it come from? What makes you so adamantly opposed to Christianity?

  22. Willeye said

    Such hostility – where does it come from?

    It came to me in a dream. Who cares where it comes from. The question is why won’t these cowards debate anyone.

  23. Mike S said

    So now conservatives are terrorists? Who is using inflammatory and fear mongering language now? Your views are about as extreme and narrow as any far right wing extremist I have heard!

  24. too far Christian said

    Dude, I worked with a klan member. He knew I was a Christian. He showed me his “Bible”. At least that is what he called it. It was the official KKK handbook and that is what they go by. Again, any group can apply certain Bible verses to their agenda, but it doesn’t make them a Christian group.

    Why such anger? Is John Lennox taking on the “top dog” of atheism not enough?

    As for DeMar and the others you listed. I’m not affiliated with them, so I can’t tell you about if they have or have not had debates. If you are in NC, I do know that Charlie Liebert will debate – http://www.SixDayCreation.com and has debated atheists and evolutionists.

    Gary DeMar is of the reformed/calvinist/covenant theology sort of Christianity. His views are sometimes extreme. Not all Christians would agree with him concerning a theocracy, etc. I personally do not view the Church as “spiritual Israel” and America as “God’s people” in place of national Israel.

    I do however agree with him concerning parental rights regarding teaching my own children and a Christian worldview.

    Also, what is the definition of socialism? communism? capitalism?

  25. Fred said

    Mike, the KKK qualify as terrorists, don’t they?

  26. WW said

    John Lennox taking on the “top dog” of atheism not enough?


    As for DeMar and the others you listed. I’m not affiliated with them, so I can’t tell you about if they have or have not had debates.

    Well, I CAN tell you. They have not. They seem to me nothing more than cowardly opportunists.

    If you are in NC, I do know that Charlie Liebert will debate

    20 bucks says he won’t.

  27. Fred said

    Too Far, the KKK is historically a white anglo-saxon protestant organization, or fraternity. To deny that from the 1870’s through the 1960’s the Kluxers were not Christian is like saying Bin Laden isn’t Muslim.

    But you knew that. You just don’t want to admit that it was conservatives win the white robes burning crosses and terrorizing people.


  28. Bill said

    Too far Christian,

    It looks like we agree on two things:

    1. DeMar’s theocratic views are extreme. I think it is unfair to say that all conservative Christians share these views. My main point has been that the real statist is DeMar not Campolo, Wallis, Clinton, or Obama.

    2. Parents do have a right to teach kids their worldview.

    As for definitions, these are mine:

    socialism – a state controlled economy in which market forces are very minimal, if not nonexistent. I do not consider a less than laisse faire economy to be socialist. A socialist economy is plan and command economy without being market driven.

    communism – a socialist philosophy based on Karl Marx’s writings, emphasizing philosophical materialism which creates an historical determinism. That in turn leads to a class struggle.

    capitalism – an economic system based on investments and markets. It’s not necessarily laisse faire, but it is market driven.

  29. Chris C. said

    The reason there arent ment debates between AiG, ICR etc. and leading atheists is because there isn’t any real debate about the validity of evolution. Having people like Kent Hovind, Kurt Wise, Duane Gish etc “debate” evolutionists implies there is actually a scientific debate on evolution’s validity. There is not.

  30. Anonymous said

    If you guys want to listen to a good debate, try listening to the debate between Bahnsen and Stein, called the Great Debate. You can even listen to it on youtube for free if you like. Willie, if you are truly open to a good debate, take a listen.

  31. too far Christian said

    All I can say is contact Mr. Liebert and find out.

    Fairy tales are fiction. Ok. The klan is not Biblically based. It can call itself Christian all day long. Still doesn’t make it so.

    Thanks for the definitions. I’d say we are heading toward socialism and judging by how Hollywood feels about Castro and Cuba, we just may be heading toward communism once socialism sets in.

    Chris C.,
    Like evolution is truly Scientific. Come on, that is just too much comedy 🙂 Or, would that be satire? 😦

  32. Anonymous said

    Here’s the youtube link,

    there, i did the work for you.


  33. Anonymous said

    I tried to post a link for the debate but it wouldn’t go through. Not sure what’s up with that? If you’re truly interested, I’m sure you can find it.:)

  34. WW said

    If you guys want to listen to a good debate, try listening to the debate between Bahnsen and Stein,

    How about something from this millennium?

  35. Fred said

    Anonymous, when you post a comment that includes a link, it will be held for the Moderator’s approval before it is posted.

  36. Anonymous said

    Thanks Fred. Didn’t know that.

    It is a good debate between Christianity and Atheism. If you have not heard it you should listen.

  37. Chris C. said

    Too Far Christian:

    If you want to debate evolution as a scientific theory then I’ll see you on the thread “Was Darwin Right?” I think I’m going to have to camp out there for a while.

  38. John said

    Chris C., you may have a lot of fun, or just get a headache, but know this…. this is not a very productive place for lessons on the evolutionary and natural sciences.
    Good luck, and try to enjoy yourself[smile].

  39. Too Far Christian said

    Ok, in answer to the question: Are you a red letter Christian?

    No, I am not. Considering the Bible is all God’s word, not just the words in red representing Jesus’ words. I am a black/red letter Christian 🙂

  40. Brad said


    You seem more interested in who will/won’t debate, than you are about answering honest questions posed of you. Just seems odd that someone with such apparent distaste for Christianity won’t, for whatever reason, say why when asked. You speak of those who are “cowardly” and won’t “debate”, yet when asked an honest question, you don’t answer it? Does the pot call the kettle black?

  41. Willie said

    Brad- I am not responding to questions about myself because it doesn’t MATTER what I do or do not believe, or who I do or do not hate, or what my emotional state is or isnt. Who/What/Where/Why I am has absolutely NO bearing on whether or not the Bible is reliable or evolution is true or any other subject that underlies the fundamentalist worldview. It’s just a way of dodging such un-important questions as why, if these guys are so sure they are right, they are too cowardly to debate, and instead addressing the all-important topic of my mood and personal motivations. I’m JUST CRAZY ENOUGH to think that when a guy calls himself the The Bible Answer Man he ought to be willing to debate a Bible-Don’t-Answer-Man once in a while. Otherwise it makes him look like a Bible-Con-Man. And we KNOW that isn’t true, right?

  42. too far Christian said

    Our emotional state and personal feelings toward a religion or thought process does indeed have some bearing on why we do what we do.

    Richard Dawkins is a perfect example. He has a great distain for religion in general and Jesus Christ specifically. This is pushed forth throughout his books and debates. His debates are less Scientific and more emotional. Hatred is his driving force.

    This was clearly evidenced in his discussion with Dr. Lennox.

    By the way, fundamentalism crosses borders even into Atheism and Evolution.

  43. Mike S said

    Amen about that! Hitchens is also an example of that!

  44. Brad said

    Thanks for answering, Willie.

  45. Gary DeMar said


    Your claim that we are not willing to debate is uninformed. We’ve published two books dealing Sam Harris (Wilson, “Letter from a Christian Citizen” and Joel McDurmon’s “The Return of the Village Atheist.” (These books are available at http://www.AmericanVision.org). We have two more books coming out dealing with Hitchens and Dawkins. We have been trying to set up a debate with Sam Harris. His publicist has written that he is not available “at this time.” We asked when the best time would be. So far no reponse. D’Souza has debated Hitchens, and another debate is planned this Spring in St. Louis. There is the very informative and already mentioned “Lennox-Dawkins” debate that took place in Birmingham, AL (October 2007). It’s available at http://www.fixed-point.org.

    The Bahnsen-Stein debate is still the best one out there. Yes, it was done in 1985, but the issues have not changed. Dawkins, Hitches, Harris, and Dennett aren’t saying anything that Bahnsen and others have not already answered.

    Next time I do Stu’s show, call in. There was plenty of opportunity for you to express your opinions. You might even find out that I don’t believe half the stuff attributed to me.

    Gary DeMar

  46. Willie said

    Gary- I appreciate you taking the time to respond to this, but with all respect, you havent really accepted the challenge.

    We’ve published two books dealing Sam Harris

    Publishing books is not a debate.

    We have been trying to set up a debate with Sam Harris.

    Again, I mean no disrespect, but Sam Harris is ‘hot’ right now, a top-tier atheist who is in demand all over the world, so it’s probably impossible for him to debate on every christian show. I don’t really fault him for that, for the same reason that I can’t really call you out as a chicken for not debating ME, because you don’t have time to argue with every village atheist that comes along.

    D’Souza has debated Hitchens

    Which is why I’m not criticizing D’Souza. Plus he doesn’t make a living bashing atheists as you and others do.

    Next time I do Stu’s show, call in. There was plenty of opportunity for you to express your opinions.

    That isn’t a debate either. That’s me asking a couple questions, then you hang up on me and give 10 minutes on why I’m wrong without any rebuttal from me.

    I have friends who work in atheist media and I can set up a debate with you and The Bible Geek any time you want.

  47. Willie said

    And I am certain you are welcome to go on either The Rational Response Squad or The Infidel Guy show if you want to reach out to young people who are also atheists.

    So shall I email those shows and tell them you when you want to go on?

  48. Anonymous said

    Hey Willie,

    Would you debate Demar on the radio show next time he is on? You said, “You know it seems to me that these guys are very afraid of us” (post 3), and, “The Christian leadership EVERYWHERE is afraid of atheists ANYWHERE. They just won’t debate. That seems awfully suspicious to me” (post 5).

    Maybe you could go into the studio with him, or he could guarantee that you would not get cut off, and would have an even opportunity to present your case? This could be very interesting. He did invite you to call in. What about it?

  49. Willie said

    anonymous- it’s a valid question. I’ll answer you as soon as Mr. Demar answers me.

  50. Brad said

    Way to sidestep Willie – “you first”, he says.

    Either you’re willing, or you’re not. Are you? Shouldn’t matter about the willingness of others?

    Pretty quiet since getting called on this one, though…

  51. Willie said

    I asked him first.
    But since you asked, Ok sure I’ll debate with something like the rules proposed in the previous post, but you have to wonder why he would agree to debate ME and not any of the people I suggested.

  52. Willie said

    Brad- notice how many times I’ve posted here and how many opportunities I’ve given them, and still your heroes are nowhere to be found. I guess the atheists win by default.

  53. Anonymous said

    To be fair, Gary Demar is probably the only “hero” involved in this thread, and he probably doesn’t check it very often. But, the fact is that he made the offer in his post. So, next time he is on you can call in and debate him. Maybe he will see this and respond.

  54. Willie said

    and he probably doesn’t check it very often.

    Yes, he is probably too busy bashing atheism on his show to actually debate an atheist.

  55. Tripp said

    Willie – so much hate towards the Christian. What good is it doing?

  56. Willie said

    Every time you hear Gary Demar or The Bible No-Answer Man just know that they were challenged and failed to respond. Then ask yourself why that might be before you send them any more of your hard-earned money.

  57. Brad said

    The mighty Willie has spoken – who are any of us to question him? He has “challenged” these 2 people to debates, and amazingly enough, they have not responded to him, amongst all the other correspondence they have.

    I’m sure they’re too scared of you to debate you, Willie. That must be it, right?

    Even if they debated you, and provided evidence to show your position wrong, would you believe them? I, and I’m sure others here, get the feeling you’re inclined NOT to believe, no matter what. At that level, what’s really the pointing of debating, Willie?

  58. F. L. A. said


  59. Willie said

    Brad- let me say this again. Stop me if I’m typing too fast for you. I DON’T they should debate me. Who am I to them? Nobody. But they should debate with
    SOMEBODY. When was the last time you heard Hanegraaff or Demar or any of the TTL regulars debate somebody? They won’t because they are scared.

  60. Brad said

    Prove they’re scared, Willie. Your argument is from silence, not facts. Prove they’re scared.

  61. Anonymous said

    Hey Willie,

    I contacted Gary Demar through the American Vision website and he is willing to discuss this with you. He said, “Have Willie contact me at the American Vision email address.” All you have to do is go to the American Vision website and hit the contact button. Your email will be forwarded to Gary.

  62. Anonymous said

    Hey Willie,

    I contacted Gary Demar through the American Vision website and he is willing to discuss this with you. He said, “Have Willie contact me at the American Vision email address.” All you have to do is go to the American Vision website and hit the contact button. Your email will be forwarded to Gary.

  63. Tripp said

    Willie – I have heard Hank debate callers many times and he always wins the debates. How often do you listen?

  64. John said

    Well now Willie, they DO debate with others of a similar mindset[smile].
    I don’t really think that they are scared. It may just be that they just don’t know how to handle a guest with a completely opposing or alien view on topics, including knowing what questions to ask said guest in order to carry on productively with the chosen topic.So they take the easy way out and stick with what they know.The show is really more an entertainment than anything else.After all, they only have one hour, more like twenty minutes after you take away all of the commercials and testimonials.
    It’s HERE that the real debating if any takes place.
    We just have to be satisfied with what we have and try to take advantage of this scenario to the fullest.

  65. Willie said

    Brad- what sort of proof would you accept?

    Anonymous: Ok- we’ll see what happens. I’ll let you know.

    Tripp: Like I said in an earlier post that’s not really a debate. You get maybe 30 seconds to make a point, maybe trade a line or two, and then they hang up on you and get the last word- or more likely the last 5 minutes- to reassure the listeners that you are wrong. Hank will NEVER engage in a real debate with an educated person like Bob Price or Eddie Tabash.

    John: yeah they debate such exciting topics as whether to be a Christian you have to accept Jesus as savior or Lord AND savior.

  66. John said

    Well………[grin, eyes rolling].

  67. Tripp said

    Why would Hank want to debate with someone like that? There’s enough false teachings going on in Evangelical Christianity. At least he is fighting for the truth and not debating some mindless evolutionist. Willie, why do you have so much hate?

  68. Fred said

    Mindless evolutionist? The pot calls the kettle black.

  69. Tripp said

    Hahahaha!!! Danger! Danger! The atheists have taken over!!!! Hahahaha!!!

    Whatever you say there, Mr. Fred.

  70. Fred said

    They were your words, not mine, Mr. Tripp.

    I am a Christian, too, by the way.

    have a nice day,

  71. Tripp said

    the kettle calling the kettle….glad to hear it

  72. Willie said

    Update: I heard from Gary Demar. Apparently he doesn’t care to debate prominent atheists like The Bible Geek, but instead prefers to debate a nobody like me. Go figure. I’ll let you all know what happens.

  73. John said

    Thank you Willie.

  74. Educated Dawg said

    “I am a Christian, too, by the way.” – Fred

    Oh, really 😦
    Judging by your posts on other threads….which Jesus do you follow? Sure ain’t the One of Scripture……..

  75. Fred said

    Apparently I am not your kind of Christian, Mr. Dawg. I thank goodness for that.

  76. Maz Herman said

    Brad: Your last line on post 57. is the reason I pulled out of the Darwin debate. What was the point? I was willing to have an intelligent debate but all we seem to get was sarcasm. The anti lobby seem to be on here just to ridicule our faith and even our science!

    And Fred: If you ARE a Christian, you do not appear to follow the teachings of Jesus in the BIble. And NOT my interpretation Fred….what IT SAYS.

  77. Fred said

    Maz, I am not going to pretend to believe something as ridiculous as Young Earth Creationism, or Noah’s Ark just so I can be accepted by you and Mr. Dawg as a Christian.

  78. Maz Herman said

    Fred: It’s not just that you don’t believe in something ”as rediculous as Young Earth Creationism, or Noah’s Ark” as you put it, you also do not accept the Bible as the Word of God, inspired by God, written by men inspired by God which it clearly states in the Christian Bible itself, ”ALL Scripture is given BY INSPIRATION OF GOD and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished (or equipped) to all good works.” Do you believe this bit of the Bible Fred?
    AND; you do not believe that Christianity and Judaism are connected or ”comes completely from Judaism” as you said somewhere else.
    Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, who became the worlds Savior (He did not become a Christian then as some in the Church seem to think!) But this whle question was answered by Mike and Ivy earlier on another Question.
    You have also stated that you believe that ”our religion comes from Rome”.
    Our religion has nothing to do with Rome. It began in the Middle East, in Jerusalem, when Jesus dies for our sins and was resurrected, and the Church was born on Pentecost. And may I add most if not all the Church were Jews who received Christ as their Messiah and Savior.

  79. Educated Dawg said


    To accept Jesus as Saviour, one must understand that He is Creator 1st – Genesis 1:1; John 1:1

    The Bible says He died for our sins. It goes on to say that “the wages of sin is DEATH”. Yet, your evolutionist buddies say death has always existed and is not punishment but advancement of the species. Your evolutionary buddies proclaim that there is no sin but what religionist fundamentalists impose on the Intellectually Elite as “right or wrong”, “sin or virtue”.

    You, as a professing Christian, are in a bind. Is death the result of sin or evolution? Is sin a madeup term from religious zealots or disobedience to God?

    Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we ourselves become deceived 😦

    God’s word never changes, has been proven trustworthy, will be here forever. I’ll keep believing Him instead of unregenerate men.

  80. John said

    I would love to debate with you about this idea you have that death did not exist within the world before the arrival of sin, Educated Dawg. Are you feeling up to it?
    Now I must warn you, if we do this, then you’ll have to know A LOT about nature and animal life.
    What do you say? Do it for grins and giggles?

  81. Fred said

    Mr. Dawg, if that means what I said in post #75, then good-o!

    Otherwise, no, we can’t be pals.

  82. ADB said

    Regarding this death thing, maybe somebody can help me. Genesis clearly says that “on the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” If that is true, why did not Adam and Eve drop dead on the spot when the ate the fruit?

    As Maz and the Dawg have pointed out numerous times, the Bible is inspired by God, and I would assert is “infallible in all it affirms,” to use the classic definition. The key here is that the Bible is infallible, not a human interpretation of it. What one believes about scripture isn’t as important as how one handles it.

  83. Fred said

    Maz, we aren’t going to agree on what it means to be a Christian.

    Nevertheless, I am a Christian.

    No, I am not a fundamentalist.

    Yes, I understand why you say I am not a Christian.

  84. Educated Dawg said

    Mine is a Biblical worldview with original sin being a core doctrine.

    Yours is a theistic evolutionary worldview with sin being a relative term.

    So, no, I have no need to go any further with you concerning death in regard to animals and nature. Also, it’s not my “idea”. It was God the Creator who established this “in the beginning..”


    You’re an educated man. What does the original Hebrew mean when it says “you shall surely die.”? What did happen to Adam and Eve the moment they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil? Obviously, they didn’t physically drop dead at that very moment. Yet, they did indeed die physically.

  85. John said

    ADB,in regards to your question concerning death, might I hazard the guess that your God was referring to some form of SPIRITUAL death.[?] Or perhaps it was a warning of things to come.After all, they were not IMMORTAL.Just an idea.

  86. John said

    Your decline of my challenge sounds like a cop-out to me, Educated Dawg.Methinks That I would have really made you come to terms with some troubling conclusions.Perhaps Mrs. Herman would like to give it a try?

  87. ADB said

    Mr. Dawg,

    Normally, the Hebrew word “muwth” means to die or to die prematurely. My point in the above post is that Adam and Eve did not die the moment they ate the fruit, because Genesis also records as I’m sure you know, that they were cursed by God and afterward lived and had children and died at ripe old ages (Adam to 930 years according to 4:5). I would argue that the death was spiritual rather than physical. Their close communion with their creator was broken, they knew evil as well as good, and as scripture makes clear the imago dei (divine image) in the human heart was forever distorted. My argument is that because the death referred to must be spiritual, then physical death could indeed have occurred before the fall. This allows for lions and other predators to be created with sharp teeth and claws for hunting before the fall, and by extension for animal life to die before the fall because animals were not created in God’s image.

    Of course you can tell from this that I am very skeptical of a young earth creation. As I look at it, scripture in no way demands a young earth, and simple observation of the creation around us sure seems to indicate that the universe is of vast age. That’s how I look at things, even if Ken Ham would say that I’m a godless evolutionist:)

    Best wishes, a curmudgeonly pastor.

  88. John said


  89. Educated Dawg said

    I would disagree with you concerning death in Genesis 3 referring only to spiritual death – why would God give the authority to eat vegetation-only during creation week? It wasn’t until after the flood that God gave the authority to eat animal meat. Also, why do you think God made it a point to describe the killing of the animal by Him and subsequent clothing of Adam and Eve? Why is the whole earth groaning and travailing if the wage of sin was only spiritual death upon human beings? Seeing that animals nor plants have a spirit. Why does Jesus Christ in the Revelation emphasize a new restored heaven and earth if sin only causes spiritual death? Your interpretation of Scripture is evolutionary based, but Biblically it is in error.


    Call it what you like. Our world-views are drastically different. You would only be able to use an evolutionary “proof” to somehow “convince” me that original sin, ie death after Adam’s fall, is in error. 1 John 1 deals with your error.

    Troubling conclusions? Doubt it. What would you convince me of? No sin? Death a product of millions of years of evolution? Jesus Christ just another deity among millions? The Bible just another religious book among hundreds? Evolution a fact of “Science”?

    There is nothing that paganism, specifically Wicca, can offer me. Jesus Christ is more than enough to satisfy the longing soul. Whom He sets free is free indeed. He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. He was there before time began. He spoke the worlds into existence. He upholds everything by His power.

    I will tell you this, with all honesty. If Christ is not who He claimed to be, if the Bible is not what God said it is, if Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead, if this was proven – then that would be the day that I would become an atheist. No religion, no deity compares with Jesus Christ and His word.

    If it’s all a sham and we’ve been hoodwinked. Then I would fully embrace atheistic evolution along with Chris C. and Abc’s. Nevermind Wicca with its cheap interpretation of evolutionary thought. Forget your gods that you really don’t know. Give me humanism and naturalistic origins. Let me live my life in relativity and self gratification, unrestrained.

    Yet………………..I am 100% sure that Jesus Christ is who He claimed to be and His word is trustworthy in every detail.

    Yes, I am very narrow-minded 🙂

  90. Willie said

    What if Genesis is just an allegory, like every other primitive creation story? If that’s the case then you don’t have to get rid of it. It is actually a profoundly meaningful story about loss of innocence. Why don’t we
    try to salvage the truth and stop betraying the old storytellers by trying to turn psychology into history.

  91. Educated Dawg said

    If Genesis is allegory, then is the resurrection also? Which one of us will play “God” and establish this chapter to be allegory and this chapter to be factual?

    Again, to the atheist, why does it matter what we say? We’re just religious nuts arguing over supposed gods that only exist in our own minds…………..

    😦 😦 😦 😦 😦 😦

  92. WW said

    If Genesis is allegory, then is the resurrection also?

    Now you’re getting it.

    Which one of us will play “God” and establish this chapter to be allegory and this chapter to be factual?

    Maybe God wants us to figure it out for ourselves.

    We’re just religious nuts arguing over supposed gods that only exist in our own minds…………..

    No argument here.

  93. Maz Herman said

    Hi Guys: Well, I’v read all your posts and I don’t want to repeat what Educated Dawg has said, which is all true……
    Who mentioned the sharp teeth? Having sharp teeth does not prove they were meat eaters. There are animals today that have sharp teeth that are vegetarians. Some need sharp teeth to tare open tough fruit.
    DEATH: Genesis, as I think Ed. Dawg said, tells us quite clearly that ”death entered this world through sin”, not just spiritual death, any death.
    Adam and Eve died spiritually immediately they ate the fruit. And they had to leave the Garden and the fellowship they’d had with God, cut off from a relationship with God. And that’s how man has been eversince. Ephesians tells us that ”we are dead in our trespasses and sin”….obviously not dead physically, but dead spiritually, cut off from a relationship with God. 1 Cor: 15 v 22, all born from Adam were born dead spiritually ”In Adam all die”.
    We can only become alive spiritually again when we accept Christs life into ours and we become ‘born-again’. We receive a new life, we become a new creation as spoken of in 2 Cor: 5 v 17.
    But in the beginning once Adam and Eve had sinned, they began to die physically. Up until then they could have lived forever in perfection. That’s why God had to guard the tree of life from them once they had sinned, because if they had touched it after sinning they would have lived forever in their sinful state, lost eternally with no chance of redemption.
    That is why, when we accept Christ as Savior, we are immediately restore spiritually into a relationship with God as our Father, but we have to constantly RENEW our minds as it says in Romans 12 v 2, and we have to wait for the redemption of our bodies. Romans 8 v 22,23. This will happen when Christ returns for His Church, 1 Thess: 4 v 13-18. ”Beloved, now are we the children of God, and it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is”. We shall receive new uncorruptable bodies like His resurrection body. 1 Cor: 15 v 52-57 tells us our corruptible body will be ”put off” and we shall ”put on” an incorruptible body.
    Does this help in any way guys?

  94. Maz Herman said

    Fred: I now understand where you are coming from….I’v found the post where you admit being a ‘nominal Christian’ one born in a Christian home, going occassionally to a Church.
    You know the old saying, Jesus was born in a barn but that didn’t make Him a sheep or cow. Nothing YOU DO makes you a Christian Fred, it’s what CHRIST DID on the cross and wha you do with Christ that makes you Christian.
    By deffinition you have to have CHRIST in your life to be a CHRISTian…or ”CHRIST IN YOU the hope of glory”. Coll: 1 v 27.

  95. Anonymous said

    I am an NFL football player… I am 5′-6″ and weigh 120 lbs… You laugh… I say… I don’t care what you think… That’s what I am… My name is Ernest T. and I’ll throw another rock at you…

  96. John said

    Mrs. Herman, mammals that are herbivores or omnivores that have sharp teeth/fangs[fruit bats,bears,monkeys,etc.] also have molars for GRINDING UP PLANT MATTER, while those mammals that feed only on flesh[felines,canines,weasels,etc.] have molars for SHEARING FLESH.For one who advised us all to take a real good, close look at the natural world,you should know this already. And that’s without getting into reptiles,fish,Dinosaurs,or arthropods.Would you like an elaboration?
    If not, then I won’t be surprised in the least.It would have led to some of those “troubling conclusions” that Educated Dawg is trying to avoid.And another thing, even if animal life was not taken before the Fall Of Man in the Garden Of Eden, it still means that there would have been death.For the plants that were being consumed.Didn’t think of that, did you? Man, as an animal, in his arrogance almost never considers the killing of botanical life as killing a life form.For example, for a cat to eat a mouse, that’s death, but to pull up and eat an onion, why that’s…………? Death is still death, Mrs Herman, be it a germ, a dandelion, a mouse or a man.

    And as for you, Educated Dawg, I would have destroyed you in a debate on this topic. Only your theistic insanity would have saved you from recognizing defeat.The Gods that I really don’t know? And am I to conclude that YOU do? Why, I bet that you don’t even know their names. What a lonely,tiny universe people like you exist in, with only your God and Satan fighting over everything. And from the way you write, one might almost think that I was trying to corrupt or convert you with my theology.Remember, I like you just the way you are.I would tell you why, but you’d probably just take it as a compliment.
    As I stated in the past, believe what brings you strength and joy[smile].
    Blessed Be.

  97. Maz Herman said

    John: It tells me in Genesis that God gave the animals the herbs and everything for food. And He also says everything was very good. You wouldn’t call death very good would you?
    After the fall everything, including the ground, was cursed, and weeds began to grow. And John plants do not possess a spirit and soul like humans or a soul like the animals. So how can they die in that way.

  98. Chris C. said

    Death is sad, but eternity would be far worse. Can you imagine never getting a break??

  99. John said

    Hello again Mrs.Herman, so good to hear from you.
    Your God also didn’t see anything wrong with murdering all of the Egyptian first born, or in drowning the whole world that one time, as I recall.Was that good too?
    Are you afraid of death, Mrs. Herman? Not I.I see it as the greatest of adventures, and as a nessassary transition from one form of existence to another.I am not yet ready[as if I have a lot of say in this matter[grin]]to take that last great adventure, but I am not afraid of it. It’s just the DYING part that sucks, is all.I disagree about botanical life not possessing spirits.They can feel pain, you know.

    Chris C., eternity sounds like a curse to me, although she was probably referring to “spiritual immortality”.I was once chatting with a Jehovah’s Witness about it[ it’s one of their best “sales pitches” for proselytizing, the gift of eternal life on earth[because Heaven will be full]] and aside from other unpleasantries like everything being a vegetarian and no self gratification or violence[where’s the fun in all this?] there was the promise of eternal life without sickness or old age.As if people would grow to “their prime”, say, forty years of age[?] and then stop aging.PERIOD. Somehow there wasn’t going to be an overpopulation problem in this scenario. I asked him if I would be able to change my physical form every five years into something new, like a eagle or a shark, or even just my gender, to keep things interesting[I know this sounds “gay”, but we’re talking ETERNITY here.It would help keep the boredom away]He said no among other things. The strange looks that he gave me!
    Only those who fear death would find any appeal in such a situation, I think.This is also why I could never understand the appeal of becoming a stereo-typical vampire.Such boredom! And seeing everything and everyone that you love wasting away to dust!

  100. Maz Herman said

    John: You need to be careful you don’t walk on the grass then…….it sounds stupid to say that , but YOU said it would feel pain, I didn’t.
    And no I am not afraid of death because I KNOW where I am going, what confidence have you got in your beliefs?….where do they come from? I have a Bible that tells me what is beyond death.
    And who are you to accuse God of something you do not understand. When He destroyed the world with the flood, He destroyed the wickedness in it. He had to. What kind of state would the world be in today if He hadn’t? Far worse I can tell you. It’s bad enough as it is.
    And if the Egyptian Pharoah had let Gods people go there wouldn’t have been any reason for their first born to die. They brought it upon themselves by their disobedience and sin.
    God is Holy and he hates sin.
    But we can thank God that He sent His Son to die in our place, so that WE didn’t have to die for our own sin. That’s the grace of God to you today…but you are like the Egyptians, you don’t want His grace or mercy….to put it bluntly, John, you would rather go to hell than ask Him to save you.

  101. John said

    I walk carefully[smile].
    You have a Bible, I work with Spirits and bask in the blessings of the Old Gods of my ancestors.
    Did I accuse your God? Or did I state what you believe to be the truth already? Well?????
    As a dear friend of mine told you in the past, that’s YOUR Hell, and you can keep it.
    “They brought it upon themselves by their disobedience and sin.God is holy and he hates sin”-you.
    And just where was this attitude when you were criticizing me on the O. Ben Laden site[frown, with one raised eyebrow]?

  102. Maz Herman said

    John: HOW do you KNOW that the spirits you work with are not demons in disguise? HOW do you KNOW that what you are doing is right? What authority have you to say what you believe is right?
    Yes, I have the Bible. John, what do you have?
    You said ”Your God didn’t see anything wrong in murdering all the Egyptian first born, or in drowning the world that one time, as I recall.” Sounds very much like you are accusing Him of murder? You do not understand the nature of a Loving God Who is also a Holy God.
    They could have been saved had they done the right thing. So many today seem to think they can do what’s wrong and get away with it. Sin always has a consequence.

  103. Chris C. said

    You’re telling me everyone on the entire earth was deserving of death by drowning? Did god not send a rainbow after the flood to say, “I will never flood the earth again.” ? I mean, to me that seems a little remorseful, as if god is saying. “Wow guys, I really overreacted there. My bad.”

  104. Willie said

    All things bright and beautiful,
    All creatures great and small,
    All things wise and wonderful:
    The Lord God drowned them all.

  105. Maz Herman said

    Chris: Read it for yourself in the Bible, Genesis 6 v 5. I’m telling you what the Bible said God did and I don’t question God on the way He does things. As I said before, God hates sin, and the Bible tells us that ”God saw the wickedness of man that it was great on the earth”, if He had let it continue it would have got worse and worse. If you do not understand how wicked sin is and how Holy God is then you won’t understand why He did it.

  106. John said

    Yes Mrs. Herman, I was calling your God a murderer, and if the Bible is to be believed literally, then that would make him the biggest murderer in all of your young earth history.Murder, whether or not it is justifiable,is still murder Mrs.Herman.Why deny it? Are you not proud? To help to completely understand were I’m coming from, for us, murder is the forceful, usually violent ending of a life, any life.That’s a Pagan absolute, in case you were interested.Aside from not taking everything within the[many versions]Bible as absolute truth[like the flood story,for example]do know that I don’t really hold the actions of your chosen deity against you Mrs.Herman. After all, we have a Goddess of War, so It’s not as if I don’t completely understand your situation[smile]. We have no Bible or old sacred writings left as our theology was mainly an Oral Tradition, like many of the Native American tribes.There are some temple/cave paintings and a few stone carvings, but my ancestors preferred to worship within groves of sacred trees[mainly Oak].Almost everything including the groves used in worship and ritual was destroyed/burned/raised before or during the European Dark Ages.We had to go underground and later relearn almost everything.Understand?
    And as far as demons go, this label is very convenient for one such as yourself, someone with a dualistic theology where everything is either of Jehovah or Satan.Because there’s no room within your theology for anything different, my deities and everything else connected with them cannot help but be demonic in nature.
    So why ask a question that you already believe you know the answer to?If I denied that they were demons, would you actually consider that I might be right? Of course not, silly.It’s like a young-earth creationist asking for evidence of transitional forms.
    It is/was a common practice of the newer theologies to turn the deities of the old religions into the demons and devils of the new.
    Does all of this help you any?

  107. ADB said

    Been tied up last couple of days. You know weekends can be busy in my calling! Dawg and Herman did indeed catch me in a “brain lapse.” Yes, I know that in some sense the fall did indeed involve physical death for humanity. The greater death was indeed spiritual, for it was that which marred the divine image within us and created the perpetual stain of sin, but certainly physical death was involved as well.

    My question then is this. Exactly where, scripturally speaking, does it speak of animal life being affected by the fall. It is true that man wasn’t explicitly given warrant to eat animals until after the flood, but this has no bearing at all on the fall. Otherwise, such warrant would have come much earlier. Animals are amoral. When a cat eats a mouse it’s not murder, it’s just a cat doing what God designed cats to do. And if God did not design cats to eat little furry rodents then they developed their physiology by evolution. Contrary to Mrs. Herman, I certainly can think of no scriptural warrant for saying that animals have souls. Only humans have the divine image, only humans have self-knowlege and awareness, and higher reasoning. Personally, my heart thinks that my big golden retriever would be in heaven one day with a resurrection body, but my reading of scripture inclines me to think otherwise.

    I would say that creation is something about which Christians, of good will do certainly disagree. For me, considering the multiple ways in which Genesis can be interpreted, and looking around me its easier to believe that the universe is indeed very old. When I know that there are stars farther away in light years than Ken Ham says the universe is old it’s easier to understand scripture around that fact than to believe phony math. (By the way Ham does not help his case by finding dinosaurs and unicorns in Job, but that’s another story!) It’s not about believing the Bible, but is all about interpreting it. So, Dawg you and Herman have every right as Christians to believe what you will about creation. I guess I’ll find myself with Charles Hodge, the dean of the “Old Princeton” theologians of the mid 1800s when he wrote:

    “As the Bible is of God, it is certain there can be no conflict between the teachings of the scriptures and the facts of science… The church has been forced more than once to alter her teachings to accomodate the discoveries of science. But this has been done without any violence to the scriptures or in any degree impairing their authority. Such change, however, caqnnot be effected without a struggle. It is impossible that our interpretation of the Bible should not be determined by our views of the subjects it treats. So long as men believed the earth to be the center of the system, the sun its satellite, and the stars its ornamentation, they interpreted the Bible in accordance with that hypothesis.” Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. I, 573.

    Best Wishes a curmudgeonly pastor 🙂

  108. Maz Herman said

    John: You say you follow an ‘oral tradition’. But oral traditions like ‘chinese whispers’ can get altered along the way. The Bible has stood the test of time. The Dead Sea Scrolls proved that.
    Yes, I believe, as the Bible teaches, that there is only God or the devil. There is no third way. Jesus said, ”Enter in at the narrow gate, for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many there be who go in that way. Because narrow is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leads to life, and few there be that finds it.”
    And the idols that were worshipped in the O.T. were worshipped ”under every green tree,” and on ”every high hill”. God was against these.
    You said, there was no room in my theology for anything else….it’s not MY theology, it’s what the Bible clearly teaches. Some verses are so plain you would have to do gymnastics to make them say anything other than what they mean.
    And John, I ask a question I already know because I want to know if YOU know the answer.
    That actually is what Jesus often did. Rather than answer the religious leaders who were always looking for a way to trip Him up with the law, Jesus would ask THEM a question.

    ADB. Are you really a Pastor? You should know about what animals were before the fall.
    They did not eat flesh, they ate vegetation. The first time any animal died was when God had to kill one to clothe Adam and Eve after they sinned. God had to shed blood then to clothe them. And Jesus was the Lamb of God that had to shed HIS blood to ‘clothe’ us and take away our sin.
    Gen: 3 v 21. Animals had souls, what else did they have beside a physical body? Certainly not a spirit, Gods Spirit gave life to man by breathing into man and he ”became a LIVING soul”. Alive to God. The animals were not alive to God.
    In John 5 v 39-40, 43: Jesus said, ”Search the scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me. And you will not come to me, that you might have eternal life. I am come in my Fathers name and you receive me not, if another came in his own name, him you will receive.” Read John 5 v 39-47.
    It is all about believing what God has said and letting the Holy Spirit guide you into all Truth, not of any private, manly interpretation to fit a certain theory or idea.

  109. Maz Herman said

    P.S. Correction….I believe there is God AND the devil not ”or” as I typed in the third line.

  110. Jeff42 said


    It is an interesting question whether or not animals have souls. We know that they are not created in the image of God, but does that mean they do not have souls? Being created in the image of God means much more than just having a soul. I’m not sure I can definitely answer this one, but the Bible does use the word for soul (nephesh) in reference to animals (see Ge. 1:20; 9:10). It also uses the word for spirit (ruach)in reference to animals (see Eccl. 3:21). It also seems to me from Rom. 5:12 and 8:20, 21 that death is the result of sin and that sin brought the entire creation into bondage. This would certainly include the animals. And certain passages in Isaiah (like 65:25) seem to indicate that once the curse is lifted the animals wil no longer kill. Death in general seems to be a result of sin. Now, I admit that the age of the earth is a difficult question – one that I have not fully worked out yet, but at this point I do not believe that there was death in the creation before man fell into sin.

  111. Jeff42 said

    Why have we gone back to posts being moderated before they are posted? Having more problems?

  112. Hey Jeff42 – Yes, we had a couple of issues that we’re working to resolve. Should be able to open everything back up shortly.


  113. Maz Herman said

    Jeff42: We agree that the Bible does support the fact that animals will revert back to a non-meat eating diet and be completely tame as in Isaiahs prophecy, Ch. 11 v 6-9. So it shows that this must have been the state of animals before the fall. Animals must have had some kind of life other than physical, and as they are deffinitely not spiritual in nature, it must be a soul…..or animal life. Our human soul carries our emotions, mind and will. To some extent animals have a mind and a will, and although they don’t cry or laugh, they can be sad or ‘happy’. You only need to watch a pet to see this.

  114. ADB said

    Good to hear from you again. Thanks for mentioning those nephesh and ruah references regarding animals. I still tend to doubt that they have souls as most normally interpret the term because humanity is given large warrant over animals throughout scripture. You correctly point out from Romans that in some way all creation is tainted by the fall, though exactly how this is worked out practically is not very clear. I don’t see where animal death before the fall is explicitly taught, though one may infer that as you do. In general creation is something I tend not to be dogmatic about though I do think that the universe is very old. I haven’t studied it enough to clearly decide how to label myself on this; day-age, theistic evolution, etc.


    Believe it or not, by the grace of God I am a pastor with seminary sheepskin and all! Personally, I think you infer too much into the creation accounts. The Bible does not explicitly say that all the animals were herbivores. That there are animals that are perfectly designed to hunt for other particular species is clear, and given the choice between believing that they evolved that way or that God created them that way I choose to believe that God made them that way. One way in which one could look at the Eden description that allow for the image you present is to idealize it or spiritualize it so that the description is intended to paint a word picture in which creation is in perfect harmony with Creator. In this way the Eden description might be similar to Isaiah 11:6 where the image of leopards, wolves, and lions lying with prey animals is used to describe the harmony present in the eschaton without actually being literal. Without presuming to speak for you, I doubt that you would tend to interpret the creation accounts that way, and I’m unsure I would either. Regarding your quotation from John 5, I don’t see the relevance of that passage to this particular discussion.

    Best Wishes

  115. Educated Dawg said

    Please be carefully in regard to wanting to spiritualize certain texts.

    In regard to Genesis 1 & 2, it seems pretty clear that indeed all animals and humans were vegetarians. That is God’s words – Genesis 1:29-30 includes not only the first man & woman, but the animals.

    Your issue of whether the animals were designed with teeth that can tear flesh or whether they evolved these is not correct. See, young earth creationists do believe in and accept natural selection and adaptation> Just not in the evolutionary molecules to man sense.

    Your delema is answered in Genesis 3 and 6, ie. the fall of man and the inclusion of animal protein in our diet after the world wide flood.

    I would encourage you to take the Scripture literally unless context dictates it to be of another nature. Genesis 1-11 in context doesn’t lead us to interpret it allegorically, but literally.

    Mr. Hodge was an old earth proponent, so was Scofield. That doesn’t mean they were correct. Most Dispensationalists do not agree with Scofield concerning his gap theory. Most reformed adherents do not agree with Hodges interpretation of Genesis 1-3 either. You can read MacArthurs, Sprouls, Kennedy’s, etc. writings concerning the Genesis account of creation to get a Biblical understanding. They were/are scholars themselves, on par with Hodge.

  116. Maz Herman said

    ADB: I think Educated Dawg has answered some of what you said so I won’t repeat it.
    Here’s a bit of my history: When I first became a Christian I was still ‘infected’ with evolutionary thinking from my school days, and I thought if all the scientists were right then maybe God used evolution to ‘create’ the world and everything in it. I even had someone from the Church of England tell me that Genesis was a myth! Then I was told by a well-meaning Pastor that there was a gap in between v1-2 of Genesis 1. The thing was it just didn’t sit very well with me, not with what I read in the Bible myself.
    I’m not one to believe just anything people say whoever they are, I want to know for myself. And eventually I found out from Answers in Genesis and other Creation Ministries….O.K, you would say they were biased toward their own interpretation, but you are also biased towards your interpretation mixed with so called science.
    But what they said made far more sense, and the Hebrew itself dictates that the Creation ‘week’ WAS six literal days (YOM with ‘evening and morning’ and numbers included also).
    And how far do you spiritualise Genesis before it is actual history?

    John 5 talks about whether you receive Jesus testimony or someone elses (like the scientists for example).

  117. F. L. A. said

    “See, young earth creationists do believe in and accept natural selection and adaptation> Just not in the evolutionary molecules to man sense.”

  118. ADB said

    I’m not surprised by the response. First, I never said that Genesis was allegory. In allegory you have a long passage in which everything is actually representative of something else. I said that simply upon what we see, which is also a revelation from God, that some animals were indeed designed to eat other animals. By the way you may want to be careful about the use of yom. Genesis has light and dark as you point out, before there are sun and moon. This of course does not refer to a scenario like the end of Revelation where the “lamb is the light” because in that case the light never goes out. Yom is inded used in several different ways in scripture. Genesis 2 is a great example because it refers to the “day” when God created, and according to your usage that contradict Genesis 1. Using “yom” to refer to long spans of time is no different than using “Babe Ruth’s day” to his playing career. No Mrs. Herman, I have never spent much time reading evolution, and never really was that good in science class either. My point is that not everyone who believes in an old earth is an evolutionist. To my mind that is a pernicious myth that AiG and ICR have sold in order to alarm folks.

    I’m bowing out of this, but I would encourage you to broaden your understanding of the Old Testament beyond what Mr. Ham says, and to consider that one can be a very serious Christian without believing that the earth is 6,000 years old.

    Best Wishes

  119. Maz Herman said

    I didn’t know we were discussing ”Darwin was he right?” We seem to be concentrating on evolution.
    F.L.A: The so called evolutionist scientists will see whatever they want to see if they look hard enough. Having sharp teeth doesn’t naturally show what an animal ate.. as I said before, some animals with sharp teeth were vegetarians. And in any case, through simple deduction, we could say that since the fall and hence aftrwards vegetarians became meat eaters (tho not all), they grew larger, sharper teeth through natural selection, and adaptation which we don’t deny happens.

  120. Willie said

    The so called evolutionist scientists will see whatever they want to see if they look hard enough.

    Fortunately the creationists are completely unbiased.

  121. Maz Herman said

    Willie: We are biased…….towards truth.
    Sorry, have to go for the evening.
    Be back tomorrow.

  122. John said

    That’s too bad.What you are describing Mrs.Herman, is, macro evolution.
    Reread post #96. The top half.
    In regards to your posts #100 and #105, as you suggested reading from the book of Isaiah to us, we have rediscovered verses stating that God himself created evil.
    Isaiah 45:7 “I form the light and create the darkness.I make peace and create evil.”-King James Version
    Have you considered the implications of such a verse, Mrs.Herman?
    It certainly makes things…..”interesting”, no?
    I look forward to hearing from you upon your return.
    Educated Dawg, please feel free to jump in with your own answer/s to post#117.

  123. Fred said

    Maz, that AiG stuff is phony baloney. Perhaps, some of us would respect your “truth” more if you would appeal to the pseudo-science.

    For myself, I don’t pretend to know how the universe came into being, or how life started here on earth. I think Science can shed some light on these mysteries better than the Bible or religion ever can. I think there must be a reality, a truth of how all this stuff came to be, but can we know it? The universe exists therefore…God? It’s a mystery. But it doesn’t fill me with dread. It fills me with wonder. Ok, no more sappy stuff.

    Furthermore, I think the Bible is totally the invention of men trying to describe the mysteries of life and including some historic and some fabricated events of human history. It is the religion of my ancestors, so it is my religion, too, but I think stopped believing most of the unbelievable parts before I was twelve. I don’t remember ever believing in Santa Claus, either.

    I believe the story of Jesus in the first four books of the New Testament is mostly myth; that the historic Jesus would have been a human being and no more capable of producing supernatural phenomena than any other human being.

    That makes me an agnostic (no-letter)Christian.

  124. Fred said

    Sorry, in that first line I should have said “appeal less”.

  125. Maz Herman said

    John: The Hebrew word for the word ‘evil’ used in the KJV is ‘ra’. God is not the author of evil as in sinful acts. One of the meanings of the word ‘ra’ carries the idea of adversity or calamity, and that’s the meaning in this verse, as opposed to peace which comes before in that verse. God created the consequences of man’s sinful actions. There has to be consequences to all sin.

  126. Maz Herman said

    Fred: ”Phoney baloney”? Yet you say later that you think ”there must be a reality, a truth of how all this stuff came to be, but can we know it?” ”It’s a mystery.”
    If it’s still a mystery to you how come you are debating against what we believe to be real and true if you don’t know whether we can know it?
    It is no mystery to me Fred nor to Educated Dawg and others who believe that the Bible tells us what the real and true origins of all this ”stuff” was……God.
    You talk about the gospels being myth and yet you say Jesus was a real human being.
    There is a tomb in Israel that was once occupied for three days and then found empty. That testefies beyond a shadow of a doubt Who Jesus was and is.
    You need to read a book called, ”The Resurrection Factor” by Josh McDowell. He began his search as an atheistic student, mocking christianity, but wanting answers to lifes questions: Who are we? Why re we here? and Where are we going?
    He found the answer and he found compelling evidence which proved the resurrection of Jesus Christ beyond reasonable doubt.

  127. Fred said

    McDowell’s books appeal to those who think AiG is a Science website.

    There is a much more plausible explanation for an empty tomb, Maz. Certainly this has occurred to you?

    Jesus may have been a real person. If so he was a human being just like you or me.

    Why am I repeating myself if you didn’t understand it the first time?

  128. Maz Herman said

    Fred: The empty tomb is one of the biggest evidences of a resurrected Savior.
    Have you read McDowells book? All the evidence would stand up in court today…and there were over 500 EYEwitnesses of Jesus alive after He rose from the dead. But you don’t believe the Bible so you won’t believe their witness either.
    I still can’t figure out how you can say you are a ‘christian’ and not believe in Jesus as Savior, Lord and God the Son. Jesus said something very strange to the religious leader, Nicodemus, ”You must be born again.” He was a religous LEADER!
    To be a christian you have to accept Christ into your life and be born again, filled with the Spirit, and believe in and walk in Gods Word…apart from a changed life.
    So what is that more plausible explanation for the empty tomb Fred??

  129. Fred said

    Maz, I know enough about McDowell’s books from reading his critics to know that I don’t need to read them.

    The empty tomb? The body was moved.

    Tell me Maz, if you put a bottle of LeBleu pure H2O drinking water in your refrigerator in the morning, and when you returned in the afternoon you find that it is missing, and your husband says he and 500 other people saw a ghost drinking your water and that is why it is missing, would not a more plausible explanation come to mind?

  130. Willie said

    Who says there WAS an empty tomb in the first place? It’s ridiculous.

  131. ADB said

    Maz (125), good answer. Similar thing happens in those occasions when the some versions say God “repented” of this or that, when the Hebrew word can mean “relent” just as well as “repent.”

  132. F. L. A. said


  133. ADB said

    FLA, context is everything in interpreting, as with when “yom” is a 24 hour day, an era, or a long span of time. With all due respect, would you trust me as a Christian to accurately interpret a text you consider sacred?

  134. Maz Herman said

    Fred: ”The body was moved”.
    BY WHOM?
    Willie: Go to Israel and have a look at it.

    F.L.A: The KJV doesn’t always have the bes translation, though I believe it is the best among all other transations, it’s still not a prefect translation. But you should know that!
    I don’t like the NIV, it has tampered too much with the original and even had whole verses taken out.

    ADB: ” ‘Yom’ is 24 hour day, an era, or a long span of time.” NOT when it is used with ‘evening and morning’ and ordinate numbers. 1t, 2nd, 3rd, etc.

  135. Maz Herman said

    Ya’all: Sorry for the bad spelling mistakes, didn’t check my typing!

  136. Educated Dawg said


    in regard to macro-evolution and the issue of animals being completely vegetarian.

    We, as young-earth Bible believing Christians take into account the fall of man, the curse on all creation, and the devastating effects of this great travesty.

    Again, natural selection and adaptation would come into play, yet not in a macro-evolutionary concept. We believe the Bible gives us a clear picture of what took place after the fall and the results we see today – death, suffering, disease, mutations, etc. – there is a Biblical answer to it all and it begins in Genesis 1 with “In the beginning God created” and continues on with “and he did eat” in Genesis 3.


    Maz has already addressed the Hebrew “yom” for “day”. To accept an old earth is to accept macro-evolution. Why is there physical death before the fall of man? Evolutionists have their answer. You reject a young earth interpretation. Thus, you must accept a macro-evolutionary interpretation.

  137. Fred said

    By whom? That’s irrelevant. You asked for a more plausible reason for an empty tomb and I gave you one.

    I sense a lack of humility about you, Maz. It’s off-putting. Try to be a little gracious when you get a good answer to one of your questions.

  138. Maz Herman said

    Goodness me Fred, ofcourse it’s relevant. There’s an empty tomb and no body. ”The body was moved” would hardly go down as evidence for robbery. You need to say who took it and where it is.
    If the disciples took it, they sure wouldn’t have the faith in Jesus Resurrection would they!?
    If the religious leaders had it taken away that would only leave an empty tomb which they did not want!
    And, if they took it, then they could have brought it out when the disciples were going on about the resurrection and say ”here he is….dead!”
    The soldiers were under sentence of death if they let anyone near the tomb, BUT strangely enough they weren’t killed. Why was that? Because the High priest and religious leaders did not want anyone to know that Jesus had walked out of a SEALED tomb while they were ‘supposedly’ asleep.
    Now, Fred, have you anything to add?

  139. Maz Herman said

    Fred: So ‘a good answer’ is not being humble? And how does one show graceousness?
    I can’t say I’v seen a lot of that from some other bloggers on this site.

  140. Willie said

    Willie: Go to Israel and have a look at it.

    Ha! That’s funny. Maybe I’ll buy a couple nails from the true cross while I’m there.

  141. ADB said

    Once again, the Hebrew Lexicon written by Ken Ham. I forgot, where does he teach Old Testament, or Biblical Interpretation? Oh that’s right he doesn’t, silly me! Once again resorting to evolution to disprove creation by the folks who claim to really hate evolution, combatting someone they think is an evolutionist but really isn’t. This is getting convoluted!

  142. Maz Herman said

    ADB: Was that meant for me or Educated Dawg? Ken Ham knows enough to know the meaning of the day YOM! And why shouldn’t he?

    And Willie: That isn’t funny.
    I don’t go along with all the Roman Catholic artifacts supposedly part of the cross or anything else. But Gordons tomb as it’s called is a very good candidate for the tomb Jesus was laid in.

  143. Fred said

    Maz, you are not being reasonable. One wonders why you expect others to interact with you when you don’t seem to listen to what others say?

  144. Maz Herman said

    Fred: What is it that I am supposed to have been unreasonable about?

  145. Fred said

    Maz, you asked me:

    “Fred: The empty tomb is one of the biggest evidences of a resurrected Savior. So what is that more plausible explanation for the empty tomb Fred??”

    I said that the body was moved. That is more plausible than the Bible stories. By whom or why is irrelevant to the question. You must give me that.

    If the Jesus stories in the Bible were not so implausible then no one would reasonably doubt them. Are you trying to make a point that we cannot reasonably doubt the Bible?

    If so you are being unreasonable.

  146. Willie said

    You unbelievers. You all CLAIM there was no wizard of OZ, but how do you explain the yellow brick road? You just don’t want to believe in the wizard.

  147. ANONYMOUS said

    You are free to doubt the Biblical account of the resurrection of Jesus Christ – the natural man will.

    Yet, do not claim that there is no evidence for it. The evidence is more than enough. You deny the evidence because that is what you want to do. Like the ostrich with its head in the sand.

  148. Fred said

    If the evidence is more than enough, doubt would be unreasonable. The ostrich analogy is false.

  149. Maz Herman said

    Fred: The thing is that your reason for the empty tomb is not more plausible. I have already explained why. Now who isn’t listening?
    The evidence is there but you just don’t want to see it.

    ”If the Jesus stories in the Bible were not so implausible then no one would reasonably doubt them.”

    I could also say, Fred, that the Jesus stories ARE plausible and that’s why millions across this world believe them with good reason. They are even willing to suffer torture and death for their faith in Christ.

  150. Brad said

    Furthermore, I think the Bible is totally the invention of men trying to describe the mysteries of life and including some historic and some fabricated events of human history. It is the religion of my ancestors, so it is my religion, too, but I think stopped believing most of the unbelievable parts before I was twelve. I don’t remember ever believing in Santa Claus, either.

    I believe the story of Jesus in the first four books of the New Testament is mostly myth; that the historic Jesus would have been a human being and no more capable of producing supernatural phenomena than any other human being.

    That makes me an agnostic (no-letter)Christian.

    Fred, I’m not sure exactly what these beliefs classify you as, but there’s one thing they DON’T classify you as – a Christian. Of that, I am sure, whether you disagree or not. You can’t deny Jesus’ divinity, the truthfulness of the Bible, yet still call yourself a Christian.

    I do feel sorry for you, Fred. I’m sure that sounds conceited to you, but when reading your replies from this side of the fence, it really is sad. You either don’t WANT to believe, and therefore will deny whatever you hear regardless of the evidence, or you’re waiting for the perfect evidence (in your mind) to arrive which will help you to believe. In either case, it’s fruitless. All the evidence is there, and has been explained over the course of the last few posts. The empty tomb, the fact that the soldiers weren’t killed, the fact that the apostles went to their death (except John, who died in exile) still believing what they had said all along, the miracles that were done, the eyewitness accounts – it’s all there.

    But what you have, Fred, is a closed mind to the fact that it MIGHT just all be true. I don’t know you or your background, so I can’t speak to anything that may have led you to this very point. Christians aren’t perfect, but they do have salvation. They’ll still mess up, they’ll still sin. But they’re still forgiven. You can be too, but you MUST believe that Jesus is who He says He is (John 14:6), or else there is no other way to Heaven!

  151. Fred said

    Maz: “The thing is that your reason for the empty tomb is not more plausible.”

    Yes, it is.

  152. ANONYMOUS said

    “doubt would be unreasonable”

    – EXACTLY! yet still you doubt.

  153. Fred said

    Brad: “You can’t deny Jesus’ divinity, the truthfulness of the Bible, yet still call yourself a Christian.”


    Brad, your certainty about things must be very reassuring to you. It does make you appear arrogant to those whom you address.

  154. ADB said


    In my previous post I was addressing you and the dawg together. You emphasize that yom must mean 24 hours in Genesis 1. Of course there are many times that it does in fact refer to solar day. However, it impossible to have a solar day if there is no sun. In another discussion with someone with a similar view as yours the person made the claim that it always referred to a 24 hour day, I don’t know if that is your position or not. If it always refers to a 24 hour day, then Genesis 1 and 2 are contradictory. Therefore, taking your position that the first chapters must be taken as literal history and science, you are taking the position that the writer of Genesis was mistaken in the order in which he presented things, and also admitting that the creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2 contradict each other. I take it that you believe that scripture is inerrent, so therefore your position is untenable. Please let me remind you that I have never referred to science at all or any source other than God’s revelation- special revelation meaning scripture, and general revelation meaning what we see around us.

    Best Wishes

  155. Brad said

    Brad, your certainty about things must be very reassuring to you. It does make you appear arrogant to those whom you address.


    I had already said you’d take it that way, but there’s no other way to say it. You still didn’t address the underlying issues, though I don’t think you’re inclined to, due to your beliefs (or lack thereof).

  156. Educated Dawg said


    We’re not saying that every instance of “yom” is always referring to a literal 24hr day. the disclaimer is “evening + morning + number = 24hrs”. The context dictates the correct meaning. Thus there is no contradiction between chapters 1 & 2. Also, you don’t need the sun in order for it to be a 24hr period, light was already there. The eskimos in Alaska have no problem determining 24hrs when their cycle of constant light or constant darkness comes. Moses in Exodus records Jehovah El Ohim’s words in reference to the 10 commandments and makes it crystal clear that God created in a literal 6 days, each 24hrs.

    You do not have to reference Science. Your old earth interpretation infers a macro-evolutionary foundation of death(physical) before sin. The Scriptures just do not teach this. You say the Scriptures aren’t clear about this, yet we’ve given you Scripture that is clear about this.

    You are choosing to err on the side of man-made reason instead of upholding the Scriptures as infallible and inerrant.

    Again, you only listed Hodge as a scholar who supported an old earth. I’ve listed at least 3 scholars who refute his understanding. Hodge doesn’t use only the Scriptures to justify his interpretation, he uses macroevolutionary “science” to interpret the Genesis account. Just like Scofield did.

    To me, it is Ken Ham, Henry Morris, RC Sproul, John MacArthur, D. James Kennedy, etc. that are upholding the correct Biblical interpretation of the Genesis account of creation.

  157. F. L. A. said


  158. Maz Herman said

    Concerning the Hebrew word YOM. Strange that this word is used for an ordinary day in other parts of the scriptures and without the added time indicators, and there is no problem, they are taken as ordinary 24 hour days there. But in Genesis l evolutionists and old earth-ists have a problem with the translation.
    Can an Omnipotent God not make everything there is in six days? Can He not create for the first three days without the sun? Our God is an awesome God, all-powerful…if He wanted to He could have made everything in an instant.

    There are numerous Physicists, Biologists, Chemists, Geologists and other ologists that DO believe in a young earth and six day creation. But we could type out names all day and that still wouldn’t satisfy you.
    I really wonder what would.

  159. Fred said

    Maz: “There are numerous Physicists, Biologists, Chemists, Geologists and other ologists that DO believe in a young earth and six day creation.”

    This is pure speculation. Maz probably got this from one of her pseudo-science websites.

  160. ADB said


    If I wanted to I could start a list of respected Old Testament commentaries and surveys that support your position, and it would actually be pretty short. The reason I mentioned Hodge was because at the time he wrote Darwin’s work was not yet widely known, particularly in America, meaning that he arrived at his conclusion without having read and studied Darwin. You claim to have provided explicit scriptural evidence that no animals died before the fall, yet you haven’t. Take some time and survey the scholarly literature on the subject and you will find some interesting reading reflecting a wide variety of opinions, many far too liberal for me. By the way you dodge my question above. If Genesis has night and day before creation of the sun then Genesis cannot be literal science and history as you claim. And if the day and night aren’t the result of the sun then there is no basis for claiming that they must represent a 24 hour day. All I have done is use sound exegesis on this, without using any scientific references. The reference to the decalogue is irrelevant because there is nothing there that demands a 24 hour day. As a theological conservative, I also believe in the classic definition that “the scriptures are inerrant in their original manuscripts in all that they affirm.” The trouble with your position, as I pointed out is that it makes the scriptures contradictory or in error. The key question is, do the scriptures really affirm your position? As I’ve shown, exegesis of the texts does not bear that out.

    I mean no disrepect at all because I can tell you, as well as Maz are sincere believers. I also admire the tenacity with which you’ve debated myself as a fellow believer, but also the non-believers here. However, the position you’ve taken has resulted in you getting twisted into using evolution to defend yourself against creation as I mentioned above, #114 above.

    Best Wishes,
    a curmudgeonly pastor 🙂

  161. ADB said

    Didn’t get your last entry. As a believer, of course God could have created everything in six days if he had desired, he could have done so in 100,000,000,000,000 centuries or in a millisecond. My contention is that the writer of Genesis was not affirming that it took place in 6 24 hour days. Please get my personal note in my response to dawg above.

    Best Wishes in Christ

  162. ADB said


    I’ve been waiting for someone to really engage Fred’s positions. This will be interesting and fun.

    Best Wishes

  163. Maz Herman said

    ADB: If all six days weren’t 24 hours long then why does God mention the ”evening and the morning” EVERY DAY? Maybe millions of years from day 1-3 and then from day 4 24 hours??? Eh?
    Did you read what I wrote in 158 about this?
    ALL SIX DAYS had to be of the SAME length…..and WITH the sun it had to be 24 hours (along with ”evening and morning”) so EVERY day had to be 24 hours long. So how do you explain Exodus 20 v 11, ”For in SIX DAYS the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; wherefore, the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it”. Is our week six literal days long? Ofcourse, because the creation week was too.

  164. Maz Herman said

    PS: Sorry I should have said ”Is our week SEVEN literal days long?”

  165. Maz Herman said

    Fred: I am reading a book at the moment written by 24 scholars, that explores why science, archaeology and philosophy havn’t disproved the Bible. And there are numerous scientific contributors to the book which is called ”THE BIG ARGUMENT”.

  166. Fred said

    ADB, thanks, bud. Fun for whom?

  167. Fred said

    Maz, I am sure that book will further reinforce your misconceptions regarding Science.

    FWIW, just because something hasn’t been “disproved” doesn’t mean it is real.

    For example….oh never mind, why try?

  168. Maz Herman said

    Fred: Are we running out of steam now?
    The book is actually very interesting and informative, but no it does not reinforce any misconceptions, I havn’t any to reinforce.

  169. Educated Dawg said

    there is a great distinction between macro and micro evolution.
    Hodge was indeed influenced by the evolutionists of his day.

    You are saying that it is impossible to have a 24hr day without the sun because it has to be there in order for a solar day to be counted.

    Lets use your skepticism on say the account of Jonah in the belly of the fish for 3 days and 3 nights. Was this a literal 3 days and 3 nights or was it just a span of time? How do you come to your conclusion?

    The resurrection, same questions…….

    Another question: What was Calvin, Wesley, and Luthers position on Genesis 1 & 2? Was it in agreement with Hodge, Warfield and Ross or was it in agreement with Ham, Morris, MacArthur, Sproul?

  170. John said

    What is the title of your book, Mrs. Herman?

  171. Maz Herman said

    John: I gave it at the end of post 165.

  172. Fred said

    Plenty of steam left.

    There is ignorance everywhere we look in the world. We can’t stop each time we are confronted by it and start a fight. I’m not much on fist fighting and besides, it’s rude to confront people like that.

    But here in the anonymous blog world we can be rude. Whenever Stu or one of his minions rudely proclaims that Truth is found in ignorance I hope I can come here and take exception to it. There isn’t much good going to come from it, but it helps to know that people get confronted occasionally.

  173. Willie said

    A better book.

  174. Tripp said

    Willie – Why are you here? All you’re doing is badgering people for no apparent reason. Even our Wiccan friends engage in friendly debate. You’re comments contribute nothing. I would like to start a movement to ban your presence from this site. In fact, I’m surprised that Truth Talk Live would even allow some of your blasphemous rantings and links that you post. Can’t you come up with anything on your own?

  175. ADB said


    Do we really have to go back over the yom thing. If there is no sun then how can you have literal 24 hour days. I would be happy to actually do an exegetical look at Genesis 1 on this format, but with Easter approaching I simply don’t have time and frankly it would be pointless. Again I know macro and micro evolution, do you really want to be in the same position as the evolutionists when you ask for transitional fossils for cats and dogs in transition from being herbivores to carnivores? Days for Jonah, days at resurrection are totally irrelevant to discussion of Genesis, again by context.

    Regarding Hodge, look I wrote a 20 page paper about his view of Biblical interpretation and inspiration in seminary, you clearly are misinformed on that score. You referred to Luther and Calvin. They are among the great Christian thinkers to be sure. That being said check out what Luther said about the passage where God made the sun stand still. You have referred to Kennedy, Sproul, and MacArthur as today’s scholars. Kennedy and MacArthur really write for popular audience, not the scholarly community. That’s not a knock on them, because their ministries have been very meaningful for a lot of people. Sproul does I think write at a higher level than the other two, but even with him he doesn’t even have earned Ph.D.

    I repeat what I said before. Clearly you are a passionate believer, and for that I am grateful. I wish that more Christians had your zeal. I wish you would walk away from AiG and ICR websites for a while, read some books on Biblical interpretation and read some Old Testament commentaries. I think you would find that the writer of Genesis was trying to say something even more important than how old the universe is. “Let the Reader Understand” by McCartney and Clayton is a great book at a seminary level its published by P&R. For all his popularity in some circles, when I actually hear Ken Ham and look at his website I am stunned that anyone that ignorant of history and Biblical interpretation is even listened to. I can assess him on those counts because, frankly with an M.A. in History and an M.Div., I have more educational background in those topics than he does. I don’t trust him in science either, but I’m not well read in science and will leave that critique to others. I’ll leave you and Mrs. Herman now. I’ve enjoyed our little debate.

    Best wishes

  176. Maz Herman said

    ADB: Just a last note to you. You may have letters after your name, but that doesn’t mean anything, so have a lot of well educated scientists that believe in Creation. Sometimes too much intellect and knowledge can be a bad thing…..it all depends on what you are reading doesn’t it.
    And we keep on about the ”YOM thing” because you just don’t get it.
    You cannot change the meaning of a Hebrew word to fit your millions of years.
    If God can cause the sun to ”stand still” in Joshua’s day, as I believe He did (and you don’t…I guess) and still keep the earth from flying out into space, then I am sure an all-powerful God can make 24 hour days without the sun. Didn’t He cause it not to shine for three hours when Jesus was on the cross? Our God is a God of miracles so why doubt His abilities?

    And I agree Tripp, I havn’t figured out why Willie is here, but maybe….maybe he just wants some kind of interaction with people…perhaps he is lonely. ( I don’t mean that nastily either Willie).

    And here are two more books written by scientists with letters behind their names:

    ”The God Factor: 50 Scientists and Academics Explain Why They Believe in God (Harper Collins, 2001), and
    ”In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists Choose to Believe in Creation”, (Strand, 2003).

  177. Brad said

    ADB, thanks, bud. Fun for whom?

    Fred, this is my point. You like to talk AROUND what you believe, but not ABOUT what you believe. Again, I don’t know you, so I can’t say why, but something causes you to believe the way you do.

    But, it’s your choice to discuss or not. You might gain a little creedence or respect in the eyes of some, if you’d at least state your positions and why you believe them. That may not matter to you, but would at least make things a little more concrete and friendlier. I tend to at least have respect for people who can articulate the “what” and “why” of their beliefs, even if I disagree completely, but not much for those who just complain and argue, without saying the “what” or “why”.

    Just a thought.

  178. Willie said

    I would like to start a movement to ban your presence from this site. In fact, I’m surprised that Truth Talk Live would even allow some of your blasphemous rantings

    Why stop at banning me? Why not go ahead and crucify me. Isn’t that the punishment religious people demand for blasphemers?

    Can’t you come up with anything on your own?

    Thanks for the insult.

    .maybe he just wants some kind of interaction with people…perhaps he is lonely. ( I don’t mean that nastily either Willie).

    Of course not. You meant it in the complimentary way.

    Whatever happened to “Bless those that persecute you”? Oh wait, I know, you don’t really believe that stuff anyway.

  179. Educated Dawg said


    It seems ironic that when one can’t defend his position, he begins to throw up his credentials and edumikation degrees. Seems all the “laity” are just ignorant sheep being tossed to and fro. We need the ph d. seminarians to tell us the Bible doesn’t mean what it says.

    Lets do an exegetical look at Genesis 1 and 2. I’d love to. Lets bring out the Hebrew verbs, tenses, and soforth. But, one thing, lets leave out the commentaries and the modern macro-evolutionary influence.

    I think it very funny that the normal everyday Christian will read Genesis 1 and 2 and will say “yep, young-earth – God created 6 days, yep. I believe it.” but depending on which seminary the professional clergy goes to will determine how he interprets Genesis 1 and 2. Very interesting indeed…….

  180. Tripp said

    Willie – stop patronizing….you are here for one reason and one reason only…to stir up trouble….you have not contributed to the conversation at all….you continue to portray yourself as the ultimate authority and that everyone else on here is wrong and ignorant. Go elsewhere and spread your hate, or better yet…go sell crazy somewhere else. We’re all stocked up here, according to you.

  181. Jeff42 said

    Hey ADB,

    It seems that in Exodus 20:9-11 the six days God’s people were to work (six literal days) were equated with the six days the Lord took to create the earth:

    Exodus 20:9-11:
    9 “Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. 11 “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

    What’s your take on these verses?

  182. Maz Herman said

    Willie: No one wants to ”crucify” you. In actual fact I want you to know the truth that will set you free from your sin, the sin Jesus took upon Himself when HE was crucified FOR YOU.
    He loved you enough to suffer the vilest and most painful of deaths…….it’s strange but true, Willie, that while you are on here having a go at us Christians, Jesus still continues to love you.
    And you really aren’t having a go at us atall, you’re having a go at Jesus because
    He said, ”If they persicuted me, they will persecute you”.

  183. Fred said

    Brad, see post #123.

  184. John said

    I can think of far worse ways for Jesus to have died Mrs. Herman
    Would you like some examples? No, of course not. Now this was interesting:”Sometimes too much intellect and knowledge can be a bad thing….”, as you said within post #176. Now why would ANYONE actually want to believe this? Being wiser may very well make one unhappy more often than not, as one sees just how silly most others in the world around them are, but the benefits are well worth the trouble, for it also makes one powerful.
    You mentioned on another sit that you studied/study physics.What kind of physics?

    Educated Dawg, look who’s talking. You still haven’t[can’t?] provided reasonable answers to back up your claims that both myself and my associate F. L. A. have called you on. Instead, you basically told us that you couldn’t bother with the challenge because “we were just too different from you”, basically, [And that’s a good reason to not try? I would think that our alien outlooks on theology and views on the natural sciences would make the prospect of debate all the more attractive.I thought that you’d chomp onto this opportunity like a Chelydra serpentina on a Lepomis macrochirus.] and that “you know what you know because the Bible told you so”, etc., but without getting to deep into that.I am beginning to think that you know next to nothing about about the topic, save from what you’ve learned from religious-based websites and literature.
    Can you do better? Just curious.
    Good luck, ADB.

  185. Maz Herman said

    John: The Bible tells me that ”the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God”
    Now, that doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t go to college and better themselves, where would we be without our scientists, doctors, lawyers, mathematicians etc. But, if we place that wisdom above the knowledge of God, we’re in trouble.
    And I do not believe that ‘ignorance is bliss” either.

    I have read a lot and know a lot about a lot of things, but I havn’t let it blind me to seeing God for Who He is. In fact a lot of my Astronomy and Physics studies have shown me otherwise.
    To be honest I know a lot about Astronomy and our Universe but I am still a beginner when it comes to Physics. I love to read Steven Hawkins books and his theories. I think he is a brilliant man, but he doesn’t yet know God.
    I am particularly interested in Quantum Physics aswell as the larger picture. It just fascinates me, because it shows me just how BIG my God is.

  186. Brad said

    Fred, it was post #123 that I was referencing, so your reply to my comments, saying to see that post, are puzzling.

    That doesn’t say WHAT your specific beliefs are (although it does give a few), but more importantly doesn’t say WHY you hold those beliefs. That’s what I’m referencing. You seem very hesitant to address the issues, which I often encounter with people.

    I’ll ask the questions straightforward, and see if you are willing to provide straightforward answers:

    1) Do you believe Jesus existed? Why or why not?
    2) Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God? Why or why not?
    3) Do you believe there is only one God? Why or why not?
    4) Do you believe in a literal Heaven? Why or why not?
    5) Do you believe in a literal hell? Why or why not?
    6) Do you believe Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven? Why or why not?
    7) Do you believe Jesus died for your sins on the cross? Why or why not?
    8) Do you believe Jesus resurrected on the 3rd day, and is alive today? Why or why not?
    9) Do you believe you need a Savior in your life? Why or why not?
    10) Do you believe the Bible to be the inspired & inerrant Word of God? Why or why not?
    11) Do you believe that salvation comes only through faith? Why or why not?
    12) Do you believe that without salvation through faith, you go to hell? Why or why not?
    13) Do you PERSONALLY have Jesus in your heart as your Lord and Savior? Why or why not?

    Others are free to answer the questions, but I don’t plan on engaging debate as to the “correctness” of the questions, what is meant by them, whether they’re “trick” questions, etc… I’m curious as to the answers that Fred (or Willie, or John, or whomever) might give, and more importantly their reasons why. We’ll see if they can give straight answers, or if they’ll resort to talking around the questions.

  187. Fred said

    Brad the Inquisitor! Alright, I am going to answer your questions, Brad. But you are one arrogant individual!

    1) Do you believe Jesus existed? Why or why not?

    Jesus probably existed. Most legends have roots in historical facts. Ever read “The Jesus Myth” by G.A.Wells? Anyways I am not convinced that Jesus couldn’t have existed.

    2) Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God? Why or why not?

    I think that the historic Jesus was a human being just like you or me. There are billions of examples of human beings and one superhuman? It’s just too hard to believe without proper documentation.

    3) Do you believe there is only one God? Why or why not?

    I don’t know. The universe exists. God (or gods)is man’s attempt to explain the unexplainable. That is hardly an original thought. I can’t credit any one source for my thinking that way. Sorry. I do not think that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit add up to one God, though.

    4) Do you believe in a literal Heaven? Why or why not?

    No, I do not. Where is the “literal Heaven”? Is it invisible? Is it in a distant solar system? If Heaven is real, I promise you I will believe in it.

    5) Do you believe in a literal hell? Why or why not?

    See #4

    6) Do you believe Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven? Why or why not?

    See #4

    7) Do you believe Jesus died for your sins on the cross? Why or why not?

    That is a comforting thought that is hard for me to dismiss. Why? Perhaps sentimentality is the main reason. I remember fondly attending church with my family in my youth. I don’t remember arrogant know-it-alls like you being part of that experience.

    8) Do you believe Jesus resurrected on the 3rd day, and is alive today? Why or why not?

    No, I do not. Anyone who was dead for three days is dead. See modern Medical Science for that opinion.

    9) Do you believe you need a Savior in your life? Why or why not?

    I need all the help I can get! Capital “S” saviors, no thanks! If #7 pans out I am all set. Somehow I get the feeling that you want some stars in your crown, Brad. Hmmm? Maybe just a few little twinkly stars?

    10) Do you believe the Bible to be the inspired & inerrant Word of God? Why or why not?

    No, I think the Bible is totally the invention of men trying to describe the mysteries of life and including some historic and some fabricated events of human history. It is the religion of my ancestors, so it is my religion, too, but I think stopped believing most of the unbelievable parts before I was twelve.

    11) Do you believe that salvation comes only through faith? Why or why not?

    Yes, I am not prepared to discount the power of positive thinking. Sorry, but that is what faith and prayer amount to. Some things in the human experience are not easy to understand. Religious faith is an important part of humanity through the ages. Does this answer your question? If not see #10.

    12) Do you believe that without salvation through faith, you go to hell? Why or why not?

    See #4,#11 and #10 in that order please.

    13) Do you PERSONALLY have Jesus in your heart as your Lord and Savior? Why or why not?

    Yes, I have had the emotional experience of being saved before.

    These are my faithful answers before Brad the Inquisitor this day
    being the fourteenth day of March, 2008.

  188. Maz Herman said

    The Inquisitor’s little helper says: If you do not believe Jesus was anything more than a man then how can He save you from sin?
    If he was just a man Fred, how can he be in your heart?
    Salvation (though emotion may be involved) is by faith, it’s a spiritual experience not an emotional one.
    Fred: By your own admission you are not saved…..if you were there’s no Heaven to go to because you said you don’t believe in it! So where are you going?

  189. Brad said


    I’m arrogant for asking you straightforward questions, and asking for straightforward answers? Not sure about that one, but you’re entitled to your opinion, just as I am to mine.

    The answers to your questions reveal one who does not have a true, saving relationship with Jesus Christ. That’s not a judgment, that’s observation based on facts provided by you coupled with what the Bible says.

    Granted, that may not mean much to you (especially since you lend no creedence to the Bible as the Word of God), but IF the Bible is true, which I believe it to be, as do countless other Christians, then that is the case.

    You are a classic example of a “doubting Thomas”, one who needs the tangible evidence and is not willing to believe in faith. Evidence is all around – but it appears as if what you try to do is always find something to counter any evidence you find. In other words, I’m not sure you even WANT to believe. Do you?

    Consider me arrogant if you will, Fred – it’s your right. But I’ve asked the questions, and you’ve given the answers (mostly), and you’ve been told what the Bible says. Maz asked some good questions in #188. Question now is – what will you do with what you know? That’s entirely up to you.

  190. Fred said

    Brad: “Consider me arrogant if you will, Fred – it’s your right. But I’ve asked the questions, and you’ve given the answers (mostly), and you’ve been told what the Bible says. Question now is – what will you do with what you know? That’s entirely up to you.”

    Mighty big of you, sir. You are arrogant regardless of my opinion of you.

    What answers did I not supply?

    I am here standing up against arrogant fundamentalists, that is what I am going to do with what I know.

  191. Fred said

    Maz, I will answer your questions in post #188 if you’ll promise to read my answers fairly and not misinterpret or mis-state or add anything to what I say. They won’t be answers you like but they’ll be honest.

    What do you say?

  192. Maz Herman said

    Fred: Honesty is the best policy so they say….whoever ‘they’ are.
    But Fred, you come over as quite arrogant yourself in some of your posts, especially 190.
    Look forward to your answers……….and I too will be as honest with you.

  193. Anonymous said

    “Do you believe Jesus resurrected on the 3rd day, and is alive today? Why or why not?
    No, I do not. Anyone who was dead for three days is dead. See modern Medical Science for that opinion.”

    Fred, this answer helps me. It shows that you are operating on the presupposition that the past is always interpreted in light of the present. Your naturalistic presuppositions rule out any possibility of God working (violating the laws of nature) in history. You assume God has not acted, dismiss any evidence that he has acted (by either explaining it away or refusing to answer), and conclude that he either does not exist or is irrelevant. Do you see the circularity in your thought process? Don’t get me wrong, I am not making fun of you. I am simply stating my observation of your philosophy. We all operate on the basis of certain core presuppositions. You remind me of Robert Jastrow who admits that he sees evidence of an intelligent design in nature, but he says that his materialism won’t let him go down that path. He then states that he is confident that in the end the evidence will support his position. I admire his honesty, but He is operating on a measure of faith in atheistic science, but it is faith none the less.

  194. Brad said


    I’m sure by now you know you’re arrogant, since you’ve now disagreed with Fred 🙂

  195. Fred said

    Maz asks:

    1. If you do not believe Jesus was anything more than a man then how can He save you from sin?

    I don’t know that he can. It is a comforting thought, though.

    2. If he was just a man Fred, how can he be in your heart?

    My father passed away years ago. He was a man and he is in my heart. That is to say I remember Dad and I remember Sunday School lessons about Jesus.

    3. Salvation (though emotion may be involved) is by faith, it’s a spiritual experience not an emotional one.

    Ok, I have had the spiritual experience of being saved through faith.

    4. Fred: By your own admission you are not saved…..if you were there’s no Heaven to go to because you said you don’t believe in it! So where are you going?

    I didn’t admit that. On the contrary, I said that I have been saved. And I don’t believe there is a heaven because it’s too hard to believe. Where is it? In the sky? Is it invisible? On another planet? There may be a heaven. I don’t know, but if there is a heaven I will believe in it.

  196. Anonymous said

    Fred, to be saved you must believe in the resurrection.

    Romans 10:9, 10
    9. That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

  197. Fred said

    Anonymous, I think I understand what you said. Let me see:

    If the universe today operates under the laws of nature and the intervention of God is absent, that does not mean that at some time in the past God did not intervene in the laws of nature.

    Is that it? I can agree with that.

    You then went on:

    “You assume God has not acted, dismiss any evidence that he has acted (by either explaining it away or refusing to answer), and conclude that he either does not exist or is irrelevant.”

    There I think you lose me. I assume that the laws of nature are the same today as they were in the past. God may have acted upon them in the past but how can we know that?

    Any Divine Intervention that is described in the Bible is not sufficient documentation for myself.

  198. Fred said

    Anonymous, Romans I don’t care for at all. I haven’t read Romans in a long time.

    If at one time I did believe in the resurrection and was saved would that qualify me?

  199. justaman said

    The memory of your father is a fond thought that exists in your head. Same as Jesus. If Jesus was in your heart you would be transformed by His mercy, love and grace and would be salt and light in a dark world.

    That is the “miracle” of NEW LIFE IN CHRIST!! And it’s everywhere!!

  200. John said

    He could always visit us at our Heaven, although I can’t guarantee his happiness all the time.
    I accept your little challenge, Brad, however I don’t see how you’ll really be satisfied with any of my answers.Too “abstract”, as you put it, among other things. And my answers are…..

    1.I believe in the possibility that he may have existed, as there seems to be enough historical “evidence” to put a few grains of truth within the legend.

    2.If he did, then I believe that he may have well been the son of a God.Those who believe in the existence of deities know that such things happen.For example, the founder of Buddhism was the son of a God, and The Greek Gods were always fooling around with mortal maidens, so………[grin].

    3.No. Real history teaches us that Judaism and it’s baby Christianity, while old, were not the worlds first theologies, but some within a long line of theologies to arise on this world.Why would your newer deity get dibs on all the power[smile with one raised eyebrow]? Do you remember when I asked you in the past “What is a deity?”?

    4.Yes. But I would pluralize it to Heavens.Your Christian Heaven, my Wiccan Heaven, others Heavens, etc.

    5.Yes. See answer #4.

    6.Yes, for a Christian.

    7.I don’t know.I was not there to ask him about it.
    It’s an attractive idea, but being as I am not a Christian or a Satanist I don’t see how it really matters for me. It’s about the same as thinking that somewhere in India, some Hindi man is toasting a drink in honor of my name. Understand?

    8.I don’t know. How could I/you/anyone today know for certain?
    If he did, so what? To repeat myself, being as I am not a Christian, a Satanist, nor a Jew or any other theology that hails from the Middle East,I don’t see how it really matters to me.

    9.No. In my theology there is no concept of Original Sin and thus, no need for salvation.We believe that babies are born “Originally Blessed”, and I would like to think that anyone who has attended a birthing and looked into the newborn babies eyes would understand this.Later…. if one is evil…one may have to EARN redemption, and if this evil behavior continues, then it will damage the soul to such an extent that one will eventually be doomed to an afterlife of Hell.A custom-made Hell, that is. But also bear in mind that whatever we do, be it good or evil, will be returned upon us 3 times over, so these things have a way of working themselves out.Which would still make salvation unnecessary.

    10.No, not really. Inspired originally perhaps, but certainly not inerrant.For example, I have 17 Christian Bibles and each one is different.Mrs. Herman asked me within her post #108 “oral traditions like ‘chinese whispers’ can get altered along the way.”
    in regards to my theology. As if such a thing could NEVER happen to the Bible or within Christianity.You have absolutely no idea.
    Would you like an elaboration? I doubt it.
    And even if it was inerrant why would it matter to me?Reread answer #8.

    11.Reread answer #9. After the “No”.

    12.My Hell or yours?For mine, yes and no.It depends on the circumstances. For yours, I’m not to sure.

    13.No, I don’t think he’s in my heart save for in the most vague way perhaps.And I believe that we’ve already covered the savior topic rather well.

    So there you have it.I hope that your satisfied.

  201. Fred said

    OK, hang on. My turn. I want to ask you guys something.

    Do you believe, as many people do (fervently I might add) that Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials travelling by some interstellar mode of transportation?


  202. Maz Herman said

    Fred: (1.) You said ”I have had the emotional experience of being saved before” 187.
    Then you tell us that you don’t think Jesus can save you.

    Fred: (2.) I have my parents in my heart but that is not the same as having Jesus actually living in my heart and life by His Spirit.

    (3.) Sorry Fred, but you havn’t, because you do not believe that Jesus is the Only begotten Son of God. John 3 v 16-18.

    (4) No you didn’t actually say you are not saved but by what you did say you inferred it.
    If you are saved, the Bible says you will go to Heaven. John 14 v 1-6. But if you do not
    believe in Heaven how can you go where Jesus said you would go? You don’t believe Him.

    Fred: You just seem a little mixed up with what you do and don’t believe. There are certain criteria for salvation, and your disbelief in not only the Bible, but in Heaven, in Jesus, in the actual existence of God, and a lot of other things invalidates you for salvation.

    To be saved….and I’m quite sure you’ve heard all this before but it bears repeating, you have to believe that Jesus is the Son of God and therefore God the Son. That He died for your sins on the cross. That He was resurrected to life on tthe third day (which you said you don’t believe) and you have to receive Him into your life and be born again, John 3 v 3.

    You probably won’t like my answers either. (191)

  203. Anonymous said

    I was simply stating what I observe in you – your tendencies when you respond to questions.

    As to Divine intervention that is claimed to have happened in the past, how can we verify it? The only way to verify a Divine intervention in the past is through historical research. The event certainly can’t be repeated in a controlled environment so that it can be empirically verified. So, the only proof you will ever have of a miracle is through historical documentation (unless you see it in person of course). Do a little study on the resurrection. Be sure to read good material from those who believe history supports the resurrection of Christ and not just material from the skeptics. I think you will find that there is more historical support for the resurrection that for any other event in antiquity. By the way, the fact that an event is recorded in the Bible doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. 🙂

    Acts 17:30. 31
    30. “In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”

  204. Educated Dawg said

    The topic for this thread is “Are you are a red letter Christian?” – Obviously, you are not. So, there is nothing more for me to communicate with you on. ADB on the other hand is a clergy member that is not a red letter Christian. I take issue with that in regard to Genesis 1 & 2. Thus, our correspondence concerning his eisegetical interpretation of the said text.

    Both you and F.L.A. cannot give me reason to debate you on this. We understand the natural world based on 2 very different world-views. Mine is a Biblical one. Yours is a paganistic macro-evolutionary one.

    You deny the inherrant sinfulness of mankind. That is a foundational doctrine of the Christian Scriptures.
    You deny that Jehovah El Ohim created all that is by the word of His power. That is a foundational doctrine of the Christian Scriptures.
    You deny the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is the foundation of the Christian’s faith.

    So, why do I want to debate you? Like I’ve said, all skeptics have to do is prove the Resurrection is a sham and you will win the be all end all, the mother of all debates.

    And if it were so easy to do, surely Muhammad’s followers would have done it years ago. Surely the numerous “great” atheists would/could/should do it. Right?

    You say you’re here to learn theology. I doubt that. Just like so many skeptics, your mind is made up. We as mortal men, even Christians, cannot convert anyone. You have the Scriptures, in 17 versions. All I needed was one and it changed my life for the better, for ever. Jesus is all the world to me. I know that my Redeemer lives and will return again.

    What say ye about your gods? What have they done for you? Why do you worship them?

  205. Anonymous said


    As to your question in 198, no. The Bible teaches that those who truly have faith will persevere in it until the end.

    Why don’t you care for Romans?

  206. Fred said

    Anonymous, I thought I was perservering? Anyways, I think we understand each other. I doubt where others are certain.

  207. Fred said

    Maz: “Fred: You just seem a little mixed up with what you do and don’t believe.”

    No, I am not. It’s no longer my concern if you can’t understand plain English.

    That sound you just heard is me putting Maz on “ignore”. Sorry.

  208. Maz Herman said

    Fred: To answer your question about whether aliens have ever visited earth….No…..because of my Christian beliefs and what the Bible tells me.

  209. John said

    Educated Dawg, all that you had to do was say “No, I can’t.”
    But then, I already knew that.The only evidence that you have is Christian based. It would not have to be if it were true.And if you were sooooooo reluctant to debate about it then you should not have brought the topic up.I don’t think that you considered the consequences of your actions, like Stu E.Jr. on the “Mormon Mirage” site[if your reading Stu, we’re still waiting].
    You don’t seem to understand that I don’t care as to whether or not the resurrection of Jesus actually happened.It matters not for me.Did you read my answers to Brad’s questions? It’s all in there.
    I am hear to learn about theology[and for amusement], but I didn’t say why.It’s people like yourself that I am really studying[smile].
    Why do I worship my deities[cute how you spelled Gods with a little g] and what have they done for me? Is this all that you want to know?

  210. Maz Herman said

    Fred: I understand what you are saying but it just doesn’t add up! And now you want to be rude about my knowledge of English? Ya?

  211. Brad said

    To the Christians here:

    The thinking on this blog of people like Willie, John, Fred, F.L.A. and others ought to be a great example of the importance of teaching our kids about the fundamentals of the Christian faith, helping them to understand WHY we believe WHAT we believe. So when they leave the house to truly enter this world on their own, they are prepared for the numerous false teachings, new age theories, etc… that await them.

    You can see how people’s thinking can get so messed up. It’s really too bad.

  212. Fred said


  213. Maz Herman said

    Fred: I feel this debate has run it’s course for me and I bow out……graciously.

  214. John said

    Yes Fred. And a goodly dose of ignorance too.He’s a young earther too[of course], but don’t bother asking him for evidence to explain why.
    Do train your children well Brad. The only thing that you will help your children understand is your own narrow view.But least you forget, people like myself want people like you to stay as you are[smile].I almost pity you, save for the fact that your condition is self-inflicted.
    All in all I thought that I answered your simple questions rather well.Perhaps I can makeup a short little list of questions for you, too.Hmmmm?

  215. John said

    On other thing, while I’m thinking about it, sometime in the future I would like Brad, Educated Dawg, or Mrs. Herman to give me as good and as detailed a description of their/your concept of Heaven as you think you can.Let us Pagans, Atheists, and “wrong types of Christians” get a good idea of what we’ll be missing out on.Don’t bother with a description of the Hell that you just KNOW awaits us if we don’t become like you. Just Heaven. Are you up to it?

  216. Educated Dawg said

    John & Fred,

    I just went back and read your answers to Brad’s questions. That’s enough for me. Sad answers, yet sincere answers.

    John, I do wonder why you worship the deities you worship though? We Christians claim our God was there before time began and that He is the Creator of all, sustainer of all, and the Savior that all mankind needs. We are indeed narrow-minded and believe that only Jesus Christ is the real God and only Way for humans to understand and live the life that this great God intended for us to have.

    Again, for me if Jesus Christ is just another god among millions. If the Scriptures are just a bunch of stories made up by men. Then I would truly denounce all religion and become an atheist. Yet, only God can give a person the understanding. That is His to do, not Christians. He has been changing peoples lives for thousands of years and He will continue on.

    You deny original sin, yet believe in good and evil? You deny the Biblical concept of Heaven and Hell, yet believe in a heaven and hell? You deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ, yet worship gods that are indeed dead?

    Oh, and I lower case gods because they are inferior at best compared to the Risen Savior Jesus Christ. They are not anywhere near the same level as He. And that is His words, no matter the translation.

    Take care and have a wonderful life – be merry, for in this life is all the “joy” you will ever know. And that compares not with what you could receive in Christ Jesus.

    – Adios amigos 😉

  217. Educated Dawg said

    What good is Heaven without the Savior Jesus Christ? That is our Heaven – to know Him and the Power of His resurrection. The place is a bonus. The reality is Jesus Christ. Nothing, no one compares to Him.

    If only you understood that. We’re not comparing apples to apples, not deity to deity, not religion to religion. We’re talking about the King of kings, Lord of lords, the God above all that is. He is far above our understanding. He is greater than all we can think of or create. He is Absolute, He is Sovereign, He is Savior……..that’s Jesus Christ.

  218. Fred said

    E. Dawg says:

    “Take care and have a wonderful life – be merry, for in this life is all the “joy” you will ever know. And that compares not with what you could receive in Christ Jesus.”

    That’s as polite a way of saying “go to Hell” as one could hope to encounter.

  219. John said

    Indeed Fred, although I probably would have said something along the lines of “Believe whatever brings you strength and joy.”[grin]
    Is that the best that you can do, “Educated”Dawg? So disappointing.
    At least you didn’t try to hide behind this sites topic like you did that last time.I never denied the resurrection of Jesus Christ,you puffed up sheepeople.I said that it didn’t matter to me.Now one of the things that really interests me about your comments in post#216 was the part were you told us that you would go completely atheistic if you discovered that there was anything else other than your God, and that the scriptures weren’t all that you thought they should be. I was surprised that such a person would be so quick to abandon his deity, not find a middle ground to work around this revelation,not just stay with your favorite deity, but just give up everything! What a quitter! I would not be very proud of you if I was your God.”True Believer”, indeed! Or were you just displaying the utter arrogance and theological bigotry that comes so easily for your kind of person? Perhaps someone else will do a better job in regards to my inquiry in post#. 215.

  220. F. L. A. said

    “You can see how peoples thinking can get so messed up.It’s really too bad.”-Brad


  221. John said

    Well, it seems that we’ve successfully, abet, unintentionally killed off yet another site.
    And this was a fun one too!
    Ah well…[smile with rolling of eyes].

  222. How to Get Gold in World of Warcraft Free…

    […]Are You a Red Letter Christian? « Welcome to TruthTalkLive.com![…]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: