The Atheist’s Inability To Comprehend God

COPYRIGHT WARNING

Those Who Deny God, Cannot Understand Him

A human being is made up of three components; body, soul, and Spirit. When a person is born, the body is preeminent, it rules the life of the person. Whatever the body wants, it expresses through the desires of the flesh. The soul is the inhabitation of the emotions, where a person expresses their thoughts, feelings and emotions. The spirit, which is the only part of man that can know and understand God, is dead because of sin.[1]

When Jesus told Nicodemus, in John chapter 3, that “you must be “born again,” He was describing the spirit. In order for any person to understand God, or to comprehend His word, first his spirit must be born again, into a new relationship with God. Until our sins are dealt with and removed by God, it is impossible for us to have a relationship with God.[2]

Jesus death on the cross, paid for the sins of all people, for all time. All those who are willing to repent from their sins and come to Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins, are born again—into this new spiritual life.[3]

This is one of the preeminent differences between Biblical Christianity and religion. The religions of man ignore the spiritual side of man, regarding sin, repentance and the need to experience a new life in the spirit. Man’s religion requires conformance into a set of rules or conduct. The Bible reveals that there are no rules that any person can keep that will make them acceptable to God. It is by a reliance upon what Jesus has accomplish that God will accept any person.[4]

To those who do not know God, who have yet to experience this new birth of the spirit, these things are difficult to comprehend. Some even scoff at this possibility and find it impossible to believe. Nevertheless, this is what the text of the New Testament reveals.

No one can know God, comprehend His word, or understand the things of the Spirit of God, until they have been born again by the spirit.[5]

The spirit of man, remaining dead because of sin—precludes the possibility of understanding God.[6]

At various places in the Bible, the terms “soul,” and “spirit,” are used interchangeably; as in the text of Job 7:11, 1 Corinthians 5:5, and Hebrews 10:39. Other places in the scriptures we see that a distinction is made between the soul and spirit; as in Hebrews 4:12.

For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. —Hebrews 4:12

The spirit of man is the method by which he may know God. This is the reason that so many people find it impossible to believe that God exists when they seek to know Him apart from the spirit. God has placed visible evidence of His existence in the universe, the earth, and human life, which reveal that God must exist. It is by the things that God has made that a person may first become aware of God.[7]

God has chosen to reveal Himself further by His word, and finally, by His Son.[8] Every person is born with an internal awareness that God must exist, as they see the world around them.[9] If they follow this inherent evidence that God has placed into the heart of every person, and continue in a search for Him—with all of their heart, they are directed to His word, where they will find Him.[10]

The Bible is Gods revelation of Himself to man. Only the Bible describes the need for a personal relationship with God, by the repentance of sins, and a turning to the Savior which God has provided. All other religions of the world require the good works of a person in order to please the particular rules of that religion. The Bible reveals that a person can do nothing themselves to redeem their life, other than believe upon the One God sent to complete the work of redemption for us.[11]

It is by this third method; by His Son, that God has revealed Himself most vividly. Jesus said that if we have seen Him, we have seen God. Jesus claimed that He and God are one and the same.[12]

For this reason, it is impossible to embark on a fruitful discussion of any other subject concerning God, the Bible, the Universe, or human life, before a person is born again. The Bible is very specific in describing the impossibility of understanding these things, before a person experiences a new life in the spirit.

But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. —1 Corinthians 2:14

Although there are compelling and satisfying answers to all questions that the atheist and skeptic have, it will be impossible to truly comprehend these things until a person has been born again. The natural man seeks to understand the universe by his intellect. God has precluded any man from knowing Him by the intellect alone.[13]

Since the world, by its wisdom, seeks to understand God; He has chosen the foolishness of Jesus-crucified and God’s requirement for salvation, through a trust in Jesus, as the method by which He will save us.

For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. —1 Corinthians 1:21

Men think themselves—so wise. They believe that they can know and understand anything by their intellect. For this reason, God has chosen a message that appears “foolish” to men who do not know God, as the method by which, He will save us. He did this on purpose, to preclude the pride of man in all his wisdom, from knowing God. The Lord will not share His glory with any man. Unless a person humbles themselves and comes to God in sorrow for their sins and believes that they cannot be saved apart from Jesus sacrifice for us, they will be lost forever. This is God chosen method; and man by his wisdom, cannot understand it, unless he first humbles himself before God.

But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence. —1 Corinthians 1:27

God has not required any person to believe in Him, apart from evidence, this is why He has provided such a great deal of evidence that proves His existence. The Universe and its vast display of creative power, are sufficient for any person to conclude that God must exist. Instead, men deny that God made the universe and claim that the universe made itself. Second, God has sent His Son into the world to prove that He exists. When Jesus arrived in Bethlehem and lived a perfect life, died for our sins upon the cross, and rose from the dead, every person had all the proof they need that God exists. Instead, men claim that Jesus is a myth and He never existed.

No matter what God does to show Himself to us, men deny the evidence and continue in their unbelief.

For this reason, it is nearly impossible to continue in a discussion about God and the universe, with those who refuse to accept the evidence that God has already provided.

Before a person can understand the evidence God has already given us; the universe, His word, and His Son, they must first see a need in themselves. They must believe that they are a “sinner,” an imperfect person, and their need for a Savior. If this need is lacking, it will be impossible for God to reveal Himself, fully to any person, or grant them an understanding of how and why the universe operates.

This sound preposterous to the person of intellect: “Certainly, any person of intelligence can understand facts if they are presented in a logical method.” Not so, regarding the things of God.

It is on purpose that God has withheld knowledge of Himself to the wise. He only reveals Himself to the humble.

I will continue in my discussion with those who posit their questions here, but it will become very clear to those who read the comments of those who argue, that they are not really interested in answers, they are interested in arguing. It will become clear that because these persons have denied God in their life, they are not able to understand the universe God has made, nor how He has revealed Himself through the things that He has made. These things are hidden from their eyes and their minds and they will not be able to understand them.

The Following is the text from my Facebook page, where various persons made comments regarding the existence of God:

The discussion began with an article that I wrote on The United States Constitution and Gay Rights, and quickly turned to the Universe, the Bible, and the Existence of God

Robert Vest Theocracy has no place here, might I suggest Syria.There are hoards of fanatics wishing to impose religion on all manner of Humankind, you’d love it there… Godspeed

RCR The Constitution is not a religious document. However, it is based upon the natural laws which God instituted for all mankind.This is a matter of record for the early history of the United States. The founders used as their model, “Blackstone’s Commentary on the Law.” This treatise on the just laws which concern all human life, takes its foundation from the “laws of nature and nature’s God,” which originate in the text of the Bible. This is a fact that is incontrovertible.

We know that this is true, because the men who wrote the Declaration of Independence included this exact language from Blackstone’s, in the first part of the Declaration.

King George III, of Britain had declared that when he spoke, it was with the voice of God. It was with this belief that he felt that Britain had the right to dictate to the people of the new land of America, that their obedience was to the king of England and his laws, only.

The motto of the American Revolution declared that they would have “No King but King Jesus.” Benjamin Franklin frequently stated during the revolution against Britain: “Rebellion to Tyrants, is Obedience to God.”

The entire purpose of our war with Britain and the seeking our independence, was to secure laws for our nation, based upon the laws of God, and to exist as people who are governed according to the dictates of the Bible. Notice the specific text in the introduction to the Declaration of Independence:

“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, 1. the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.We hold these truths to be self-evident, that 2. all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 3. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That 4.whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

1. The basis of law for the United States was “the laws of nature and nature’s God.”

2. These laws are created for all men, and come to us from God as our Creator.

3. In order to institute these laws that come from God, government is established.

4. When any government becomes destructive in not following the laws of God, the people have the right to abolish that government and start a new government.

The purpose of this Declaration of Independence was necessitated because of the actions of the king of England, who said that he was acting in the place of God and had the right to institute laws himself. The war that took place between the newly formed nation of America, and Britain, was to establish a new government, based upon he laws of nature’s God and not those from a king, nor any man

The problem today is that revisionists want to rewrite the history of America and insist that it was founded as a secular nation. In order to believe this, a person would have to ignore the more than 100,000 documents by the founding fathers who wrote that their entire purpose in founding this nation was so that every American could be free to worship God according to the dictates of their heart, or not worship any god, without interference from governments or a king. Secondly, to live their lives in liberty, free from the tyranny of a king or any government.

In order to accomplish this monumental task, the framers of the Constitution looked to a source for our laws that was transcendent of man. It was the laws of nature, and natures God that the founders describe in the first part of the Declaration of Independence. They continued this basis for law in writing the Constitution.

No secular nation would have every conceived of the laws that are set forth by our Constitution. It had never been done before, and it has only been done again, as other nations have adopted the laws of our Constitution for their country.

The misunderstanding that seems to prevail with many people is that Christians want to impose our belief in Jesus upon others, and our government.

We do not, simply because Jesus did not.

What we want is for every person to know the incredible joy of knowing Jesus, having your sins forgiven, and knowing that heaven is your eternal home.

Or, a person has the right not to believe.

We also want every American to know that they can thank God that the founders of our great nation, had the wisdom to take the established laws of God and place them into the laws for this new nation. Because they did, we are all free, even to the present day.

Robert Vest So that someday misguided fanatics could impose those beliefs on anyone willing or not…. Nooo, (sic) that was never their intent… God gave free will, No one of this earth can chain another with the word. No matter your intent!

RCR Apparently, you did not read what I just wrote before your comment.

“The misunderstanding that seems to prevail with many people is that Christians want to impose our belief in Jesus upon others, and our government.

We do not, simply because Jesus did not…

Kyle Buntjer *cough* *cough* maybe you should read some of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine’s works…

RCR

“The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1904), Vol. XV, p. 383, to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse on June 26, 1822.

“The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.

Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Alberty Ellery Bergh, editor (Washington D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XII, p. 315, to James Fishback, September 27, 1809.

“I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.”

Thomas Jefferson, Memoir, Correspondence, and Miscellanies from the Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, editor (Boston: Grey & Bowen, 1830), Vol. III, p. 506, to Benjamin Rush, April 21, 1803.

“I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.”

Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, editor (Washington, D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XIV, p. 385, to Charles Thomson on January 9, 1816

Kyle Buntjer Nothing from Thomas Paine? Have you read the Jeffersonian bible?

Kyle Buntjer You know who hates separation of church and state? Muslims

RCR All of the statements made by these four men, that you included here, make statements regarding the Christian religion as not being a part of the government of the Unites States, this is of course, true

If you read the entire article: “The Constitution of the United States and Gay Rights,” you would discover that the government of the United States was not founded upon the Christian religion.

However, the laws which the framers of the Constitution used for the United States, were based upon Blackstone’s commentary on the law. This famous treatise, which was used by every college and university, court and attorney prior to the writing of the Constitution, describes the only valid laws that govern the affairs of men as originating from “the laws of nature and nature’s God.”

RCR Regarding Thomas Jefferson and the “Wall.” you should read: “Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation between Church and State” by Daniel L. Dreisbach

This author details the true purpose of Thomas Jefferson’s use of the “Wall of separation” statement. In this book, the author documents from history that Thomas Jefferson did not intend that his words be interpreted as separating religion from Government.

Dreisbach, Daniel (2002-09-01). Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation Between Church and State (Critical America (New York University Paperback))

Also, regarding Thomas Paine:

Thomas Paine on “The Study of God”
Delivered in Paris on January 16, 1797, in a
Discourse to the Society of Theophilanthropists

“It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of Divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles. He can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author.”

“When we examine an extraordinary piece of machinery, an astonishing pile of architecture, a well executed statue or a highly finished painting where life and action are imitated, and habit only prevents our mistaking a surface of light and shade for cubical solidity, our ideas are naturally led to think of the extensive genius and talents of the artist. When we study the elements of geometry, we think of Euclid. When we speak of gravitation, we think of Newton. How then is it, that when we study the works of God in the creation, we stop short, and do not think of God? It is from the error of the schools in having taught those subjects as accomplishments only, and thereby separated the study of them form the Being who is the author of them. . . .”

“The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of the creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of His existence. They labor with studied ingenuity to ascribe everything they behold to innate properties of matter; and jump over all the rest, by saying that matter is eternal.”

Although Paine is undoubtably the least religious of the founding father’s, notice his language that insist that the teaching of God should be included in school curriculum.

Paine describes God as the author of the universe and the fact that men should think of God when we seek the source of the universe.

Paine and the majority of those who framed the Constitution, deigned the laws of America, with God in mind. This is unmistakable when we examine the lives and the words of those who signed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Kyle Buntjer Many of them believed in a god, yes. Even Paine was a deist. BTW, how do you know which group has the right god? Sounds like, if we can know the mind or laws of a god that the world (or at least the country) cannot unanimously agree on, then we would probably be better off with just the nature part for now. Until a god proves its existence. But if you want to contest homosexual rights, think of this; homosexuality is completely natural. It happens at a 10% rate among mammals. Sheep have even displayed long term homosexual relationships.

If you want to talk about biblical marriage…. You’re talking about regressing 100s of years socially

Kyle Buntjer Jefferson also wasn’t the only founding father. Gotta love democracy wink emoticon ever heard of the treaty of tripoli?

RCR The religious affiliation of the framers of the Constitution is of little help to us.. The mind-set and points of reference used by the framers when they set out to write the Constitution, is the real issue.

When you examine Blackstone’s and you understand that this was the manual for law that the framers used in their construction of the Constitution, it becomes very clear that their intent was to base the laws of the United States on the natural laws which the God of the Bible has determined for man.

Odd… It passed unanimously in congress….

Millard Ralph Kyle Buntjer I applaud you for at least having some knowledge of our past how ever you should ready the story of how that treaty came into existence you can’t just take 1 little article and build a doctrine off of it read all the documents of our founding fathers then put an argument together I think if you do that you will find yourself in a precarious position as there are far to many documents suggesting otherwise

Kyle Buntjer Lol. A christian telling me I can’t take one little article and build a doctrine off of it…. Oh the irony.

The founding fathers declared independence to escape (actual) religious persecution (and to avoid taxes on tea, among other things. Mainly ridding themselves of the crown). Why would they want to make a country that would eventually do the same thing. If they wanted the US to be a christian theocracy, wouldn’t they have made it different? Wouldn’t it be unquestionable?

Kyle Buntjer http://www.amazon.com/The-Age-Reason-Thomas…/dp/1603863400

You would do yourself some justice by reading this book

Manuel Romero The beauty of interpretation, is it allows one to postulate an idea that coincides with their beliefs.

Kyle Buntjer I was raised christian. I became evangelical. When you look through the history books, no theocracy does well. When you look at the world around you, you examine certain truths. When you interpret the bible, you have to accept that it says we live on a flat circle earth and that it is only thousands of years old. We didn’t walk with dinosaurs and we are just evolved little pieces of RNA that became DNA. Those are truths, we are apes. Do you deny that housecats (sic) and lions are related? What about dogs and wolves? Do you think hyenas are canine or feline?

My point with that is that if we live on a round earth circling one of 10²² stars in an exer (sic) expanding universe, being nothing but apes living on a moldy pebble then there was no original sin, and no reason to be saved by yahweh. And an all powerful god could just forgive people instead of sending yeshua (himself) to act as a blood sacrifice couldn’t it?

I also don’t find human sacrifice to be ethicly (sic) good. I’d rather accept punishment for being who I am; someone who doesn’t accept blood sacrifices for vicarious redemption of a crime I’ve supposedly commited (sic) by being born

RCR Kyle you are unfortunately, greatly misinformed.

I have written extensively on the subjects that you have problems with.

1. The Bible describes the earth as a sphere, long before any scientists knew that it was round. The Bible describes the earth as hanging on nothing, long before any scientist knew about gravity.

2. The Bible does not teach that the earth, is only thousands of years old. This is the opinions of men. I have written extensively about this subject in my book: A Universe From God.” In fact, the universe is billions of years old and I can prove that the Bible taught this in Genesis chapter 1, long before any many knew this.

3. Homo Sapiens did not inhabit the earth during the time of the Dinosaurs, again this is the incorrect opinions of misinformed men. I also answer this question in A Universe From God. The earth is at least 4.86 billion years old. There were many creatures on the earth before man.

4. Evolution of species is impossible. It has never been proven,and it never will. Evolution amongst species for adaptability is observed and it is true. I also address these subjects in A Universe From God.

5. The Bible does not teach human sacrifice. If this is what you understood from reading the Bible, you have misunderstood. I can easily explain this to you if you really want to know.

There are no intellectual boundaries to receiving Jesus as Savior and Lord, nor for believing that God exists and that the Bible is true. God loves every person–equally and He has proven His love for us by giving His Son.

If un answered questions or mis-answered questions have caused you to fall away from Jesus, then I am truly sorry. There are many ignorant men, who do not know the answers to important questions that young men like you ask.

I have spend 40 years learning and answering these questions.

If I can be of any help to you, in any regard, it would be my honor to do so.

Manuel Romero You could give the biblical justification on your 5 points to start with. I’m all ears or should I say eyes?

Kyle Buntjer Do you think I havent (sic) spoken of these things? Do you think I speak out of ignorance? 1. the bible doesn’t call the earth a sphere. But I do wonder how it would be possible for that to be true and yet in Job, when Yahweh is chilling with Lucifer, talking about how convicted he was, they can see all of the kingdoms of the earth by standing on a mountain top. As far as the earth “hanging on nothing,” gravity isn’t nothing. 2. If you look at the timeline established in the bible, you get roughly 6,000 years old. https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/ 3. the earth is 4.5 billion years old. just like all of the asteroids we’ve been able to test and the rock found on mars. 4. “evolution of species”? Genomes change and adapt over time and as a result, gene pools. Maybe you’re referring to speciation? when a gene pool becomes bifurcated to the point that the two new species can no longer produce fertile offspring. http://listverse.com/…/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/ Either way, you’re letting cognitive dissonance get in your way if you can’t see that evollution (sic) is true. you realize that we knew nothing about cancer until evolution became fully realized theory right? and the flu vaccine? Every year, scientists strive to figure out how the flu will evolve…. evolution is theory, just like gravity. it’s the highest rank you can get in the scientific community as a published work. 5. um….. the bible teaches that the sacrifice of Yeshua was a good thing. Even if that’s god in human form, that’s still sacrifice of a human. And ethically deprived. If you would like to talk about these things further PM me. If you think you’ve got answers that many pastors, priests, and many other holy people didn’t have,, please, in the words of Pat Benatar, “hit me with your best shot”

Jeff Poehls The Bible is but a book written by ordinary human beings. It has some good stories. Many people take it literally. Muslims have their book. LDS have theirs plus the Bible. Everyone thinks theirs is the one true way like all the rhetoric above. This is exactly why we have separation of church and state. And Blackstone is a document from ordinary men. Too bad books were not written by women…but all these men were so smart…that’s why they allowed women to vote, and they had slaves, etc….the credibility of all these old books authors can all called to the carpet.

We need new books with new thought written by humanistic minded people as a starting point.

Kyle Buntjer I don’t think this is too difficult to understand is it?

RCR

1. The earth is a sphere (circle)

Isaiah 40:22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

Also notice that Isaiah describes the universe as “stretched out.” Scientists only recently knew this about the universe. Isaiah wrote these words 2,700 years ago.

The Earth hangs upon empty space:

Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing.

Job is the oldest book in the Bible, perhaps over 3,500 years old or more. How did Job know about gravity before any scientist knew this fact?

2. The Bible, nowhere, describes the earth as 6,000 years old. The first line of Genesis says: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”

When did God create the universe? “In the beginning.” When was the beginning? we don’t know. If scientists can proved that the Universe is nearly 14 billion years old from Cosmic Background Radiation left over from the big bang, then this certainly does not conflict with the Bible.

The 6,000 year time line that you claim, was postulated based upon the genealogies given in the Bible. This only proves that Adam was created about 6,000 years ago, it does not prove the earth is only 6,000 years old.

3. Please site one example of a species of animal or advanced life form that has evolved from one species, into a completely different species? There are none!

4. The Bible teaches that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Our sins separate us from God. When Jesus died, because He is God living in the body of a man, His life is of infinite value. He was able to offer His life in exchange for all other human lives. In this way, when He died, all the judgment that we deserved for our sins, was placed upon Jesus. Those who believe this and receive Jesus as their Savior, are set free from all future Judgement.

The real question is: Why would Jesus, as God, do this for us? It makes no sense to me, yet this is what He did, simply because He loves us and was not willing even one of us should experience judgment for our sins.

Even more amazing, Jesus died for the sins of all people, even those who He knew ahead of time, would never love Him, or accept His sacrifice, or even thank Him.

How great is the Love of God!

RCR Also, your graphic about an all knowing God allowing a child to be raped, is incorrect in its basic logic. You are assuming that God has not done anything about it. He has, He sent His Son into the world to end the reign of evil, sin, and death–once and for all.

In this brief time before Jesus returns, He has allowed men like you and me, the opportunity to repent of our sins and be saved.

There is a day coming very soon when God will hold all evil persons accountable for their actions. Do not think that because justice is not served quickly that God does not care or is not able.

God allowed His Son to experience the most horrific death possible, for us. This is proof that He does care and He has done something about the evil in the world.

Kyle Buntjer if you think a circle is a sphere then you need to go back to geometry….. and once again, we are suspended by gravity. And news flash; Outer space isn’t empty space. HUGE difference 2. If the universe is 14 billion years old and we’re in one of 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 solar systems, then your god is extremely wasteful. the idea of a personal god is just silly 3. ‘Please site one example of a species of animal or advanced life form that has evolved from one species, into a completely different species? There are none!” animals don’t change into another one, they split into two different ones… http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html theres a link in there labelled “Some more observed speciation events,” I suggest you spend some time researching and verifying the findings on here. 4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By9JJSVzlTw Do you know of Christopher Hitchens? He is a very well spoken philosopher and I think, puts my issues with vicarious redemption better than I can 5. Yes…. why would a god do that for us if it exists? why would a god sacrifice it’s own son (which is also that same god) for a bunch of people who are born in sin (because of a curse that god put on all of man kind)? so they can avoid judgement for their wrongdoings? So a just god wouldn’t want its creation held accountable for its wrong doings? you’re logic escapes me…. well, most theist logic escapes me

RCR Kyle, if you really want answers to your questions, and at this point this is not clear, it seems that you are more interested in arguing rather than understanding.

I have written an extensive book on empirical proof for the existence of God as the true origin of the Cosmos. It is available at Amazon.

“A Universe From God.

Kyle Buntjer I don’t have all of the answers, I don’t pretend to, I’m a skeptic. If the god of the bible was real, the whole world would be on the same page. Gay marriage wouldn’t be contested, that’s for sure. Love your neighbor as yourself and love your enemy as yourself. I might pick up your book next term during my philosophy course but right now I’m so swamped that a 4th book isn’t in the cards for me right now.
Like · July 11 at 6:47pm

Manuel Romero Also notice he discribed (sic) it as a curtain and tent like. they didn’t have a word for sphere and you’re going to interpret circle as spherical, but the word stretched out is representative of what we now know of the earth’s expansion? I refer back to my earlier statement on interpretation.

If Job knew anything about gravity and it’s function on earth’s orbit, hang is a most inadequate description of that knowledge.

You referenced Homo Sapiens, how far down that scale of hominids do you go? You ask for one example of macro evolution and I say us, check the fossil records. If you asking for an eyewitness account than your either ignorant of the process, or simply trying to poison the well on the issue.

If Jesus was a man and was sent to be killed to absolve sin, that is human sacrifice. If his life has infinite value, than what value does his finite death hold? You ask how great is gods love? I first need to know what happens to those that do not love him or accept his sacrifice?

On the topic of the graphic, what good is accountability and justice if a simple repentance prayer can relinquish a person of accountability and justice. Jesus experienced the most horrific deaths possible? Have you ever read up on some of those torture devices used in the inquisitions? And is his death more horrifing (sic) than an eternity in hell?

RCR Manuel, As it seems that you are interested in Hermeneutics, let us make use of this in our exegesis of this verse of scripture.

The term: “circle,” comes from Strong # 2329, the Hebrew word “chug” or “chuwg.”

This Hebrew word is also seen in:

Job: 22:14, as “circuit.”
Proverbs: 8:27 as “compass”

In all three usages of chug, the Hebrew clearly indicates that the subject is round, a spare, or a circle.

This is the opinion of the Hebrew scholars who translated this word from Hebrew, into English.

The fact is, in the context of this verse of scripture from Isaiah, God is observed as Transcendent over the earth, which He describes as a circle, a globe, or a sphere. This is important because God does not describe the earth as flat, which scientists at that time, believed the earth was flat.

I will answer your other questions in subsequent posts

RCR There are millions of fossil remains of non-humanoid beings who lived on the earth millions of years ago.[1] Who are they? When exactly did they live here? Scientists confirm that they are not homo sapiens, and they are not apes. Experts have dated these fossils remains at millions of years, demanding a conclusion that they were here on our planet before Adam was created. Scientists have wrongly concluded that these humanoids were the early ancestors of human beings, although they are an entirely different genus. Genetic testing of the DNA of these beings reveals that they are only similar to current Homo Sapiens in about 6% of their Genome.[2] Human beings did not evolve from these earlier life forms; they are a different species altogether.

Clearly, the Bible reveals that human beings, in their present form, have only been on the earth for about 6,000 years.[3] There is an extensive list of skeletal remains that have been dated as far back as 5 million years, yet not one of these ancient remains are related to the present species of human beings which have lived on the earth for the past 6,000 years.

Most of the fossils shown are not considered direct ancestors to Homo sapiens but are closely related to direct ancestors and are therefore important to the study of the lineage.”[4]

What do these pre-humanoid beings mean to us today? Absolutely nothing. They are not a part of the descendants of Adam. They did not have a Savior who died for them. They are not important to our story. The only service that the provide for us is to explain why skeletal remains of humanoid beings are present on the earth, dating back 5 million years. They also serve to clarify that the descendants of Adam are not descendants of the Neanderthals. The Bible makes no mention of these beings, and we should not be concerned about them at all. The fact that evolutionists have tried to tie the homo sapient species to these beings as a part of the evolutionary process, has never been proven. As stated earlier, their DNA is 94% different from ours.

NOTES:
[1] The term “Humanoid,” first appeared in 1912 to refer to fossils which were morphologically similar to, but not identical with, those of the human skeleton. The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed. OED Online: Oxford University. 1989.
[2] 1. Noonan J. P (May 2010). “Neanderthal genomics and the evolution of modern humans”. Genome Res. 20 (5): 547–53. doi:10.1101/gr.076000.108. PMC 2860157. PMID 20439435.
2. Reich D, Green RE, Kircher M, et al. (December 2010). “Genetic history of an archaic hominin group from Denisova Cave in Siberia”. Nature 468 (7327): 1053–60. Bibcode:2010Natur.468.1053R. doi:10.1038/nature09710. PMID 21179161.
3. Abi-Rached, L; Jobin, M. J.; Kulkarni, S.; McWhinnie, A.; Dalva, K.; Gragert, L.; Babrzadeh, F.; Gharizadeh, B. et al. (2011-08-25.
[3] As determined by the Genealogies that are listed in the Bible.
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_evolution_fossils

RCR A large part of the plan of God in allowing Jesus to suffer for the sins of all men was God’s desire for a righteous basis to forgive our sins. The pronouncement of God declared that the soul that sins will die.

Ezekiel 18:4 “Behold, all souls are Mine; The soul of the father As well as the soul of the son is Mine; The soul who sins shall die.

In order for God to be seen as Just, He must punish sin by the death of the guilty. In making our salvation a reality, God did not overlook our sin; He punished them all just as He promised. This was accomplished by a provision in the law of God whereby an innocent could take the penalty for the guilty, and thereby set them free.

Leviticus 1:3-4 “If his offering is a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD. 4 Then he shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him.

The law of God allowed the substitutionary death of someone whose life was perfect and had sufficient value. That sacrifice had to be a Male, without blemish (sin) and offered of his own free will. Jesus met all of these strict requirements. Some of the many stipulations which God had made for an acceptable sacrifice are described throughout the Old Testament. Jesus met all of these demands.

1. He was perfect, without sin.
2. He is firstborn.
3. A male.
4. He offered His life freely.
5. He became one of us.
6. He is also God, dwelling in the body of a perfect man.
7. Jesus said that He is the door to heaven (John 1:9).
8. He died for us, paying our penalty.
9. His life for ours satisfied God’s requirements.
10. Because His life is eternal, it is of sufficient worth to pay for all human lives.

Jesus met all of the demands of God’s law for the substitutionary death of the guilty; and therefore, He was allowed to offer His life in exchange for ours. By successfully completing the plan of salvation for all people, Jesus fully vindicated God and showed all creation that God is Loving, Merciful, and Just.

RCR Manuel, you asked a few very good and important questions. I did not get the feeling that you are looking for answers though, it seems that you are looking for an argument.

This being true or not, I still gave unawares to your questions. All of these topics and many, many more, are in my book: “A Universe From God.”

A Universe From God: The True Origin of the Cosmos

Kyle Buntjer Pushing your book again I see. Just another charlatan.

RCR That is not fair Kyle. The questions that Manuel asked, require extensive answers. It is impossible to answer his questions and yours in a small format like FB. I have published an extensive book that answers all of Manuel’s and your questions. If you really want to receive good answers, get the book. If you cannot afford it ($4.77) I will give it to you for free.

Kyle Buntjer Shouldn’t all of the answers be in the bible. And if we want the answers, shouldn’t Yahweh reveal them to us? confused_rev emoticon

RCR True, except that you asked me… Blessings

RCR Regarding Manuel’s questions for Evolution:

We should be careful to distinguish between Microevolution and Macroevolution. The first is a matter of settled scientific fact, the second is not.

Microevolution is variations within certain limits of complexity within a particular species, which allow for adaptability and survivability within those species. This area of evolution is not in doubt, not a theory, and is a settled scientific fact. The effects of natural selection, genetic drift, and mutation are observable, testable, and are being constantly recorded.

Macroevolution is large scale changes or innovations within a species that results in a totally new species—evolving with new organs, structures, and genetic material—vastly different from the original species. This area of evolution is not a settled fact—although evolutionists, atheists, and materialists would like it to be and often imply that it is settled. What most evolutionists would have us believe is that because Microevolution is true and observable, macroevolution must also be true—even though, from Darwin’s original thesis to the present day, macroevolution has never been observed or proven.

Although evolution is a theory for how life evolves and changes, it has not, and cannot, explain how life began in the first place. The term “Molecular Evolution” argues that self-replicating genetic material can create life from non-living materials.[1]

The term “Natural Selection” operates on the basis of variations which can arise from genetic drift and mutation.

In all these various forms of evolution, each of these theories, except microevolution, remain as hypothesis—which as yet, are unprovable, even 150 years after Darwin first published his theory for evolution. For this reason, the only scientifically viable and credible point of evolution is in the area of changes that are observed as occurring within cells and adaptability within species. We do not, however, see any new species being created, nor any present species in the process of becoming new species. We also cannot observe scientifically, any process of new species that have been created in the past geologic record of the earth. These are matters of fact that should—by themselves, cause the theory of evolution to be considered—outside the boundaries of provable science, and to remain as clearly speculation.

To exclude the existence of God solely because of evolution, is a grave error. Not only does evolution not preclude the possibility of an intelligent, transcendent, unlimited being as the source of life—even if evolution of certain species could be proven; intelligence would be required to set life into motion in the first place. Regarding the origin of life and how it began, all of the current theories of evolution cannot bear the weight of evidence required to prove that life began on its own, apart from design, and engineered through an intelligent Being.

NOTES:
[1] Evolution by Peter Skelton (ed.), Addison Wesley, Harlow, England, 1993 p. 854.

Kyle Buntjer No. No. No. No.

There is no micro and macro. Speciation happens, we’ve seen it. I showed this to you and than you moved the goal post. Besides that, we’ve seen key transitional fossils from fish to amphibian, amphibian to reptile, reptile to bird, rep…See More

Kyle Buntjer We see amino acids on asteroids all the time. There’s even bacterial life on mars, though skeptics say they hitched a ride on the rover
Like · 1 · July 12 at 11:07am · Edited

RCR Again, site one scholarly article that proves that there have been any new species which have been created from a prior species. There are none, other than simple cells or plants.

Kyle Buntjer Your cognitive dissonance is staggering. You moved the goal post again BTW.

https://books.google.com/…/about/The_Oestrid_Flies.html…

RCR Kyle, can you site one specific text in this book that specifically proves that one species has evolved into a completely new species?

If it does, then please post it here, now.

Evolution as a theory

The supposition of evolutionary speciation is both unprovable and has no factual scientific basis. There is no evidence that any species of animal has ever evolved into a completely new species. There are mutations and adaptive evolutionary processes which have been observed within certain species, called Microevolution, but no Macroevolutionary process of new species evolving from a lower life form, other than a few assertions that simple plants, and insects have become new species.[1] You will find many claims by evolutionists in which the process of Microevolution is used as proof for the “possibility” of Macroevolution, but no actual evidence for this process is ever given.

A rather large problem for Speciation is that no evidence from the fossil record has ever been discovered which proves that one species has evolved into a new species. The field of micro-biology has validated the fact that macroevolution is not only unlikely, but impossible. Mutations and errors in DNA do not add new information nor help in causing a new species, in fact—they prohibit the possibility of a new species.

I have read many of the papers which purport evidence for Speciation—discovering in every case, these publications fall short of actually proving their claims by testable and observable scientific evidence.

What does the evidence reveal?

The paleontological record of the earth shows that man in his present form suddenly appeared on the earth about six thousand years ago, fully formed as a human being. There is not a single credible fossil that has been discovered which has demonstrated how a primate became a human being. Yet, this theory, that the highest life form on the earth evolved from lower life forms, is being taught in our high schools and universities all over the United States, as if it is an established fact, when it is not.

NOTES:
[1] In all of the following articles that purport to show evidence of speciation in evolution, at best a few plants and insects, with the possibility of a fish or two are sited. In no study, no such example of one species evolving into an completely different species is ever given. I have included the following references which are used by proponents of Macroevolution for your perusal.
1. Rice, W.R.; Hostert (1993). “Laboratory experiments on speciation: what have we learned in 40 years”. Evolution 47 (6): 1637–1653. doi:10.2307/2410209. JSTOR 2410209.
2. Jiggins CD, Bridle JR (2004). “Speciation in the apple maggot fly: a blend of vintages?”. Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) 19 (3): 111–4. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2003.12.008. PMID 16701238.
3. Boxhorn, J (1995). “Observed Instances of Speciation”. TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 26 December 2008.
4. Weinberg JR, Starczak VR, Jorg, D (1992). “Evidence for Rapid Speciation Following a Founder Event in the Laboratory”. Evolution 46 (4): 1214–20. doi:10.2307/2409766. JSTOR 2409766.
5. Kirkpatrick, Mark; Virginie Ravigné (2002-03). “Speciation by Natural and Sexual Selection: Models and Experiments”. The American Naturalist 159 (3): S22–S35. doi:10.1086/338370. ISSN 00030147. JSTOR 3078919. PMID 18707367.

Those who conclude that the universe simply came into existence on its own have failed to consider the implications of that conclusion. The number of conditions that must be present in order for advanced life forms to exist—are impossible apart from a transcendent intervention.

According to Peter D. Ward, Paleontologist and Donald Brownlee, Professor of Astronomy at the University of Washington, advanced life forms on any other planet in the universe must be extremely rare—if not impossible.

…not only intelligent life, but even the simplest of animal life, is exceedingly rare in our galaxy and in the Universe. We are not saying that life is rare—only that animal life is. We believe that life in the form of microbes or their equivalents is very common in the universe, perhaps more common than even Drake and Sagan envisioned. However, complex life—animals and higher plants—is likely to be far more rare than is commonly assumed.“[1]

In fact, advanced life forms on earth could not have occurred by the very long process of evolution. According to Paleontologist, Dr. Peter Ward, when we examine the Fossil record of earth—we observe the emergence of man—suddenly, not over the long course of an evolutionary processes. Man appeared on the earth precisely when the environment was perfect for him to survive on this planet. This is indicative of a moment of creation—rather than a long process of evolution which clearly was not possible for an advanced life form such as man.

New ways of more accurately dating evolutionary advances recognized in the Earth’s fossil record, coupled with new discoveries of previously unknown fossil types, have demonstrated that the emergence of animal life on this planet took place later in time, and more suddenly, than we had suspected….Although life may have formed nearly as soon as it could have, the formation of animal life was much more recent and protracted. These findings suggest that complex life is far more difficult to arrive at than evolving life itself…”[2]

NOTES:
[1] Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe, Peter D. Ward Donald Brownlee, Copernicus Books, 37 East 7th Street New York, NY 10003, ISBN 0-387-95289-6 (pbk.: alk. paper), Page 18.
[2] Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe, Peter D. Ward Donald Brownlee, Copernicus Books, 37 East 7th Street New York, NY 10003, ISBN 0-387-95289-6 (pbk.: alk. paper), Page 24

Source of this material is “The Prophecies of the Messiah,” by Robert Clifton Robinson, and “A Universe From God,” by the same author

RCR To all who will continue with this discussion:

I am currently doing research for my new book and will be actively involved in writing for the next several months.

As such, I will not have the time that is necessary to answer or correspond with you here, at the present time.

I will return when time permits.

Kyle Buntjer If you’re going to speak on evolution I suppose you comb through the paper and debunk it yourself. You moved the goal post again. Fist its “site one scholarly paper” now it’s “show me where”

Evolution is a theory. Just like gravity, just like relativity, just like quantum mechanics…. Philosophical theory and scientific theory are two different things.

There have been tons of fossils that have been recovered that show transitions…. Cognitive dissonance…..

Manuel Romero I’m really not that interested in it. “The Hebrew clearly indicates that the subject is round, a sphere or a circle.” Since round can be either a sphere or a circle we are left with two choices of which you choose to insert our current understanding of earth’s shape. I also stated that the scripture also described the universe as curtain and a tent. I know nothing about ancient Hebrew tents were those spherical?

Kyle Buntjer The universe is flat and ever expanding

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html

Manuel Romero I’m curious what percentage of DNA are you willing to concede as valid? After all we cannot expect a 100 percent match because as you’ve stated we’re talking about specieal (sic) change through evolution. What of our 90 plus percent match to the modern chimpanzee, what does that mean to you in evolutionary regards.

You claim that the modern human has only been around for 6000 years? There are mummified remains from 7000 and 8000 years ago. And also fossil remains from 30,000- 40,000 years ago. Now I was willing to let the whole in the beginning was not time specific so it’s perfectly biblically valid for the earth to be 14 billion years old. But know your trying to tell me that there were humanoids roaming the earth millions of years ago when biblically there was no dry land or light, how exactly does that work out?

Kyle Buntjer Me? Because if you’re talking about me, you’ve misrepresented me in so many ways

Kyle Buntjer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FGYzZOZxMw have you ever heard of chomosome? (sic).

Kyle Buntjer i never claimed modern humans have been around 6,000 years. I said if the bible was true that that would be the case. homo sapiens have been around between 100,000-250,000 years. The earth isn’t 14 billion years old, the universe is 13.72 billion years old and the earth is 4.5 and the sun is just slightly older.

Kyle Buntjer life on earth, most likely happened around 4 billion years ago

Kyle Buntjer the fossil record is out there and all of this information is available to you. unlike the bible, the claims made by scientists have gone through a rigorous process of scrupulation (sic) and general consensus based on what is testable, falsifiable and repeatable. if you were standing with me and we had an electron microscope, i could show you our dna and chimp dna and show you exactly how the two are similar. I literally witnessed this first hand in biology 101

Manuel Romero I am not “looking” for biblical theological answers they’re proven to be invalid. You say the questions can not be answered in this format, I agree but your summerization (sic) does not even explain the simplest of questions in this regard. You have not even made a compelling argument to inspire the purchase of your works. And your answers remind me of the theological teachings I encountered 30 years ago.

As I said before, asking for a visual case of an animal switching species is nothing more than poisoning the well. You’ve stated you belive (sic) the earth to be 14 billion years old with creatures roaming it for millions of years . evolution is a process of hundreds of million years. How is your proof even possible considering the time frame?

Kyle Buntjer Dude… Pm him

Manuel Romero Yes, I’m addressing the prophet. And I would like to know if a 6 percent DNA match means to him that we are not evolved from earlier hominids, than to him what does the 96 percent match to chimpanzees mean. I like the “man appeared on this planet precisely when the environment was perfect for him to survive” as an indication of creation. He also conceded to the fact that life existed millions of years before Adams creation 6000 years ago, as depicted biblically yet biblically light has only existed for 6000 years and 3 days. The questions were getting tough so he switched over to abiogenesis than completely left the discussion, before providing that ever so important thing called proof that he demands from evolution.

RCR The evidence from DNA, describes these earlier beings as completely different beings from the present human species. It is not the 6% difference in DNA alone that determines whether a particular species is the same. There are other factors, such as “substitutions.” According to the Smithsonian Institute in its research for human ancestors: “Ancient DNA and Neanderthals.”

“The Neanderthal mtDNA sequences were substantially different from modern human mtDNA (Krings et al. 1997, 1999). Researchers compared the Neanderthal to modern human and chimpanzee sequences. Most human sequences differ from each other by on average 8.0 substitutions, while the human and chimpanzee sequences differ by about 55.0 substitutions. The Neanderthal and modern human sequences differed by approximately 27.2 substitutions. Using this mtDNA information, the last common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans dates to approximately 550,000 to 690,000 years ago, which is about four times older than the modern human mtDNA pool. This is consistent with the idea that Neanderthals did not contribute substantially to modern human genome.”

Further mtDNA sequences confirmed sequence differences between Neanderthals and modern humans. Researchers compared Neanderthal mtDNA to that of modern humans from different geographic regions. If Neanderthals had interbred with modern humans in Europe, then researchers would have expected to find more similarities between Neanderthals and Europeans than between Neanderthals and other modern humans. However, Neanderthals were equidistant from modern human groups, which is consistent with genetic separation between modern humans and Neanderthals.” 

Source: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals

Kyle Buntjer yeah… well he’s gone, so I think this is a fruitless venture. But it’s satisfying to see that someone else noticed he likes to move the goal post
Like · July 12 at 6:41pm

RCR As I returned to the former posts that we have made, concerning evolution, creation, and the existence of God, I was disappointed in the comments that followed my notice of absence.

I realized in reading your subsequent comments that a continuing intellectual discussion regarding these subjects will be impossible.

Regardless of what I say, I am labeled a “Charlatan,” and a self proclaimed, and misinformed “prophet.”

I have enjoyed many interesting exchanges with intelligent persons over the past 40 years. In these discussions I have always treated those who had different opinions from myself, with respect and courtesy, as they conveyed the same to me.

Unfortunately, this has not occurred in this most recent exchange. There is a tone of anger, vindictiveness, and disrespect that makes it impossible for me to continue in this discussion.

There are very good answers to all of the questions that you have presented, and the real interesting part of this exchange was just beginning. It is unfortunate that you have made the continuation of our discussion impractical. It is clear that you are both so entrenched in your atheism that you are not really interested in the possibility of any alternative.

Kyle Buntjer You’re the one with the balls to walk around calling your page “the prophecies of the messiah”

As far as calling you a charlatan goes; you say you want to have an intellectual discussion yet you’ve pushed your book on us.

Maybe you should read a biology book. They’re everywhere. And free.

I may be intrenched in atheism but that doesn’t mean that I’m not open to the possibility. Maybe Yahweh. But that’s because the bible is such a curropt (sic) book. There may be a god, but looking at the facts, there isn’t a theistic or “personal” god. There may be a first mover but then that requires an explanation of its own existence. If we’re so amazing that we demand a creator, then doesn’t that creator so inherently amazing that it requires a creator as well by its own logic? If not, that’s what you call a logical fallacy. I believe the truth is more amazing than we can dream of. Look out into space. We are so insignificant. Thinking there is a personal god is just so self righteous.

You barrage people with no evidence, move the goal post repeatedly and make repeatedly debunked arguments.

Manuel Romero On my behalf I would say definitely disrespect. You’ve repeatedly presented your argument from a position of authority, by stating your 40 years of study. You’ve made comments about conscious beings that date beyond 6000 years mean nothing to us in regards to the evolution argument, because the bible says man was created 6000 years ago. And now you claim I’m to entrenched. You realize atheism is the alternative possibility for many atheists. But hey what ever excuse you need to dodge the questions, by all means use the offense excuse.


NOTES:
[1] Romans 8:10 And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
[2] John 3:1-8 There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, “You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
[3] 2Corinthians 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.
[4] Galatians 2:16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
[5] John 3:3 Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
[6] ibid, Romans 8:10 above
[7] Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse
[8] Hebrews 1:1-2 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds
[9] Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.
[10] Deuteronomy 4:29 But from there you will seek the LORD your God, and you will find Him if you seek Him with all your heart and with all your soul.
[11] John 6:29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is what God requires, that you believe in Him whom He sent.” (RCR)
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast
[12] John 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen God; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? (RCR)
John 10:30 I and My Father are one.”
Hebrews 1:1-2 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son…
[13] The New Testament defines these three terms:

1. Natural – Gr. “Psuchikos” meaning senses, or sensual. This is a person who is naturally born into the world and is guided primarily by their feelings. (James 3:15 and Jude 19)
2. Carnal – Gr. “Sarkikos” meaning fleshly. This person is “born again” by the Spirit of God but lives and walks to please their flesh. They are described as “Babes in Christ” who have not yet grown into spiritual maturity. (Romans 8:4 1 Corinthians 3:1-4)
3. Spiritual – Gr. “Pneumatikos” meaning spiritual. This is the person who has been “born again” by the Spirit of God and is directed by and controlled by the Spirit. (Ephesians 5:18-20)

The natural man may be highly educated, possesses great ability and be endowed with considerable knowledge. He may be personable, well spoken, and possess the ability to captivate those who listen to his lectures, read his books, or see his programs by visual media. Though wise, the natural man is not able to discern spiritual principles—they are foreign to him. The meaning of scripture is hidden from those who have not yet been born again, as well as the carnal Christian, who can only understand the most basic and simple of Biblical truths.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ.



Categories: Atheists, Atheists uneducated observations, Atheists, Agnostics and Skeptics, Books, Common errors of Atheists, Common objections by Atheists, Exegesis and Hermeneutics, Origin of the Universe, Religion vs. Relationship, Robert Clifton Robinson, The age of the Earth, The Atheists inability to understand the Gospel, The Creation of the Universe, The Existence of God, Why God Allows Evil

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s