Reasons for Joy; In Gentleness, and Respect.

Profile of SPF

Show Posts

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - SPF

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Do Christians sin less than Athiests?
« on: October 09, 2017, 04:40:59 pm »
Discrete meaning individual, seperate. 
It pertains because you said you do not "focus on sin".  If we do not focus, separate things tend to blur together.
Your comment of "Sin is sin" is gives me the impression of sin being a homogenized paste, of which you have can have more or less of, but is ultimately uncountable.

In order to repent a single sin, doesn't that sin need to be clearly in view?
I don't focus on sin in the sense that I don't live my life out of a works based mentality of striving to sin less.  I know I'm going to sin.  When I do, I recognize it, I repent, and I then I move on, trusting that Christ has forgiven me. 

I'm sure sin is probably uncountable.  I have no clue how many times a day I sin, it's probably a lot.  But thankfully, my Salvation is not based upon anything I do or don't do, it's based upon the grace that Christ has shown through His work on the cross. 

Honestly though, I don't know why a non-Christian would even care about counting sins and comparing.  Do you have some argument you want to put forth about how Christianity is false because Christians seem to sin just as much as non-Christians?  What's the point of this topic?

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Do Christians sin less than Athiests?
« on: October 09, 2017, 01:47:00 pm »
Are you aware of your sins as discrete events?
Could you define "descrete events" for me please? And off the top of my head I don't see how this question pertains to what I said or speaks against it.  Sin is sin.

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Do Christians sin less than Athiests?
« on: October 09, 2017, 11:26:21 am »
But Christians are trying to sin less, right?  Are they not succeeding?
I suppose that depends upon which Christians you ask.  If you ask me, I would say that I don't focus on sin, and I would even argue that "sin management" usually fails.  Sinning less is not my goal, knowing Christ more is.  Scripture already says that I'm a saint now, that I'm holy now, that I'm forgiven now, and that I'm redeemed now. 

My goal is to trust Christ more and become more like Him.  The result of that will certainly be that I sin less, but sinning less is not my goal.  Salvation comes by way of grace, through faith, not works. 

As for your second question of, "are they not succeeding"? I don't know that they aren't, do you?

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Do Christians sin less than Athiests?
« on: October 09, 2017, 10:44:09 am »
"Do Christians sin less than Atheists?"

If Christianity is true, then the answer should be yes.  Scripture teaches that we are all born with an inherited sinful nature with an inclination towards sin.  When a person becomes a Christian, there is a real change that they undergo in which they are metaphorically given a new heart, which in reality though causes them to have an inclination towards Christ.

Sanctification is the lifelong process by which a Christian becomes more like Christ.  Christians still sin, and Christians can still sin in serious ways.  But the longer a person is a Christian and the more Christians seek to grow in their relationship with Christ, the byproduct is sinning less. 

Apologetics and Theology / Re: When Did The Adam Get His Soul?
« on: September 27, 2017, 10:35:25 am »
Matthew 10:28  "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." 

Act 7:59  They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!" 

1Corinthians 5:5  I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 

1Corinthians  7:34  and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit;

There are dozens more Scripture that distinguish the body from the soul/spirit.  I would recommend a basic systematic theology book like Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology for you to start with.

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« on: September 01, 2017, 07:52:09 am »
It sounds to me like a perfectly valid term that refers to a specific situation.  I think the issue is that it's just become politically incorrect. 

How do you measure 500 ft? How do you measure 212 F?
With measuring instruments. Or, in the case of 500 feet, you could do it manually if you didn't trust the ruler in your hand.

"What is true to you is not true to me when there is relativity in science. Name one thing that is in fact true in science, you'll find out it is relative. This is called (post)modern science."
That water boils at 212 degrees at sea level, and then at each 500 foot increase in elevation the boiling point drops by just under 1 degree.

Would that not be a scientific fact?

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Poll: Punching Nazis...
« on: August 23, 2017, 09:34:03 am »
Regarding the OP, I think it really depends on whether I'm the one doing the punching or if Chuck Norris is the one doing the punching. 

Funny thing happened, I joined a LGBT forum and told them they were all perverts and I got banned, I then joined two more LGBT forums, said the same thing, and was banned from both of them.  Then I joined a minorities only forum and told them I was white and better, I was banned.  Then I joined two atheist forums and told them God hated them and that it was their fault they didn't know they were sinners, I was banned there.

Honestly though, I think there's a conspiracy out to ban me from forums.  Most things are never my fault, they're  almost always someone else's fault. 

in 2016, the UMC, which has generally only taken steps towards a more liberal stance on all issues, actually took a more conservative step.

For 40 years the United Methodist Church has supported the Supreme Court’s infamous Roe v. Wade decision – that is, until last week.

Delegates of the country’s third-largest religious body voted 445 to 310 to repeal the official resolution supporting the case establishing a constitutional “right” to abortion during its General Conference. They also voted to sever its affiliation with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), an interfaith organization co-founded by the United Methodist Church.

I think the inconsistency appears when you get into the timing. Many people who I know that are pro-choice/pro-women's reproductive rights/pro-abortion ARE ALSO against third trimester or late-term abortions. There seems to be a crucial time period when it is seemingly acceptable to terminate a pregnancy and when it is not.
Well if you watched the debates, you'll recall that Trump really hammered in on Clinton when she said that she would not vote to make even partial-birth abortions illegal.  And no, before you ask I don't recall which debate nor do I have the transcript.

Apologetics and Theology / Re: How serious are you about abortion?
« on: July 24, 2017, 11:09:41 am »
I would like to expand my comments as they relate to morals and the issue of abortion by considering the following scenario of three people.

Person1 - a pregnant female who belongs to a religion and who lives in a community of people mostly of her religion.  This religion allows early-term abortion and makes no issue of any early-term abortion that occurs.
Person2 - a member of a different religion who lives in a community of people mostly of this different religion; this community is geograhically distant from the first.  This religion allows abortion in very few, if any, circumstances.
Person3 - a member of no religion who lives in a free-thinking community where religion is kept private.  This community generally allows mid-term abortion, discourages late-term abortion but does not make it illegal.

So in the case where Person1 is deciding whether or not to proceed with an early-term abortion.  Whose morals - Person1, Person2 or Person3 - should she follow?  Should the morals of the either of other two be imposed or enforced on Person1?  rgds, igr

This demonstrates that this really isn't a discussion about abortion for you.  You're begging the question in that your underlying belief in everything you say is that there are no objective morals, and that right/wrong are determined by popular opinion, and hold no objective truth, but fluctuate according to opinion. 

If you're right about morality, then nobody has the right to say that abortion is immoral, because there is no such thing as morality!

The answer though to your scenario is that none of the cultural norms have any bearing upon the morality of abortion.  In the case of 3 mutually exclusive notions about the morality of an action, we can say that either 1 is right and 2 are wrong, or all 3 are wrong. 

The discussion that you need to have has nothing to do with abortion, and everything to do with whether or not objective morals exist. 

Apologetics and Theology / Re: How serious are you about abortion?
« on: July 18, 2017, 07:20:07 am »
I am familiar with the biblical passages quoted by Christian Abortion Prohibitionists.  None of these relates specifically to the zygote - if each passage is read/interpreted not in the context of a discussion about abortion, I suggest that the reading/interpretation would say nothing about abortion - any claimed relevance to the abortion issue is imposed on a particular interpretation (an interpretation manipulated to appear relevant) of the passages.
The passages I referenced from Scripture provide us with principles that are clear.  In the passage from Exodus, we have a clear teaching that if a woman, who is pregnant, miscarries because of a physical altercation, the wrong-doer must pay life for life.  This is a clear example an acknowledgment of the moral value of a human located inside a womb.

Secondly, King David makes a statement that his sinful nature began at conception, or from the moment of his beginning.  I don't expect you to understand this as you are not a Christian, but the Biblical narrative is that humankind alone is unique among God's creation in that we alone are created in His Image, and we alone possess an inherited sinful nature.  Humanity is innately morally valuable from its beginning.

There is no fabricated distinction in Scripture between a human being and a human person.  It's simple - if you're a human, you have moral worth and value.  Human life begins at conception. Thus, human life is morally valuable from conception.

Now that you reference your religion/faith, as a reasonable person given the respect to believe whatever you like (under Freedom of Religion), you will also respect that everybody else has the same Freedom of Religion.  In a secular society where no particular religious version is given favour (such as the one you live in), a Christian view, a Muslim view, a Jewish view, a Mormon view, a Hindu view, a non-theist view etc are all treated equally (in theory).  And as you might expect, people who are non-theists give no weight to religious belief/assertion.  And because you are a reasonable person who believes in Freedom of Religion, you respect that non-theists may have a view that differs from yours.  And you will also respect that others may have morals that differ by varying degrees from yours,  rgds, igr.
Different views can be wrong.  You see igr, there is something called truth in the world.  Truth is that which corresponds to reality.  So if it is true that God exists and that He has revealed Himself to us through Scripture, then it is true that abortion is morally wrong and a form of murder. 

Do I respect other people's freedom to believe what they want? Sure.  Does that mean I should therefore not stand up for what I believe is truth? I surely hope not.  I believe rape is wrong, so I'm going to do my best to make sure that it's always illegal. Why would I not do the same with abortion?

Again, the only reason people have fabricated a make believe distinction between a human being and a human person is so that some action can be committed against the non-person that would otherwise be considered immoral.  That is the essence of your anti-life position. 

Apologetics and Theology / Re: How serious are you about abortion?
« on: July 17, 2017, 06:59:46 am »
So I ask a hypothetical - if nobody at all believed that abortion was wrong, would abortion still be wrong?  If yes, why?
I'm not sure why this question is so important to you, as we have already established the different foundations with which we hold to.

For me, the answer to this is obviously yes.  Morality is not determined by subjective human opinion.  For you, the answer is obviously no.  In fact for you, the answer is both yes and no depending on who you're talking to as you believe that morality is a make believe construct that resides in each individuals brains.

And this is why my argument for why your anti-life position is wrong won't ever be able to convince you.  For my belief system stems from the foundation of not only God existing, but God conveying Himself to us through Scripture.

I would tell you that the Biblical narrative is that all human life is morally valuable and of equal worth. I would tell you that Exodus 21 provides an example of a woman giving birth prematurely because of a fight, and that if the child dies as a result that life for life is given. 

King David made the observation that he was actually sinful from the moment of conception.  He recognized that his sinful nature began literally at the first moment he was alive.  Only humans inherit sinful natures.

I would tell you that humanity alone possesses the Imago Dei.  We alone are created in the image of God, and as a result have inherit moral worth and value. 

I view all people, no matter their age, location, or level of mental development as morally valuable.  Therefore, abortion at any stage for convenience sake is nothing short of a form of murder. 


The anti-life position seems to at least on some level acknowledge that humans do possess moral value and worth. It seems that on some level you also believe this, as you have indicated that you are against late-term abortion.  But there is no difference in terms of moral value between a zygote, an embryo, a fetus, and a newborn. They are all equally human.  The only way we can make it morally appropriate to kill a human at one of the aforementioned stages is if we create a fabricated and arbitrary distinction within humanity.  Then we simply declare that those humans who do not meet this fabricated distinction are not morally valuable.  And viola, abortion becomes acceptable, and our conscience is appeased. 

Apologetics and Theology / Re: Conception and Evolution of Satan
« on: July 14, 2017, 12:04:56 pm »
if this is not an original Jewish thought than that causes me to doubt Jesus' divinity
Wouldn't the fact that Jesus was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, and actually rose from the dead help quell any doubts regarding His Divinity?

The Gospel really stands or falls with the resurrection.

I Corinthians 15: Now I would remind you, brothers,[a] of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 

12 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.

Pages : [1] 2 3 ... 131