7,780 reputation
21656
bio website
location United States
age 32
visits member for 2 years, 3 months
seen Jul 26 at 20:29

I'm a born-again Christian, active member of the body of Christ, husband and father, and Bible teacher. I love to study Scripture, and firmly believe it is the only credible standard for truth.

Aside from my devotion to God, His people, and His word, I don't really have any loyalty to a particular doctrine or creed.

(The guy in the picture is Zhuge Liang from the movie Red Cliff.)


Jul
5
comment What does it mean to interpret the Bible literally?
+1 for "Charleton Heston in front holding a stick." (I'm kidding... +1 for a good answer.)
Jul
5
comment What does it mean to interpret the Bible literally?
"Words don't have meaning, people have meaning", and "The meaning of a word is determined by the context in which it is used". There is no way to say what a person means by, "I take the Bible literally", unless you probe them for further details about what they mean by their use of that phrase. Ten different people could make the same claim and mean ten different things, because there is no standard; there is no Bible verse that says "this is what it means to take the Bible literally".
Jul
5
revised Are the gifts of the Holy Spirit still active today?
added 4 characters in body
Jul
5
answered Are the gifts of the Holy Spirit still active today?
Jul
5
comment Does the Bible support the concept of 'balance' between 'two extremes'?
+1 for "We're not finding what is virtuous by seeking a mid-point between extremes; we are defining the mid-point based on what we already decided was virtuous." This hits the nail on the head. Great example with sexual activity, too.
Jul
5
awarded  Nice Answer
Jul
5
comment How is modern day Christian morality reconciled with the morality of the Bible?
@MarcGravell LOL... point taken. Thanks. :p
Jul
5
comment How did all the animals fit into Noah's ark?
@MarcGravell Your observation-less "science" is worth exactly nothing in terms of history. Science is useful in making predictions once enough repetitions have been observed. It is not as useful in telling what happened in the past - that is why we have history, which is based on eye-witness accounts. I thought we were talking history, and the "eye-witness account" is everything in history.
Jul
5
answered How is modern day Christian morality reconciled with the morality of the Bible?
Jul
5
comment How did all the animals fit into Noah's ark?
@MarcGravell As I'm sure you know, the dating is based on the presupposition of an old earth. RE: "there is not one shred, one jot, of evidence" - actually, we have an eyewitness account from a pretty reliable source. 3.6 billion years is not enough to get from "basic" life to human either. When Creationists make a claim for which evidence appears to be lacking, it is considered "absurd"... when Evolutionists do the same, it is "under research". We call that a "double-standard". The fact is, Purmou's claims are also under research, but the research is under-staffed and under-funded.
Jul
5
comment How did all the animals fit into Noah's ark?
RE: "as I say in my book, ..." What book is that? Are you John Woodmorape?
Jul
5
revised How did all the animals fit into Noah's ark?
added 2 characters in body
Jul
5
comment How did all the animals fit into Noah's ark?
@MarcGravell If it hasn't been observed and repeated in a controlled environment, it shouldn't be called "science". Also, how do you know "the time required to do that is very long"? Do you have scientific (repeatedly observed in a controlled manner) evidence to show this? If not, it would be more accurate to say "according to my presupppositions and assumptions, that would take too long". As a side note, the Theory of Evolution has no way of explaining how to get from nothing to human in 3.6 billion years, but it is still taught as fact. Why is Purmou's claim less valid?
Jul
5
comment Does the Bible support the concept of 'balance' between 'two extremes'?
Although I disagree, +1 for finding a verse that says "Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes"!! I'm curious which translation you quoted? In the NASB, verse 18b reads "for the one who fears God comes forth with both [lit. "all"] of them."
Jul
4
revised Does the Bible support the concept of 'balance' between 'two extremes'?
edited body; deleted 8 characters in body
Jul
4
comment Does the Bible support the concept of 'balance' between 'two extremes'?
@Mike The trouble I have with that is I have seen many, many people use this "balance" idea to justify a lukewarm spiritual life, or a more "reasonable" interpretation of the dramatic claims of Scripture, and so on. This is just simply not a Biblical principle. I think we need to stick with what is actually taught in Scripture and avoid using secular teachings to sugar-coat our doctrine. We really are called to give up everything, die to ourselves, live for Jesus, turn the other cheek, stop sinning, love God with everything we are, etc. etc. People need to hear the actual, extreme truth.
Jul
4
comment How is modern day Christian morality reconciled with the morality of the Bible?
Aren't you assuming that "Christian morality" changes with time? "Christian morality" is "Biblical morality", by definition. Or, if you are referring to the trends in thinking within the sub-culture of those called "Christians", the changes would either be a result of recalibration with Biblical principles, or influence from worldly thinking. Or, if you are suggesting that because secular morality changes over time, Christians need to try to justify the Bible in light of the new secular morality, that is incorrect. Please clarify.
Jul
4
revised How is modern day Christian morality reconciled with the morality of the Bible?
edited body; added 1 characters in body
Jul
4
comment How is modern day Christian morality reconciled with the morality of the Bible?
Possible duplicate: How did God's morality not change between OT and NT times?
Jul
4
revised How is modern day Christian morality reconciled with the morality of the Bible?
Added a Scripture reference