I was watching a television program a while ago and there were many Christians who were tying their faith in with science.Today the Christian lion boldness has been weakened so as to bend with the winds of deceit and Satan.Please see attachment.
Creation vs Evolution. CTA
- Thread starter Brett
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Apparently My post count is a little too low to see your attachment... Oh well.I will say this though;First, I understand where you're coming from.Second; Evolution is clearly the truth, and is not of Satan at all. There is a huge misunderstanding of Genesis in the Hellenized Christian World. It has been prevalent from Christianity's inception.Just as has been done with Job from the earliest time of the Church, so also has the narrative in the first Chapters of Genesis been misunderstood. If one will pay heed to the early Rabbis, who obviously didn't accept Christ for any sound reasons that I have ever heard given the amount of clear prophesy about Messiah exists in and outside of the Tenak {old Testament}. However, the knowledge they have of all the things in the Tenak, and especially the Pentateuch/Torah, can't be easily shrugged off. Now, from what I'm told, throughout the Talmud not one Rabbi suggested that Genesis was literal when they were arguing about it's meaning. In fact, one of the views of this work was that it is a metaphor for growing up from childhood.I say all this because I am convinced that you do not consider evolution evil for any real socio-political reason, nor do you believe it wrong {let alone "of Satan"} because of a sound study of science. Rather, you are asserting this almost definitely based on your interpretation of Genesis' first chapters.Your interpretation is not by any means 'invalid' theologically, though there are some presentable theological issues with it which most ignore. However science has directed us irrevocably to the conclusion that we have evolved, along with everything else within creation.In my search for faith, I have been pretty zealous about ruthlessly seeking out the truth. I was almost on my way to becoming a Muslim once, and I... no, rather, God showed me. I reaffirmed my faith seeking for Truth, and I have remolded various aspects of my faith searching for the truth. The truth of this matter, I am most convinced, is that evolution is a super-biological fact, just as C.S. Lewis concluded generations ago, and he did not have the level of proof we do today.The reason I say I understand where you're coming from; I used to be an ardent creationist.
My post count is higher.. That article was downright insulting. Another disgrace for the once proud banner of 'Christian', which I and many others wear.I find it hard to be proud of that title when such things as this come up.
You are half right Tetra the world is millions of years old but evolution is just a theory and has never been proved a snail lookes like a snail rather it be 1,000,000 yrs old or 2 years old.however survival of the fittest is a much more sound theory. Here is the real storyhttp://www.biblestudysite.com/begin.htm
I wouldn't call that real story. I much rather prefer that dinosaurs are over grown reptiles. Since they never stop growing in their lifetimes, and life back before the flood lasted hundreds of years, then these lizards would be huge.
I cannot read the attatchment, since my count is not high enough. The biggest problem I have with Evolution is that it requires death long before Adam ate the fruit. How could God call that "good", let alone "very good"? Since death did not enter the world until the fall it isn't possible for this to be. Unless you rearrange and majorly reinterrperit the first Chapters of Genesis. Also, there is no way that "science" can give us all of the answers. If it could then there would be no need for faith. We would be able to get all of our answers by ourselves. I believe that God keeps many things a secret from us because (a) we can't understand, and (
it is a part of his mystery whis is a part of his glory.
(alaskadrifter)
I cannot read the attatchment, since my count is not high enough. The biggest problem I have with Evolution is that it requires death long before Adam ate the fruit. How could God call that "good", let alone "very good"? Since death did not enter the world until the fall it isn't possible for this to be. Unless you rearrange and majorly reinterrperit the first Chapters of Genesis. Also, there is no way that "science" can give us all of the answers. If it could then there would be no need for faith. We would be able to get all of our answers by ourselves. I believe that God keeps many things a secret from us because (a) we can't understand, and (
it is a part of his mystery whis is a part of his glory.
Dear alaskadrifter,Evolution is nothing more than a pure outright lie. I don't know how or why it is called "science", but it should be placed in a religion.I Timothy 6:20 - O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:Yes, Adam did indeed eat the forbidden fruit, but the thing is it is not a literal fruit. (like apples and oranges) It's different than a literal fruit.Lovest thou in Christ Jesus (Yahshua) our Lord and Saviour.
I cannot read the attatchment, since my count is not high enough. The biggest problem I have with Evolution is that it requires death long before Adam ate the fruit. How could God call that "good", let alone "very good"? Since death did not enter the world until the fall it isn't possible for this to be. Unless you rearrange and majorly reinterrperit the first Chapters of Genesis. Also, there is no way that "science" can give us all of the answers. If it could then there would be no need for faith. We would be able to get all of our answers by ourselves. I believe that God keeps many things a secret from us because (a) we can't understand, and (
Dear alaskadrifter,Evolution is nothing more than a pure outright lie. I don't know how or why it is called "science", but it should be placed in a religion.I Timothy 6:20 - O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:Yes, Adam did indeed eat the forbidden fruit, but the thing is it is not a literal fruit. (like apples and oranges) It's different than a literal fruit.Lovest thou in Christ Jesus (Yahshua) our Lord and Saviour.
Kriss, evolution is just a theory just as gravity is just a theory. In science, everything is just a theory and has the ability to be proven wrong. However, just like gravity, evolution has so much evidence backing it, that it will never be disproven. And survival of the fittest is just another way of stating the most simple concept of evolution, regardless if you try to add god into the explanation.
bballplyer123, Evolution is a man made theory, that can not even break through of the real evidence. What is the real evidence you said? The real evidence is the Word of God, The Living Word...which is impossible to contradict each other. The bible is all we need and the Holy Ghost that shall teach us truth.Lovest thou in Christ Jesus (Yahshua) our Lord and Saviour.
(bballplyer123;17060)
Kriss, evolution is just a theory just as gravity is just a theory. In science, everything is just a theory and has the ability to be proven wrong. However, just like gravity, evolution has so much evidence backing it, that it will never be disproven. And survival of the fittest is just another way of stating the most simple concept of evolution, regardless if you try to add god into the explanation.
I dont agree gravity can be proven by dropping an apple or comparing outer space with earth evolution has never been proven. There is no solid proof because its a lie. as I said a snail is a snail no matter the age. The so called the missing link of human and ape never found. Birds still fly ancient or modern, fish still swim, bugs are still bugs. Survial of the fittest yes there are laws of nature that see to it the strongest survive the weak die.
Kriss, evolution is just a theory just as gravity is just a theory. In science, everything is just a theory and has the ability to be proven wrong. However, just like gravity, evolution has so much evidence backing it, that it will never be disproven. And survival of the fittest is just another way of stating the most simple concept of evolution, regardless if you try to add god into the explanation.
I dont agree gravity can be proven by dropping an apple or comparing outer space with earth evolution has never been proven. There is no solid proof because its a lie. as I said a snail is a snail no matter the age. The so called the missing link of human and ape never found. Birds still fly ancient or modern, fish still swim, bugs are still bugs. Survial of the fittest yes there are laws of nature that see to it the strongest survive the weak die.
I believe that the theory of evolution is incorrect, however as long as the individuals take the right views on the matter I have no qualms with someone believing in it.I know some Christians who believe in evolution. The difference between them and most evolutionists is that they reject random mutations as the driveing force behind it. In their views God personaly caused the changes over time (A couple say he did it over an extended period of time and hold to a day-age interpretation of Genesis 1 while the other believes he did so in a very rapid manor, within the literal seven days). They believe that God created everything and that the Bible is infalable. They simply have a different understanding of some scriptures (that I don't agree with) and of science. (And yes, Evolution is science. Science does not deal with truths but explainations for observations, even if they are incorrect explainations.)
The theory of evolution needs death and decay. Death and decay didn't enter the world until after the fall of man. When man fell, He (Adam) was a man already. You can't have both the bible and evolution. Evolution and Genesis cannot go together. The overwhelming evidence proves that "THE THEORY" of evolution cannot be true. Debunking Evolution: problems, errors, and lies exposed, in plain language for non-scientistshttp://www.newgeology.us/presentation32Problems for the Theory of Evolutionhttp://www.christiancourier.com/articles/r...ry_of_evolutionThe Scientific Case Against Evolutionhttp://www.godandscience.org/evolution/locke.htmlWhy Evolution Is Wrong --Problems For Evolution http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/fiftyreasons.htmScience against Evolutionhttp://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/http://creationevidence.org/cemframes.htmlhttp://talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.htmlhttp://www.geocities.com/reasonstobelieve2000/index.htmlhttp://www.christiananswers.net/creation/menu-fossils.htmlAbsolutely no evidence of proof evolution has been proven to be impossible, and they know it.http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/mutations.htmlHow did the theory of evolution last so long without any proof? Here's one example of how they keep the truth from you. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5081801680.htmlYou must make a distinction between macro evolution, which claims that one species can evolve into a completely different species, and micro evolution, which claims that a species can evolve to adapt to an environment, but never evolve from one species into a completely different species. Like an ant evolving into a great Dane. Micro is witnessed in nature every day. Nobody denies it. Macro has no proof, and has relied on muddying the waters between the two, and a propaganda campaign to hide the truth from the general public.Can people and animals adapt to their surroundings? Sure, we see it in nature all the time. Do these changes lead one species to evolve into a completely different species? No, this has never been witnessed in nature, and this has never been proven. What was the first cause that caused everything else? Ask a naturalist what started it all, and the only answer that they can come up with is "chance". But chance is not a force, it simply cannot be the cause of anything, much less the cause of everything. The only legitimate sense of the word "chance" has to do with mathematical probability. Chance determines nothing. mathematical probability is merely a way of measuring what actually does happen.
"Yet in the naturalistic and evolutionary parlance, chance becomes something that determines what happens in the absence of any other cause or design...In effect, naturalists have imputed to "chance" the ability to cause and determine what accures. And that is an irrational concept. The concept is so fraught with problems from a rational and philosophical viewpoint that one hardly knows where to begin. But lets begin at the beginning. Where did matter come from in the first place? The naturalist would have to say that either that all matter is eternal, or that everything appeared by chance out of nothing. The latter option is clearly irrational. But suppose the naturalist opts to believe that matter is eternal. An obvious question arises: What caused the first event that originally set evolutionary process in motion? The only answer available to the naturalist is that is that chance made it happen. It literally came out of nowhere. No one and nothing made it happen. That, too, is clearly irrational.... Abandon logic and you are left with pure nonsense. In many ways the natualists' deification of 'chance' is worse than all the various myths of other false religions, because it obliterates all meaning and sense from everything. But it is, once again, pure religion of the most pagan variety, requiring a spiritually fatal leap of faith into an abyss of utter irrationality. It is the age- old religion of fools (psalm 14:1)-- but in modern, "scientific" dress... What would prompt anyone to embrace such a system? Why would someone opt for a worldview that eliminates all that is rational? It boils down to the sheer love of sin....Evolution was introduced as an atheistic alternative to the biblical view of creation. According to evolution, man created God rather than vice versa. And as we have seen, the evolutionists' ultimate agenda is to eliminate faith in God all together and thereby do away with moral accountability.... To put it simply, evolution was invented in order to eliminate the God of Genesis and thereby oust the Lawgiver and obliterate the inviolability of His law. Evolution is simply the latest means our fallen race has devised in order to supress our innate knowledge and the biblical testimony that there is a God and that we are accountable to Him (Romans 1:28). By embracing evolution, modern society aims to do away with morality, responsibility, and guilt. Society has embraced evolution with such enthusiasm because people imagine that it eliminates the Judge and leaves them free to do whatever they want without guilt and without consequences." Judge Marvin L. Lubenow writes, "The real issue in the creation/evolution debate is not the existence of God. The real issue is the nature of God. To think of evolution as basically atheistic is to misunderstand the uniqueness of evolution. Evolution was not designed as a general attack against theism. It was designed as a specific attack against the God of the Bible, and the God of the Bible is clearly revealed through the docrtine of creation. Obviously, if a person is an atheist, it would be normal for him to also be an evolutionist. But evolution is as comfortable with theism as it is with atheism. An evolutionist is perfectly free to choose any god he wishes, as long as it is not the God of the Bible. The gods allowed by evolution are private, subjective, and artificial. They bother no one and make no absolute ethical demands. However, the God of the Bible is the Creator, Sustainer, Saviour, and Judge. all are responsible to him. He has an agenda that conflicts with that of sinful humans. For man to be created in the image of God is very awsome. For God to be created in the image of man is very comfortable." "... The notion that natural evolutionary processes can account for the origin of all living species has never been and never will be established as fact. Nor is it "scientific" in any true sense of the word. Science deals with what can be observed and reproduced by experimentation. The origin of life can be neither observed nor reproduces in any laboratory. By definition, then, true science can give us no knowledge whatsoever about about where we came from or how we got here. Belief in evolutionary theory is a matter of sheer faith. And dogmatic belief in any naturalistic theory is no more "scientific" than any other kind of religious faith... ...scripture is God's own eyewitness account of what happened in the beginning. When it deals with the origin of the universe, all science can offer is conjecture. Science has proven nothing that negates the Genesis record. In fact, the Genesis record answers the mysteries of science.(Macarthur from his book "Think Biblically")
The hard facts of science never contradict revealed scripture, but the truth of scripture should never be presented to the public from a platform of science. Atheism, claiming to be the superior, or ultimate source of truth, makes these claims because they believe that their theory and logic is foundationally scientific. (the only thing that they trust). Thus, discrediting Atheism on it's own grounds (science, logic etc.), such as evolution, does not in any way mean that scripture must now be proved by the same. Atheists will alway think the simple truths of scripture, which we are commanded to preach only, namely the Gospel, to be foolishness because these things are spiritually decerned (1 Corinthians 2:14).
"Yet in the naturalistic and evolutionary parlance, chance becomes something that determines what happens in the absence of any other cause or design...In effect, naturalists have imputed to "chance" the ability to cause and determine what accures. And that is an irrational concept. The concept is so fraught with problems from a rational and philosophical viewpoint that one hardly knows where to begin. But lets begin at the beginning. Where did matter come from in the first place? The naturalist would have to say that either that all matter is eternal, or that everything appeared by chance out of nothing. The latter option is clearly irrational. But suppose the naturalist opts to believe that matter is eternal. An obvious question arises: What caused the first event that originally set evolutionary process in motion? The only answer available to the naturalist is that is that chance made it happen. It literally came out of nowhere. No one and nothing made it happen. That, too, is clearly irrational.... Abandon logic and you are left with pure nonsense. In many ways the natualists' deification of 'chance' is worse than all the various myths of other false religions, because it obliterates all meaning and sense from everything. But it is, once again, pure religion of the most pagan variety, requiring a spiritually fatal leap of faith into an abyss of utter irrationality. It is the age- old religion of fools (psalm 14:1)-- but in modern, "scientific" dress... What would prompt anyone to embrace such a system? Why would someone opt for a worldview that eliminates all that is rational? It boils down to the sheer love of sin....Evolution was introduced as an atheistic alternative to the biblical view of creation. According to evolution, man created God rather than vice versa. And as we have seen, the evolutionists' ultimate agenda is to eliminate faith in God all together and thereby do away with moral accountability.... To put it simply, evolution was invented in order to eliminate the God of Genesis and thereby oust the Lawgiver and obliterate the inviolability of His law. Evolution is simply the latest means our fallen race has devised in order to supress our innate knowledge and the biblical testimony that there is a God and that we are accountable to Him (Romans 1:28). By embracing evolution, modern society aims to do away with morality, responsibility, and guilt. Society has embraced evolution with such enthusiasm because people imagine that it eliminates the Judge and leaves them free to do whatever they want without guilt and without consequences." Judge Marvin L. Lubenow writes, "The real issue in the creation/evolution debate is not the existence of God. The real issue is the nature of God. To think of evolution as basically atheistic is to misunderstand the uniqueness of evolution. Evolution was not designed as a general attack against theism. It was designed as a specific attack against the God of the Bible, and the God of the Bible is clearly revealed through the docrtine of creation. Obviously, if a person is an atheist, it would be normal for him to also be an evolutionist. But evolution is as comfortable with theism as it is with atheism. An evolutionist is perfectly free to choose any god he wishes, as long as it is not the God of the Bible. The gods allowed by evolution are private, subjective, and artificial. They bother no one and make no absolute ethical demands. However, the God of the Bible is the Creator, Sustainer, Saviour, and Judge. all are responsible to him. He has an agenda that conflicts with that of sinful humans. For man to be created in the image of God is very awsome. For God to be created in the image of man is very comfortable." "... The notion that natural evolutionary processes can account for the origin of all living species has never been and never will be established as fact. Nor is it "scientific" in any true sense of the word. Science deals with what can be observed and reproduced by experimentation. The origin of life can be neither observed nor reproduces in any laboratory. By definition, then, true science can give us no knowledge whatsoever about about where we came from or how we got here. Belief in evolutionary theory is a matter of sheer faith. And dogmatic belief in any naturalistic theory is no more "scientific" than any other kind of religious faith... ...scripture is God's own eyewitness account of what happened in the beginning. When it deals with the origin of the universe, all science can offer is conjecture. Science has proven nothing that negates the Genesis record. In fact, the Genesis record answers the mysteries of science.(Macarthur from his book "Think Biblically")
The hard facts of science never contradict revealed scripture, but the truth of scripture should never be presented to the public from a platform of science. Atheism, claiming to be the superior, or ultimate source of truth, makes these claims because they believe that their theory and logic is foundationally scientific. (the only thing that they trust). Thus, discrediting Atheism on it's own grounds (science, logic etc.), such as evolution, does not in any way mean that scripture must now be proved by the same. Atheists will alway think the simple truths of scripture, which we are commanded to preach only, namely the Gospel, to be foolishness because these things are spiritually decerned (1 Corinthians 2:14).
evolution is a myth. some how in that tree of man we just skipped the neaderthal? and, christian scientist say that if you lived up to 1000 years like the pre-flood times=your head and appendages would be different. these ape men you see in these museums have ADAPTATIONS TO COINCIDE WITH US COMING FROM AN APE. HOGWASH. THE BOOK OF GENESIS IS QUITE LITERAL. adam was the first man on earth, eve the first woman. and the devil has done his monkying with gods word. hell we cannot cure cancer but a scientist can tell me that a mans bones are scores of thousands of years old. that is rediculous. and yes i believe there is a devil.
(Brett;11206)
I was watching a television program a while ago and there were many Christians who were tying their faith in with science.Today the Christian lion boldness has been weakened so as to bend with the winds of deceit and Satan.Please see attachment.
Hi! My name's Pete. I'm the new guy here.re - "Christians who were tying their faith in with science."I am one of those Christians. The last part of your comment is unclear to me. While I could take my own guess as to what it means I'd rather have you tell me what it means.I am unable to read the attachement because it requires me to have 10 points or more while I only have 1 so far.Pete
I was watching a television program a while ago and there were many Christians who were tying their faith in with science.Today the Christian lion boldness has been weakened so as to bend with the winds of deceit and Satan.Please see attachment.
Hi! My name's Pete. I'm the new guy here.re - "Christians who were tying their faith in with science."I am one of those Christians. The last part of your comment is unclear to me. While I could take my own guess as to what it means I'd rather have you tell me what it means.I am unable to read the attachement because it requires me to have 10 points or more while I only have 1 so far.Pete
(tim bennett;17122)
evolution is a myth.
With all due respect sir - What evidence do you have to that effect? Are you well educated in the theory of evolution? Have you ever read through a serious book on the subject? If the answer is no to all of those things then I recommend that you first learn a theory before you claim its not true.
...some how in that tree of man we just skipped the neaderthal?
There seem to be two theories on that. One is that the neanderthals interbreeded with modern man in certain areas in Europe and blended into one species, with the neanderthal genes all but gone now. Diluted given enough time. DNA evidence supports this conclusion. Others hold that neanderthals simply died out. In the later case neanderthals were not ancestors of modern man.
...and, christian scientist ...
What is a "christian scientist"? Is that a Christian who is also a scientist or a Christian who is a member of Christian Scientists?
...say that if you lived up to 1000 years like the pre-flood times=your head and appendages would be different.
Why? What led you to believe this? The fossil record has never shown anything like that.
... these ape men you see in these museums have ADAPTATIONS TO COINCIDE WITH US COMING FROM AN APE.
It is a common error to believe that we evolved from apes. No evolutionist would every make such a claim. An evolutionist would hold that both ape and man are both decendents from the same primate.
THE BOOK OF GENESIS IS QUITE LITERAL.
I agree. But that doesn't imply that Genesis is inconsistent with the best of modern science. If you're worried about the huge differences in time then you must know of the idea that perhaps God was speaking of time as recorded by him and not time as recorded by man. Is this my own idea which I'm building into Genesis so that my idea of Genesis will work? Well read this and you tell mePsalms 90:4 - "For a thousand years in your sight are like a day gone by, or like a watch in the night."Job 10:5 - "Are your days like those of a mortal, or your year like those of man?"So we see that the idea certainly isn't new and it is found in the Bible. If we take the above passages to be literally true then we can use them in Genesis so that Genesis and science agree as they must. There is a whole book on tying Genesis into a one-to-one correspondence with the best modern science has to offer. The book is called "In the Beginning ... Biblical Creation and Science," Nathan Aviezer, KTAV Publishing House (1990)The author is a physicist and a devout Jew.
..hell we cannot cure cancer ..
What??? Since when can't we cure cancer???? I had a terrible and extremly deadly form of cancer back in 2000 and I've been cured and am around to tell you about it.Best wishesPete
evolution is a myth.
With all due respect sir - What evidence do you have to that effect? Are you well educated in the theory of evolution? Have you ever read through a serious book on the subject? If the answer is no to all of those things then I recommend that you first learn a theory before you claim its not true.
...some how in that tree of man we just skipped the neaderthal?
There seem to be two theories on that. One is that the neanderthals interbreeded with modern man in certain areas in Europe and blended into one species, with the neanderthal genes all but gone now. Diluted given enough time. DNA evidence supports this conclusion. Others hold that neanderthals simply died out. In the later case neanderthals were not ancestors of modern man.
...and, christian scientist ...
What is a "christian scientist"? Is that a Christian who is also a scientist or a Christian who is a member of Christian Scientists?
...say that if you lived up to 1000 years like the pre-flood times=your head and appendages would be different.
Why? What led you to believe this? The fossil record has never shown anything like that.
... these ape men you see in these museums have ADAPTATIONS TO COINCIDE WITH US COMING FROM AN APE.
It is a common error to believe that we evolved from apes. No evolutionist would every make such a claim. An evolutionist would hold that both ape and man are both decendents from the same primate.
THE BOOK OF GENESIS IS QUITE LITERAL.
I agree. But that doesn't imply that Genesis is inconsistent with the best of modern science. If you're worried about the huge differences in time then you must know of the idea that perhaps God was speaking of time as recorded by him and not time as recorded by man. Is this my own idea which I'm building into Genesis so that my idea of Genesis will work? Well read this and you tell mePsalms 90:4 - "For a thousand years in your sight are like a day gone by, or like a watch in the night."Job 10:5 - "Are your days like those of a mortal, or your year like those of man?"So we see that the idea certainly isn't new and it is found in the Bible. If we take the above passages to be literally true then we can use them in Genesis so that Genesis and science agree as they must. There is a whole book on tying Genesis into a one-to-one correspondence with the best modern science has to offer. The book is called "In the Beginning ... Biblical Creation and Science," Nathan Aviezer, KTAV Publishing House (1990)The author is a physicist and a devout Jew.
..hell we cannot cure cancer ..
What??? Since when can't we cure cancer???? I had a terrible and extremly deadly form of cancer back in 2000 and I've been cured and am around to tell you about it.Best wishesPete
verzanumi24
Advanced Member
(Brett;11206)
I was watching a television program a while ago and there were many Christians who were tying their faith in with science.Today the Christian lion boldness has been weakened so as to bend with the winds of deceit and Satan.Please see attachment.
The Bible says that God created the earth, it did not say when or how old the earth is. Simply because mankind have been on the earth about 6,000 thousand years, does not mean that the earth is 6,000 thousand years old.
I was watching a television program a while ago and there were many Christians who were tying their faith in with science.Today the Christian lion boldness has been weakened so as to bend with the winds of deceit and Satan.Please see attachment.
The Bible says that God created the earth, it did not say when or how old the earth is. Simply because mankind have been on the earth about 6,000 thousand years, does not mean that the earth is 6,000 thousand years old.
(Biblical Tetragramaton;11382)
My post count is higher.. That article was downright insulting. Another disgrace for the once proud banner of 'Christian', which I and many others wear.I find it hard to be proud of that title when such things as this come up.
Can you tell me what the article was about? Thanks.Best regardsPete
My post count is higher.. That article was downright insulting. Another disgrace for the once proud banner of 'Christian', which I and many others wear.I find it hard to be proud of that title when such things as this come up.
Can you tell me what the article was about? Thanks.Best regardsPete
Similar threads
