What About The Little People

[Mattnxtc 0]

It has come up already in one of the threads so I will attempt to address it now. Now a common thing said is that since babies and young children arent capable of accepting or rejecting God that to send them to hell is just not right. How could you follow a God that sends children to hell? Well lets look at some biblical versesThe popular theory and one that I also believe is that if the child is to young to be able to make a conscience decision then God being a just God will choose to save them. Here are some passages for the basis of this claim: Isaiah 7:16 - "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken."This verse makes it clear that there is a time before a child knows right from wrong 1 Samuel 3:6-7 - "The Lord called yet again, 'Samuel!' So Samuel arose and went to Eli and said, 'Here I am, for you called me.' But he answered, "I did not call, my son, lie down again.' Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord nor had the word of the Lord yet been revealed to him."Clearly this shows that Samuel was to young to know and understand. This also points to the fact that there is a time when we as children dont grasp the concept yet, but we are not forsaken for it. 2 Samuel 12:22-23 - "He said, 'While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, 'Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.' But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."Now this is David talkin about his son who has just died. As you see, David who we know went to heaven says that one day he will see his son again. Since there is only one place that could be, it makes heaven the place. All three verses point to the fact that there is a time where we as children arent capable of understanding what is at stake. 2 Samuel in particular makes the case that David knew he would see his son in Heaven.

[KowboyKoop 0]

It has come up already in one of the threads so I will attempt to address it now. Now a common thing said is that since babies and young children arent capable of accepting or rejecting God that to send them to hell is just not right. How could you follow a God that sends children to hell? Well lets look at some biblical versesThe popular theory and one that I also believe is that if the child is to young to be able to make a conscience decision then God being a just God will choose to save them. Here are some passages for the basis of this claim: Isaiah 7:16 - "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken."This verse makes it clear that there is a time before a child knows right from wrong 1 Samuel 3:6-7 - "The Lord called yet again, 'Samuel!' So Samuel arose and went to Eli and said, 'Here I am, for you called me.' But he answered, "I did not call, my son, lie down again.' Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord nor had the word of the Lord yet been revealed to him."Clearly this shows that Samuel was to young to know and understand. This also points to the fact that there is a time when we as children dont grasp the concept yet, but we are not forsaken for it. 2 Samuel 12:22-23 - "He said, 'While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, 'Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.' But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."Now this is David talkin about his son who has just died. As you see, David who we know went to heaven says that one day he will see his son again. Since there is only one place that could be, it makes heaven the place. All three verses point to the fact that there is a time where we as children arent capable of understanding what is at stake. 2 Samuel in particular makes the case that David knew he would see his son in Heaven.

LOL!! SOOOOOO..a human being, David, who can not think on the level of God, just KNOWS that his baby is going to heaven..so thus that is God's will...even though David can't think on the level of God..he can decipher exactly how God works. yeah...okay...lol. What are your thoughts on evolution?? Oh wait..I guess all those scientists have just lied this whole time about the origin of human beings, right??? LOL.

[Mattnxtc 0]

LOL!! SOOOOOO..a human being, David, who can not think on the level of God, just KNOWS that his baby is going to heaven..so thus that is God's will...even though David can't think on the level of God..he can decipher exactly how God works. yeah...okay...lol. What are your thoughts on evolution?? Oh wait..I guess all those scientists have just lied this whole time about the origin of human beings, right??? LOL.

You need to read up on David apparently. Since God made it clear that his ancestor would be the King. God and David had a special relationship.What about evolution? Actually do some research on it. Ask about the origin of humans. Youll find that science doesnt have an answer. Youll find that they are missing a ton of links. That they have an ape and a man. No in betweens. All those great things they should you in high school...Those were all wrong...we know this. Its common knowledge.

[AlphaOmega 0]

You need to read up on David apparently. Since God made it clear that his ancestor would be the King. God and David had a special relationship.What about evolution? Actually do some research on it. Ask about the origin of humans. Youll find that science doesnt have an answer. Youll find that they are missing a ton of links. That they have an ape and a man. No in betweens. All those great things they should you in high school...Those were all wrong...we know this. Its common knowledge.

Evolution is a developing concept that grows/expands as we seek to find more knowledge about our past revealed through increasingly developed scientific methods.So, in essence, yes, you could argue that evolution doesn't answer the question of human origin.Using God to explain origin, though, is the equivalent of me saying, "A magic snapdragon created the universe." If I supported it with my own text with historical backing, then my theory would have just as much relavence as any God theory, and that should be troubling.

[ShakeZuma 585]

You need to read up on David apparently. Since God made it clear that his ancestor would be the King. God and David had a special relationship.What about evolution? Actually do some research on it. Ask about the origin of humans. Youll find that science doesnt have an answer. Youll find that they are missing a ton of links. That they have an ape and a man. No in betweens. All those great things they should you in high school...Those were all wrong...we know this. Its common knowledge.

You're completely correct. Science hasn't completely proven evolution and where man comes from, so obviously the next logical turn in reasoning is that a magical man in the sky said let there be light and *poof*... we're here.That does make more sense.

[crowTrobot 2]

That they have an ape and a man. No in betweens.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/default.htmhttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/links.htmlhttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs

[Mattnxtc 0]

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/default.htmhttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/links.htmlhttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs

haha u really should find new stuff crow..same sites same problems as always..but eh...what else can u do

[Canada 0]

It has come up already in one of the threads so I will attempt to address it now. Now a common thing said is that since babies and young children arent capable of accepting or rejecting God that to send them to hell is just not right. How could you follow a God that sends children to hell? Well lets look at some biblical versesThe popular theory and one that I also believe is that if the child is to young to be able to make a conscience decision then God being a just God will choose to save them. Here are some passages for the basis of this claim: Isaiah 7:16 - "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken."This verse makes it clear that there is a time before a child knows right from wrong 1 Samuel 3:6-7 - "The Lord called yet again, 'Samuel!' So Samuel arose and went to Eli and said, 'Here I am, for you called me.' But he answered, "I did not call, my son, lie down again.' Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord nor had the word of the Lord yet been revealed to him."Clearly this shows that Samuel was to young to know and understand. This also points to the fact that there is a time when we as children dont grasp the concept yet, but we are not forsaken for it. 2 Samuel 12:22-23 - "He said, 'While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, 'Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.' But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."Now this is David talkin about his son who has just died. As you see, David who we know went to heaven says that one day he will see his son again. Since there is only one place that could be, it makes heaven the place. All three verses point to the fact that there is a time where we as children arent capable of understanding what is at stake. 2 Samuel in particular makes the case that David knew he would see his son in Heaven.

What about the souls of adults who have never been introduced to Christianity?

[brvheart 1,759]

What about the souls of adults who have never been introduced to Christianity?

There are many ways to approach this subject. The historical evidences for Christianity (see Christian Evidences page), which verify Christ’s identity through the miraculous events, prove that there is a God. Likewise, so does fulfilled prophecy discussed in the fulfilled prophecy page. There are also many arguments from logic. Here we will just use one argument from logic that I think is particularly powerful, and one which the Bible uses in the first Chapter of Romans - the argument from design.The passage under consideration is Romans 1:18-25. Verse 18 says that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against men who deliberately suppress the truth. What truth do they suppress? The next verse tells us: “because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.” How has God made it evident? “I have never seen God,” one may object. Again, the next verse tells us: “for since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so they are without excuse.”So the fact that there is a God of great power and divine nature has been clearly seen, being understood by looking at the creation. A little reflection will show how this is truly the case based on observations in the real world which even the slowest of men can deduce. Design demands a designer. One cannot take the 26 letters of the alphabet, throw them into a box, and shuffle them into a perfect poem. Nor can monkeys in a print shop come up with the Gettysburg Address, no matter how long you leave them there. Design demands a designer. If you were walking on a trail in the forest with a friend, and you both find a watch on the ground, how would you think it came into existence? Suppose your friend told you that he really and truly believed, the pieces of that watch formed and organized themselves up into a working time piece? Who would not think that person would be insane to actually believe that? Can one imagine a tornado blowing through a junk yard and producing a Boeing 747 Jet?But a watch or a 747 Jet is mere child’s play compared to the complexity of the human body which contains over 10 trillion cells organized in such a complex fashion we cannot even fully analyze it let alone reproduce it. In the nucleus of each cell is the DNA molecule, an extremely complex computer that directs growth and reproduction. If one were to take out all the DNA from a human body, stretch it out and link them together, it would reach from here to the sun and back 400 times! All the books that have ever been written do not contain the amount of information contained in the DNA of one single person. Sir Francis Crick, who discovered the DNA molecule in 1956, himself an atheist, stated that not even in 3 billion years of evolution could this have come about by accident. So he postulated that some advanced beings living in outer space must have put it here.No one believes a watch or Jet can come about by accident. Yet many who would never believe that, believe the infinitely more complex human body did! Not to mention the rest of creation. Such a thing is an outrage to the logical and reasoning capacities God gave the human mind. That is why God says “so they are without excuse.” No one can stand before God on judgment day and say “I did not know you existed.” God will answer “I created your mind and gave you the rational capacities I know you have. You had to go against your logical and rational faculties to conclude I did not exist.”If the evidence is that strong, why are there people who do not believe in God? The next verse (Romans 1:21) answers that. “For even though they knew God, they did not want to honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”When I meet a nice person who does not believe in God, it appears on the surface that he is just an unbiased objective person who perhaps just hasn’t been convinced. But if he goes to the grave with that belief, God’s word says the real problem, in the persons heart, is he “did not want to honor Him as God, or give thanks.” Romans 1:25 gives the reason behind this: “For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator.”Rather than worship and submit to the God who created them, they rather worship themselves. It is quite interesting that every religion in the world except Christianity does exactly that. Their concept of heaven is attained by man’s works, performance, and attainments; by his greatness, not God’s. Man is on the throne, God is relegated to insignificance or otherwise diminished.I used to be totally mystified when I would explain God’s truth to someone (who had told me they were completely open minded), with good, solid, and convincing evidence, and their reaction would be one of indifference and disinterest. Then when another religious point of view or philosophy would come along that had absolutely no evidentiary basis whatsoever to recommend it, that person would immediately gravitate to it and believe it! Looking back on it, I can now see the other view they gravitated to, without exception, allowed them to put man (themselves) in the position of pre-eminence and diminished the appropriate response of the creature submitting to and honoring his Maker.John 7:17 rings true, where Jesus said “ If any man is willing to do His will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God...”

[Jimshoen 0]

Matt 18:2-4 (NIV) 2He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.Rom 2:1-16 (NIV) 1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance? 5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism. 12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

[crowTrobot 2]

haha u really should find new stuff crow..same sites same problems as always..but eh...what else can u do

instead of laughing like a hyena at my posts as you usually do why don't you actually point out what you think specific problems are and maybe something meaningful can be discussed. are you saying that the entire documented sequence of what evolutionists consider transitional proto-human fossils (outlined in the above threads) are actually extinct apes? if so do you think you are smarter or more informed than the 99% of the scientific community (which also includes most objective theistic scientists) who disagree with you? you have studied bible history somewhat (presumably about the same as me although you reached entirely different conclusions), so i can't fault you for trying to sound like you know what you're talking about in that area. but you really could use a little more humility when it comes to discussing evidence for evolution, since you've never posted anything to indicate that you have any understand of even the basics.

[brvheart 1,759]

instead of laughing like a hyena at my posts as you usually do why don't you actually point out what you think specific problems are and maybe something meaningful can be discussed. are you saying that the entire documented sequence of what evolutionists consider transitional proto-human fossils (outlined in the above threads) are actually extinct apes? if so do you think you are smarter or more informed than the 99% of the scientific community (which also includes most objective theistic scientists) who disagree with you? you have studied bible history somewhat (presumably about the same as me although you reached entirely different conclusions), so i can't fault you for trying to sound like you know what you're talking about in that area. but you really could use a little more humility when it comes to discussing evidence for evolution, since you've never posted anything to indicate that you have any understand of even the basics.

This is an incorrect statement. Many influential scholars believe that there is no evidence of evolution. Like this guy. An Oxford professor who has been an atheist is whole life. He is arguably the worlds most influential and most famous atheist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew In Flew’s words, he simply “had to go where the evidence leads.”

[Mattnxtc 0]

instead of laughing like a hyena at my posts as you usually do why don't you actually point out what you think specific problems are and maybe something meaningful can be discussed. are you saying that the entire documented sequence of what evolutionists consider transitional proto-human fossils (outlined in the above threads) are actually extinct apes? if so do you think you are smarter or more informed than the 99% of the scientific community (which also includes most objective theistic scientists) who disagree with you? you have studied bible history somewhat (presumably about the same as me although you reached entirely different conclusions), so i can't fault you for trying to sound like you know what you're talking about in that area. but you really could use a little more humility when it comes to discussing evidence for evolution, since you've never posted anything to indicate that you have any understand of even the basics.

99% is an extreme exaggeration. maybe 40-50% at most and this number continues to fall. Heck even those in charge realize that the theory is facing an uphill battle just on the lack of evidence that was supposed to have been found. You remember that evidence, the fossils that were supposed to have been foudn by now. Since you felt the need to post propoganda...I might as well rebutt it:http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/evolprob.htmlhttp://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/cartoon.htmhttp://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/pe00cont.htmlthere you posted three so i posted three also

[crowTrobot 2]

99% is an extreme exaggeration. maybe 40-50% at most and this number continues to fall. Heck even those in charge realize that the theory is facing an uphill battle just on the lack of evidence that was supposed to have been found.

nice dream world you live in. if you're talking about polls of the general public, then yes, they are split pretty evenly. but polls of scientists are 99% pro evolution. there is plenty of controversy about the mechanism behind it, about how life started in the first place, and about whether it might have been directed, but among scientists there is no controversy that it happened.

You remember that evidence, the fossils that were supposed to have been foudn by now.

you mean these? -http://www.origins.tv/darwin/transitionals.htm#Transitionalshttp://www.godandscience.org/evolution/evolprob.htmlout-of-date misinformation propaganda site created with a pre-existing creationist agenda - in most recent years only nit-picking silly minor things what we don't (or didn't at the time) understand about evolution - but not even challenging the overall picture (does not even incorporate things like continental drift etc.) Badly in need of an update - i would not have posted this one even if i was on your side.http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/cartoon.htmOMG this is in even worse need of updating - mostly just references gish's published and discredited arguements from the *1980's*. try again.http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/pe00cont.htmlok, this one is more up to date. however note that some of the evidence and arguments presented on this site *accept* that evolution has occured, but argues that an intelligent creator is necessary to jump start and direct it, which is an entirely different issue - one which i agree is worthy of debate (unlike nonsense about lack of transitional fossils etc).

[Mattnxtc 0]

nice dream world you live in. if you're talking about polls of the general public, then yes, they are split pretty evenly. but polls of scientists are 99% pro evolution. there is plenty of controversy about the mechanism behind it, about how life started in the first place, and about whether it might have been directed, but among scientists there is no controversy that it happened.this just isnt truehttp://www.godandscience.org/evolution/evolprob.htmlout-of-date misinformation propaganda site created with a pre-existing creationist agenda - in most recent years only nit-picking silly minor things what we don't (or didn't at the time) understand about evolution - but not even challenging the overall picture (does not even incorporate things like continental drift etc.) Badly in need of an update - i would not have posted this one even if i was on your side.2004 is out of date? imagine thathttp://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/pe00cont.htmlok, this one is more up to date. however note that some of the evidence and arguments presented on this site *accept* that evolution has occured, but argues that an intelligent creator is necessary to jump start and direct it, which is an entirely different issue - one which i agree is worthy of debate (unlike nonsense about lack of transitional fossils etc).nobody ever said that some evolution has happened...

you mean these? -http://www.origins.tv/darwin/transitionals.htm#Transitionals

to quote you..this site is badly out of date...The bird tree is wrong and it has been shown wrong. The humanoid tree is the overzealousness of scientists to prove somethign that isnt there. All those famous skeletons that we were all shown in high school turned out to be fakes...But for some reason they keep teaching it to us even though we know they are fakes...I wonder why

[Canada 0]

There are many ways to approach this subject. The historical evidences for Christianity (see Christian Evidences page), which verify Christ’s identity through the miraculous events, prove that there is a God. Likewise, so does fulfilled prophecy discussed in the fulfilled prophecy page. There are also many arguments from logic. Here we will just use one argument from logic that I think is particularly powerful, and one which the Bible uses in the first Chapter of Romans - the argument from design.The passage under consideration is Romans 1:18-25. Verse 18 says that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against men who deliberately suppress the truth. What truth do they suppress? The next verse tells us: “because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.” How has God made it evident? “I have never seen God,” one may object. Again, the next verse tells us: “for since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so they are without excuse.”So the fact that there is a God of great power and divine nature has been clearly seen, being understood by looking at the creation. A little reflection will show how this is truly the case based on observations in the real world which even the slowest of men can deduce. Design demands a designer. One cannot take the 26 letters of the alphabet, throw them into a box, and shuffle them into a perfect poem. Nor can monkeys in a print shop come up with the Gettysburg Address, no matter how long you leave them there. Design demands a designer. If you were walking on a trail in the forest with a friend, and you both find a watch on the ground, how would you think it came into existence? Suppose your friend told you that he really and truly believed, the pieces of that watch formed and organized themselves up into a working time piece? Who would not think that person would be insane to actually believe that? Can one imagine a tornado blowing through a junk yard and producing a Boeing 747 Jet?But a watch or a 747 Jet is mere child’s play compared to the complexity of the human body which contains over 10 trillion cells organized in such a complex fashion we cannot even fully analyze it let alone reproduce it. In the nucleus of each cell is the DNA molecule, an extremely complex computer that directs growth and reproduction. If one were to take out all the DNA from a human body, stretch it out and link them together, it would reach from here to the sun and back 400 times! All the books that have ever been written do not contain the amount of information contained in the DNA of one single person. Sir Francis Crick, who discovered the DNA molecule in 1956, himself an atheist, stated that not even in 3 billion years of evolution could this have come about by accident. So he postulated that some advanced beings living in outer space must have put it here.No one believes a watch or Jet can come about by accident. Yet many who would never believe that, believe the infinitely more complex human body did! Not to mention the rest of creation. Such a thing is an outrage to the logical and reasoning capacities God gave the human mind. That is why God says “so they are without excuse.” No one can stand before God on judgment day and say “I did not know you existed.” God will answer “I created your mind and gave you the rational capacities I know you have. You had to go against your logical and rational faculties to conclude I did not exist.”If the evidence is that strong, why are there people who do not believe in God? The next verse (Romans 1:21) answers that. “For even though they knew God, they did not want to honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”When I meet a nice person who does not believe in God, it appears on the surface that he is just an unbiased objective person who perhaps just hasn’t been convinced. But if he goes to the grave with that belief, God’s word says the real problem, in the persons heart, is he “did not want to honor Him as God, or give thanks.” Romans 1:25 gives the reason behind this: “For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator.”Rather than worship and submit to the God who created them, they rather worship themselves. It is quite interesting that every religion in the world except Christianity does exactly that. Their concept of heaven is attained by man’s works, performance, and attainments; by his greatness, not God’s. Man is on the throne, God is relegated to insignificance or otherwise diminished.I used to be totally mystified when I would explain God’s truth to someone (who had told me they were completely open minded), with good, solid, and convincing evidence, and their reaction would be one of indifference and disinterest. Then when another religious point of view or philosophy would come along that had absolutely no evidentiary basis whatsoever to recommend it, that person would immediately gravitate to it and believe it! Looking back on it, I can now see the other view they gravitated to, without exception, allowed them to put man (themselves) in the position of pre-eminence and diminished the appropriate response of the creature submitting to and honoring his Maker.John 7:17 rings true, where Jesus said “ If any man is willing to do His will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God...”

Hi.There is at least one thing worse than who preaches mindless bullshit, and that's a plagarist.1) Anybody can cut & paste2) It doesn't answer the question3) It makes you look like an idiotHave a nice day nowAs I asked before, what happens to the souls of adults that haven't been introduced to Christianity? Anybody with a clue want to answer?

[LongLiveYorke 38]

As I asked before, what happens to the souls of adults that haven't been introduced to Christianity? Anybody with a clue want to answer?

They go to hell. Remember Dante's Inferno?

[crowTrobot 2]

this just isnt true

since the notion that 50%+ of scientists don't believe in evolution would just be sheer stupidity, i have assume you are confusing polls asking scientists if they believe evolution is the most likely cause of speciation (vast majority favor it), with polls asking if evolution necessarily precludes god, intervening or otherwise. in the latter case you would be correct, because only a minority think evolution precludes god. but in the former case you would be very badly misinformed. if you think a poll has shown that 50%+ of scientists don't believe evolution happened i would love to see it specifically.

2004 is out of date? imagine that

everything listed after 2000 deals with issues within the framework of evolution about things we don't (or didn't at the time) understand, and not with major challenges to evolutionary theory as a whole. there are more significant challenges listed prior to 2000, and they are badly out of date, yes. that isn't a very good site, even by creationist standards.

nobody ever said that some evolution has happened...

just look at the dude featured in the very first section - "Flew, 1984 still accepts Darwinian evolution but doubts that it can explain the ultimate origins of life"also the entire "religion" section deals with how evolution and theism are not incompatable

to quote you..this site is badly out of date...The bird tree is wrong and it has been shown wrong.

not sure what you mean. trees are constantly being updated as we learn more. that's how science works. just because we do not know every tiny detail doesn't mean the framework of evolution is incorrect.

The humanoid tree is the overzealousness of scientists to prove somethign that isnt there. All those famous skeletons that we were all shown in high school turned out to be fakes...

i assume you're referring to piltdown which is old news that no scientist considers or cares about. obviously the vast majority of hominoid fossils that the tree is based on aren't fakes, and if an odd fake is discovered it is immediately taken out of account. you seem to think scientists aren't trying to be objective about these trees, when there is a well-established peer review system in place for the very purpose of keeping things objective.

[timwakefield 68]

Here are 2 reasons that the fossil record is incomplete, and they are real reasons, arrived at by the scientific method. They are not excuses.The first is that only a very tiny number of all the animals that ever lived were fossilized. Compared to every individual animal that ever lived, the number fossilized is extraordinarily tiny. More on that later.The second reason is that most evolutionary theorists now believe that evolution occurs is steps....that there are periods of relative stasis interspersed with periods of relatively quick evolutionary change within a given population. There are a number of reasons for this, one of which is that individuals of a given population (let's say mice for this example) are sometimes separated from their larger population, due to a storm, family migration, accident, etc. If the migrated population of mice has moved far enough, it will encounter new predators, food sources, environment, etc. Possibly the new population will eventually die out, if they are not at all suited to their new home. But possibly (if they are plucky enough) the general population will evolve to suit their new environment. This will be a slow process, measured by human standards. It may take say 500,000 years (or 100,000 generations of mice, at a 5-year lifespan) for the new population to evolve into what we would now classify as a new species. Now, just to push our example to the farthest, lets say something else happens: That any number of members of the new population of mice, 500,000 years later and now existing as a new species, for whatever reason returns to its ancestral stomping grounds, or at least relatively near to it. It is also possible that it never moved that far away, but was separated by a mountain for example. Anyways, now scientists dig up fossils in that region. They find fossilized remains of 3 entire mice. They date from 14 million years ago, 12 million years ago, and 10 million years ago respectively. The oldest mouse is 8 cm long. The second oldest mouse is 8.4 cm long. The least old mouse is 13.5 cm long, but is otherwise quite similar. Now the 10 million year mouse has made a huge evolutionary leap from the 12 million year mouse. This is explained by the fact that the actual evolutionary change occurred over what, to a mouse, is an extraordinarily long time, but what, to a geologist, is an extraordinarily small amount of time. To find a cache of fossils cataloging the evolutionary change that happened during that half a million year period would be an incredible stroke of luck. Animals just aren't fossilized that often. Charles Darwin, in the Origin of Species, wrote: "Many species once formed never undergo any further change....; and the periods, during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured by years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form."edit: I'm going to move this into a new thread....respond there if you wish.

[Loismustdie 0]

It has come up already in one of the threads so I will attempt to address it now. Now a common thing said is that since babies and young children arent capable of accepting or rejecting God that to send them to hell is just not right. How could you follow a God that sends children to hell? Well lets look at some biblical versesThe popular theory and one that I also believe is that if the child is to young to be able to make a conscience decision then God being a just God will choose to save them. Here are some passages for the basis of this claim: Isaiah 7:16 - "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken."This verse makes it clear that there is a time before a child knows right from wrong 1 Samuel 3:6-7 - "The Lord called yet again, 'Samuel!' So Samuel arose and went to Eli and said, 'Here I am, for you called me.' But he answered, "I did not call, my son, lie down again.' Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord nor had the word of the Lord yet been revealed to him."Clearly this shows that Samuel was to young to know and understand. This also points to the fact that there is a time when we as children dont grasp the concept yet, but we are not forsaken for it. 2 Samuel 12:22-23 - "He said, 'While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, 'Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.' But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."Now this is David talkin about his son who has just died. As you see, David who we know went to heaven says that one day he will see his son again. Since there is only one place that could be, it makes heaven the place. All three verses point to the fact that there is a time where we as children arent capable of understanding what is at stake. 2 Samuel in particular makes the case that David knew he would see his son in Heaven.

You should point them in the direction of the New Testament where Jesus speaks of " suffer the little children" or something of that effect. Or, better yet, find an example in the Bible where it talks of sin and children. It doesn't. So, where the bible is silent so are we. Try and not overcomplicate things Matt, it would be a welcome change.

What about the souls of adults who have never been introduced to Christianity?

They go to Hell. God allows for that, in that he guarantees that if you seek, you will find. So, if a soul was never introduced to Christianity, he must have never wanted to be. It's not like Christ is some big secret- he is known of worldwide.

You need to read up on David apparently. Since God made it clear that his ancestor would be the King. God and David had a special relationship.What about evolution? Actually do some research on it. Ask about the origin of humans. Youll find that science doesnt have an answer. Youll find that they are missing a ton of links. That they have an ape and a man. No in betweens. All those great things they should you in high school...Those were all wrong...we know this. Its common knowledge.

Yeah, theres an evolution thread. Mods, please move this post.

[Canada 0]

what happens to the souls of adults that haven't been introduced to Christianity?

They go to Hell. God allows for that, in that he guarantees that if you seek, you will find. So, if a soul was never introduced to Christianity, he must have never wanted to be. It's not like Christ is some big secret- he is known of worldwide.

ummm. There are still plenty of people who will never have heard of Christ and if you think of the billions of souls that would have died in the last 2000 years that it would have been impossible for them to here 'the word' it turns salvation into a lottery. Imagine some guy born in New Zealand 763 AD. Condemed to hell regardless of what you do, so have good life now because you are going to spend all eternity burning in the flames of hell. Kinda cruel don't you think?I mean how do you think that poor bastard is feeling now as he burns. 'What did I do wrong?'You never found Christ'Never found Christ? Who the hell is Christ, excuse the pun Satan-me-lad'Seriously though, all joking aside. If you turly believe what you said before, then there are billions of souls in agony right now, I mean think about, they are really there, burning, there forever, simply for being born in the wrong part of the world...

[Loismustdie 0]

They go to Hell. God allows for that, in that he guarantees that if you seek, you will find. So, if a soul was never introduced to Christianity, he must have never wanted to be. It's not like Christ is some big secret- he is known of worldwide.ummm. There are still plenty of people who will never have heard of Christ and if you think of the billions of souls that would have died in the last 2000 years that it would have been impossible for them to here 'the word' it turns salvation into a lottery. Imagine some guy born in New Zealand 763 AD. Condemed to hell regardless of what you do, so have good life now because you are going to spend all eternity burning in the flames of hell. Kinda cruel don't you think?I mean how do you think that poor bastard is feeling now as he burns. 'What did I do wrong?'You never found Christ'Never found Christ? Who the hell is Christ, excuse the pun Satan-me-lad'Seriously though, all joking aside. If you turly believe what you said before, then there are billions of souls in agony right now, I mean think about, they are really there, burning, there forever, simply for being born in the wrong part of the world...

There is no all joking aside- your points in fact are a joke. I mean, you could sit there and whine and grovel but God knows that you don't really care about the guy in New Zealand- you just don't want to change your life and conform to what God wants. Misdirection doesn't work with him.

There is no all joking aside- your points in fact are a joke. I mean, you could sit there and whine and grovel but God knows that you don't really care about the guy in New Zealand- you just don't want to change your life and conform to what God wants. Misdirection doesn't work with him.

And you missed the point- if he never found God, then he wasn't looking. Simple as that. So don't cry for New Zealand man, he deserves everything he gets.

[Canada 0]

There is no all joking aside- your points in fact are a joke. I mean, you could sit there and whine and grovel but God knows that you don't really care about the guy in New Zealand- you just don't want to change your life and conform to what God wants. Misdirection doesn't work with him.

Grow up Lois. You are right. I don't care about him, because I don't believe he is in hell. I'm not whining and I'm not grovelling.For a Christian who is instructed by God to be good person, you take a lot of pleasure in insulting people. Bit hypocritical aren't you?

And you missed the point- if he never found God, then he wasn't looking. Simple as that. So don't cry for New Zealand man, he deserves everything he gets.

OK, so are you saying that if Mr NZ, who has no access to the Bible or any other messages from God, can still enter heaven.Does he simply have to live his life the same as a good Christain would, minus the conscious knowledge?Repenting (or more likely in his case, regretting) his sins as well loving and forgiving all those around him, regardless of their actions etc etcSerious question

[Loismustdie 0]

Grow up Lois. You are right. I don't care about him, because I don't believe he is in hell. I'm not whining and I'm not grovelling.For a Christian who is instructed by God to be good person, you take a lot of pleasure in insulting people. Bit hypocritical aren't you?OK, so are you saying that if Mr NZ, who has no access to the Bible or any other messages from God, can still enter heaven.Does he simply have to live his life the same as a good Christain would, minus the conscious knowledge?Repenting (or more likely in his case, regretting) his sins as well loving and forgiving all those around him, regardless of their actions etc etcSerious question

I didn't insult you- you think you are the first person to ask that question? "Oh, but what about the guy who is tucked into some far corner of the universe and has never heard of Jeus, or God for that matter? " It's not an original question, and the answer is simple- if you seek, you will find. If said hidden fellow seeks, he will find. If he doesn't care to seek, if his heart is to be a sinner, then he will die that way. Most people go through time where they ask questions, and I have faith that if that guy wants to know of Christ God will make it happen. It is really in Gods hands. Since when is it hypocritcal to be straightfoward and to the point with a whole website full of guys whose one goal is to try and find something, anything, wrong with God and the Bible? I am not being hypocritical or overly harsh in any way- really, think about your question. It's at best a hypothetical, and at it's core just another doubting Thomas type question. If that is insulting to you than so be it. You think you are going to have the nerve to ask a question that pointless on Judgement day? You know what God will say? " Who cares, what about you?" That's all you should really worry about.

I didn't insult you- you think you are the first person to ask that question? "Oh, but what about the guy who is tucked into some far corner of the universe and has never heard of Jeus, or God for that matter? " It's not an original question, and the answer is simple- if you seek, you will find. If said hidden fellow seeks, he will find. If he doesn't care to seek, if his heart is to be a sinner, then he will die that way. Most people go through time where they ask questions, and I have faith that if that guy wants to know of Christ God will make it happen. It is really in Gods hands. Since when is it hypocritcal to be straightfoward and to the point with a whole website full of guys whose one goal is to try and find something, anything, wrong with God and the Bible? I am not being hypocritical or overly harsh in any way- really, think about your question. It's at best a hypothetical, and at it's core just another doubting Thomas type question. If that is insulting to you than so be it. You think you are going to have the nerve to ask a question that pointless on Judgement day? You know what God will say? " Who cares, what about you?" That's all you should really worry about.

All that being said it is this simple- NO SIN is allowed into heaven. All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God. Unless you have your sins washed away by the blood of christ you cannot enter into heaven. So, even if he was a really good guy he would still be left out- no sin enters heaven. I didn't make the rules, sorry.

[Canada 0]

I didn't insult you- you think you are the first person to ask that question? "Oh, but what about the guy who is tucked into some far corner of the universe and has never heard of Jeus, or God for that matter? " It's not an original question, and the answer is simple- if you seek, you will find. If said hidden fellow seeks, he will find. If he doesn't care to seek, if his heart is to be a sinner, then he will die that way....It's at best a hypothetical, and at it's core just another doubting Thomas type question. If that is insulting to you than so be it. You think you are going to have the nerve to ask a question that pointless on Judgement day? You know what God will say? " Who cares, what about you?" That's all you should really worry about. All that being said it is this simple- NO SIN is allowed into heaven. All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God. Unless you have your sins washed away by the blood of christ you cannot enter into heaven. So, even if he was a really good guy he would still be left out- no sin enters heaven. I didn't make the rules, sorry.

I'm not suggesting that I am the first to ever ask it. It seems to be a very simple and obvious question that anybody looking at Christianity objectively would ask, and by no means is it remotely hypothetical.Personally, I have not yet asked and therefore not yet had the question answeredWhat you have put forward as an answer is atypical in its generality.How about some simple yes or no's...Given that all men sin, he needs 'a process' for want of a better phrase to enter heaven.Must he believe in Jesus? Yes/Noor can he accept that there is a greater 'unknown/unnamed' power that he must answer to ? Yes/NoMust he be baptised? Yes/No