Quote from peilthetraveler:
I do not see myself as some kind of hero for young earth creationists. When atheists are everywhere speaking of their evidence, it can cause some beleivers to lose their faith. For instance, when we talk about the age of the world and atheists bring up carbon dating, and then we creationists bring up the inaccuracies of carbon dating. I do not try to justify my beliefs, I just want to help those that are reading that do not like to get into the conversation.
Problem here again. I suggest you learn about the different types of radioactive dating methods and when each is appropriate. When you do, you will see the mistake you made.
As for being a hero, ok, sure, that was my assumption. Here though, you make yourself out to be a "soldier" fighting against what you perceive is a threat to belief.
I posit that the threat is the interpretation of the genesis record. There are interpretations that are quite reasonable as far as interpretations go that do not find themselves in conflict with dating of the earth or the order of life appearing on earth. Nor what and who Adam and Eve were. And answers the question of who Cain was worried about such that a mark had to be placed on him.
As for proof, didnt the israelites get proof with the parting of the Red Sea? Didnt the crowd of 5000 get proof when a few fish and loaves of bread fed them all? And I have to say that Abraham got his proof first. God spoke to him and told him he would have a child even though his wife was beyond childbearing years. This was Abrahams proof that God keeps his word. Once he had that proof, he only had to keep trusting God.
Careful here. You are inadvertently proving my point.
We'll start with the Israelites. Proof did little for them. Hence why that generation that had "proof" had to wander the desert for 40 years and never being able to cross over the river Jordan into the promised land. They became "addicted to proof" such that they had no real need of faith.
Abraham having his son sure was proof. Even though the son's name means laughter because Sarah didn't believe God and laughed when told she be having a son at that age.
What's more Abraham were given proof that his son wouldn't die when he went up to sacrifice him, what would be the object of his faith?
And here's a doozy. Jesus when asked for a sign told the Hebrews that no sign would be given to them except that of Jonah. Well, funny enough, that sign had to be taken by faith since those who wanted a sign had to believe the account of his followers that he rose again on the third day just like he said.
As I said, in the Christian paradigm, at all points, knowledge does practically nothing. It is faith that saves. Faith must be based on something unverifiable in order to have any efficacy.
This can be the same with us. We can get proof that God is real and that his word is real, but we still have to repent and trust that Jesus died for our sins. There are many many people that believe in God and everything in the bible, but do not give up their sinning.
Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Yes, but look at the one thing those individuals didn't offer? Their faith. They did works which have "proof" to validate those works. Sure you can make the case that it took faith to perform those works but here's the problem with that; The Lord says he never knew them. So we have no validation that what they did was actually the case. It may have been to them. They could have laid hands on a person with a common cold only to witness them get well a few days later. Without the Lord acknowledging that they in fact did perform those works we would have to assume they didn't actually do it.
After all, we know the Lord can acknowledge a true thing. Think of the rich young ruler. Lord acknowledged that he kept the commandments. And what's more, states that he loved him for it. But since this fellow wasn't looking for an object of faith but what he can do to be perfect, Jesus gave him what he asked for... another commandment. An object this person can have as proof he's perfect.
Though we know how well that worked out for the rich young ruler.
I have no doubt that some of the things I have said on this board has gotten at least 1 person open his bible, but when you have a secularist educational system force feeding our children one thing, then not answering their questions about evolution only makes them think its worthless to open their bible and look for truth because they think they already have it. Almost all children think that if you ask a question that someone doesnt know the answer to, then it cant be answered. Many children take this thought process into adulthood. I like to call them atheists.
Here's the thing though. If parents share and teach their children their religion and worldview and it falls in conflict with secular views, so what? What secular view properly aligns itself with a "godly" worldview? If the religion can stand up to scrutiny, it will remain in the hearts and minds of the child.
I know, You're worried about souls being at stake. And I can appreciate that because it is a "loving" point of view. But if God were so concerned about that, he'd have done a whole lot more in the way of a good faith effort to see to the salvation of souls. As it is, he sends his son to die in a desert 2000 odd years ago and left the spreading of his message to fallible humans who have used and abused the message. What's more he even prevented Paul from going into what was considered Asia at the time to spread the gospel. Did God not care about the Asians? What about the Africans, Indians, etc who hadn't heard the gospel until hundreds of years late? A mostly Catholic version of the gospel no less.
I could go on. But I think you get my point.
Oh...and to address the concern of the more proof I seek, the more my faith is diminished(which i do not agree with that premise, but lets say its true) I'm sure you have heard of the mustard seed parable, correct? All you need is faith that small to move mountains.
But like I said, my faith is there first. If it wasnt, I wouldnt bother looking for answers to things atheists say. I already know the proof is there through my faith, the answers are only to justify what my faith already tells me to be true.
Once again, you prove my point. In fact, admittedly, you posed it better than I did.
Using proof to justify your faith diminishes the need for faith. Those that came before you had no proof yet still believed. Well not entirely. As they took for proof things to which had other causes than what they attributed it to. So nevermind. Oops. Butt they had no proof of creation. Suppose that is what I was getting at.
In any event, what did the Lord say, "blessed are they that believe yet have not seen."
Even so, the other aspect of faith, or I should say that in the biblical concept of faith, faith is believing a promise and/or word of God.
So if God swore to you that he formed the universe et al by his word and you think you have found proof that he did, you no longer have faith that he did. You now "know" he did.
The atheist on the other hand, with his inquiring mind, should he somehow start to believe in God, the one thing that he will never declare as "knowing" with any certainty, is proof of God's word. He will be in a state of having to be contented with faith and he knows this. and this doesn't just apply to the atheist-turn-theist. It applies to honest theists who are secure in their faith.
