Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Atheist's turn toward God was a 4-year process, friend says
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=19780 ^ | Dec 22, 2004 | David Roach

Posted on 12/26/2004 2:12:39 PM PST by protest1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-111 last
To: LibertarianInExile
However, the actual answer is 5.475, meaning that we have not yet reached the sixth day.

5.475 would be about half way throught the 6th day.

101 posted on 12/27/2004 8:58:27 PM PST by Raycpa (Alias, VRWC_minion,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: oldcomputerguy

I was one of those nurses with a 6th sense for trouble.

The number of times I walked out of report and knew immediately that I had to check on someone even though it was out of sync with my organizational routine were to many to count.

I'm not going to say, I saved their lives because nothing like that is ever a singular moment. But I arrived at a pivotal moment where there was still the opportunity to make the difference between life and death.

It was just a sense that I needed to be with someone.


102 posted on 12/27/2004 9:31:45 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (Free the Fallujah one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

Good point, and good catch. I'm with you. But then, it's easy to concede since these are not MY words, but the words of a literalist looking at Schroeder's work. :) I got that from answersingenesis.org. That was what I intended to show with that posting--that literalists would have an easy time demonstrating that Schroeder was not hewing to their literal interpretation of the Bible.

I'm not at all excited about the notion of reconciling current scientific theories with the Bible, because I think either you believe in the Bible as the Word of God, or you don't. Molding it to fit today's scientific theory is essentially draining the book of its divinity from a literal standpoint. If the Book says God created the Earth and all its wonders in 6 days, well, if you believe the Book is the literal word of God, it should have happened in 6 days, not some 'but-a-day-to-God-is-infinite' wordtwisting b.s.


103 posted on 12/27/2004 11:02:11 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
You said -- "That Jesus wants us to spread the Word has naught to do with spreading the news that Flew is a theist."

I would say that it has everything to do with it, because the person who was talking to this guy is a Christian who is spreading that very "news" of the Gospel.

The fact that the other person (who received that Good News of the Gospel) is not there yet, doesn't mean that what this proclaimer of the Gospel has done is useless either to this hearer -- or -- to other hearers who may be doing that very same thing (and/or talking to others).

The fact that you don't want anyone to hear about those who proclaim the Gospel and what happens when they proclaim the Gospel is simply a statement on the condition of your own heart.

Those who are of Christ are happy to hear about the proclamation of the Gospel being accomplished, whether it has fully accomplished what it should, or whether more is needed for the person to consider his own salvation.

Even the angels in Heaven rejoice over these things...

      Luke 15:7-

      7 I say to you that likewise there will be more joy
        in heaven over one sinner who repents than over
        ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.

      8 "Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she
        loses one coin, does not light a lamp, sweep the
        house, and search carefully until she finds it?

      9 And when she has found it, she calls her friends
        and neighbors together, saying, 'Rejoice with me,
        for I have found the piece which I lost!'

     10 Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the
        presence of the angels of God over one sinner
        who repents."

Proclaim it far and wide -- and rejoice (in like manner as the angels in Heaven)...

Regards,

Star Traveler

104 posted on 12/28/2004 1:00:21 AM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: MississippiMan

You said -- "It is mathematically impossible that its origin isn't from a single source outside our space-time domain."

It sounds like you've been listening to Chuck Missler. :-)

Regards,
Star Traveler


105 posted on 12/28/2004 1:09:07 AM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
Molding it to fit today's scientific theory is essentially draining the book of its divinity from a literal standpoint

I pondered this for some time and concluded that the bible is designed to speak to people about the who, what, where, why of God. It needs to be relevant to every age because its purpose is salvation not science. Every age will have its own "science" regarding origins and every age will be wrong in part and right in part. Therefore, Genesis 1 and 2 needed to be written so that it was true and at the same time somewhat fuzzy on the details so that each age would not use its own limited understanding as a basis for rejecting it.

Personally, I have endeavored to read Genesis literally and figuratively while attempting to reconcile it to our current understanding of space and time. Some things fit, some don't. But I did find that reading it literally, going back to the Hebrew and most importantly, not using imposing later definitions of words on the text and treating each word as brand new the first time its used is very difficult and doesn't lead to the current "literal" understanding nor does it lead to the current science. In fact, one of my literal readings leads to the conclusion that we have been in the 6th day since man has been on earth and will not leave the 6th day until Jesus's work is done.

106 posted on 12/28/2004 7:16:58 AM PST by Raycpa (Alias, VRWC_minion,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
It sounds like you've been listening to Chuck Missler. :-)

Missler's a sharp guy; he has a tendency to go off on tangents, though. :-)

MM

107 posted on 12/28/2004 7:24:44 AM PST by MississippiMan (Americans should not be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile; All
For example, according to Dr. Schroeder, since the universe started in such a very tiny volume, the first twenty-four hour day was a time period of 8 billion years. As the universe continued to expand, the second day was only 4 billion years, the third day was 2 billion years, the fourth day was 1 billion years, the fifth day was 1/2 billion years and the sixth day was 1/4 billion years for a grand total of 15 3/4 billion years. He does not rest this choice of variable ‘day’ lengths on any discernible scientific reasoning, nor does he offer any Biblical basis for such a division. We are merely supposed to accept his re-definition of the word ‘day’ and ignore all the Biblical evidence (such as Genesis 1:5 and Exodus 20:8–11) that each Creation day was essentially the same length of time as an ordinary day of the week today.

Moreover, Dr. Schroeder’s arbitrary numbers are not consistent with each other. He chooses to divide ’the 15 billion years by the degree of expansion of the universe, which he defines as a million million (1,000,000,000,000), and then multiplying that by 365 for the number of days in a year. He states that the answer is approximately 6, proving his theory, which states that we are in the afternoon of the sixth day. However, the actual answer is 5.475, meaning that we have not yet reached the sixth day. Therefore, according to his theory, animals and humans should not be around.

Wrong, wrong, wrong ,wrong.

This analysis of Schroeders work has been posted by somebody who admittedly has not read Schroeders work.

Is it any wonder that he misstates Schroeders work?

108 posted on 12/28/2004 8:16:37 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED
TASMANIANRED WROTE: "Concerned, Thank you for sharing that touching story with me."

You're welcome!

109 posted on 12/28/2004 1:11:51 PM PST by Concerned (RATS can't win unless they LIE, CHEAT and/or STEAL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

"The fact that you don't want anyone to hear about those who proclaim the Gospel and what happens when they proclaim the Gospel is simply a statement on the condition of your own heart."

What are you TALKING about? I just said I don't see the point of celebrity endorsements in what is a personal decision, and you twist that to mean somehow I'm against all evangelism? One more straw man of many.


110 posted on 12/28/2004 2:22:48 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Noachian
Why doesn't anyone think that as Flew gets closer to the grave, and the realization of his mortality, he'll get even more religious?

Everything everyone has ever done has occured on the way toward the grave.

111 posted on 01/02/2005 12:16:17 PM PST by derheimwill (Love is a person, not an emotion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-111 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson