[_ Old Earth _] AIG: Why is humanism taking over society?

[Khristeeanos]

Q: Why is humanism taking over society?

A: Humanism has become the “religion†of many countries because the chief barrier to it has been broken down: belief in God’s Word. Paul warns us in 2 Corinthians 11:3–4 to not be deceived, as Eve was by Satan. When we go to Genesis and read about the way Satan tempted Eve, we find that he got her to question God’s Word (Gen. 3:1–7).

That’s exactly what’s happening in our society today. So many people question the authority of the Word of God, particularly the book of Genesis. Satan knows that if he can get people to doubt the reliability of the book of Genesis, ultimately the whole Christian structure will collapse.

Today, not only is the culture as a whole rejecting God’s Word, but, sadly, even many Christians have given up believing Genesis. As a result, the Christian framework is collapsing all around us, and humanism is taking over.

How do we repair the Christian structure? We need to stop doubting the Word of God and start rebuilding the foundation that states Godâ¬â„¢s Wordâ€â€beginning in Genesisâ€â€is true.

 

[Drew]

I do not know if the OP is suggesting that we need to adopt a specifically literal interpretation of Genesis in order to take the word of God seriously. Please clarify.

 

[Grengor]

Accept his interpretation, or you'll burn in hell with Satan. It was pretty clear wasn't it? Oh yea, and that humanism is evil and is taking over Christianity.

The sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling!

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Accept his interpretation, or you'll burn in hell with Satan. It was pretty clear wasn't it? Oh yea, and that humanism is evil and is taking over Christianity.

The sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling!

I think such a response is unnecessary. If you want to react to something as tame as that article is that is your choice of course.

 

[Khristeeanos]

I do not know if the OP is suggesting that we need to adopt a specifically literal interpretation of Genesis in order to take the word of God seriously. Please clarify.

AIG = Answers In Genesis

That is an email I received from them.

The literal intrepretation is always the correct one unless the context is obviously not meant to be taken literally.

 

[Grengor]

Accept his interpretation, or you'll burn in hell with Satan. It was pretty clear wasn't it? Oh yea, and that humanism is evil and is taking over Christianity.

The sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling!

I think such a response is unnecessary. If you want to react to something as tame as that article is that is your choice of course.

Was what I said innacurate? Did the article not say not accepting a literal interpretation was Satan's will?

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Was what I said innacurate? Did the article not say not accepting a literal interpretation was Satan's will?

Yes it was. The context and language of Genesis clearly makes it literal, to interpret differently is clearly not glorifying God.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

If secularism is ruining society then let me ask you a a question.

If you had access to a time machine, would you go back to the 15th century and live in medieval europe to live in a time an place when the church ruled every aspect of life?

I am serious, there would be a chance to live in a time and place when - according to you - life should have been so much better. Sure, a street and a sewer there one in the same but heck at least those suhi eating humanists would not go around promoting evolutionism.

 

[Solo]

If secularism is ruining society then let me ask you a a question.

If you had access to a time machine, would you go back to the 15th century and live in medieval europe to live in a time an place when the church ruled every aspect of life?

I am serious, there would be a chance to live in a time and place when - according to you - life should have been so much better?

If I had access to a time machine I would go forward in time to the place where there is no such thing as secularism and unbelievers. Then all of the abundance and joy that God has to offer his believers will be free for the experience from that point on with no sin, death, sorrow, pain, etc.

Come quickly Lord Jesus.

 

[Grengor]

Was what I said innacurate? Did the article not say not accepting a literal interpretation was Satan's will?

Yes it was. The context and language of Genesis clearly makes it literal, to interpret differently is clearly not glorifying God.

It sounds like you misunderstood me, I'm saying that the article says Humanism and doubting genesis is Satan's will.

 

[Khristeeanos]

Was what I said innacurate? Did the article not say not accepting a literal interpretation was Satan's will?

Yes it was. The context and language of Genesis clearly makes it literal, to interpret differently is clearly not glorifying God.

It sounds like you misunderstood me, I'm saying that the article says Humanism and doubting genesis is Satan's will.

In Genesis 3 and also Matthew 4 we read that Satan attempts to get people to doubt the Word of God.

It caused death for Adam and Eve and had Jesus listened to Satan and obeyed him it would have caused Him to not be the Perfect Sacrifice for our sins.

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

If secularism is ruining society then let me ask you a a question.

If you had access to a time machine, would you go back to the 15th century and live in medieval europe to live in a time an place when the church ruled every aspect of life?

I am serious, there would be a chance to live in a time and place when - according to you - life should have been so much better. Sure, a street and a sewer there one in the same but heck at least those suhi eating humanists would not go around promoting evolutionism.

Interesting. Another interesting fact is that on October 31, 1517 an Austrian Monk named Martin Luther stapled the 95 Thesisâ€â€thanks to men like him Christianity changed and broke away from the oppressive, non-Christ-centered Church. Of course like the other early reformers it was not his intention to break away from the Church but to turn it back to the Bible. In the 14th century, before Luther, John Wycliffe had a profound influence on the Reformation. Now of course along with Martin Luther there were the following Reformers that were also involved in the Reform movement: Martin Bucer, Heinrich Bullinger, John Calvin, Andreas von Carlstadt, Wolfgang Fabricius Capito, Martin Chemnitz, Thomas Cranmer, William Farel, Matthias Flacius, Caspar Hedio, Justus Jonas, John Knox, Jan Łaski, Philipp Melanchthon, Johannes Oecolampadius, Peter Martyr, Joachim Vadian, Laurentius Petri, Olaus Petri, Pierre Viret, Huldrych Zwingli.

(Information gathered from Wikipedia.com)

 

[Heidi]

Q: Why is humanism taking over society?

A: Humanism has become the “religion†of many countries because the chief barrier to it has been broken down: belief in God’s Word. Paul warns us in 2 Corinthians 11:3–4 to not be deceived, as Eve was by Satan. When we go to Genesis and read about the way Satan tempted Eve, we find that he got her to question God’s Word (Gen. 3:1–7).

That’s exactly what’s happening in our society today. So many people question the authority of the Word of God, particularly the book of Genesis. Satan knows that if he can get people to doubt the reliability of the book of Genesis, ultimately the whole Christian structure will collapse.

Today, not only is the culture as a whole rejecting God’s Word, but, sadly, even many Christians have given up believing Genesis. As a result, the Christian framework is collapsing all around us, and humanism is taking over.

How do we repair the Christian structure? We need to stop doubting the Word of God and start rebuilding the foundation that states God’s Wordâ€â€beginning in Genesisâ€â€is true.

We're not going to be able to repair the Christian structure because Jesus said that in end times that the faith of most will grow cold and "you will be hated by all nations because of me." So I, for one, welcome the rejection of God because that means we're closer to end times when all will know the truth. :angel:

 

[TheFallOfTroy]

I don't see how questioning the bible is necessarily a bad thing. If it is the truth, wouldn't questioning it only prove you are right?

 

[Khristeeanos]

I don't see how questioning the bible is necessarily a bad thing. If it is the truth, wouldn't questioning it only prove you are right?

There is a difference between questioning the Bible and not believing large parts of it.

Anybody who believes in evolution cannot believe the Bible literally.

 

[Drew]

I don't see how questioning the bible is necessarily a bad thing. If it is the truth, wouldn't questioning it only prove you are right?

There is a difference between questioning the Bible and not believing large parts of it.

Anybody who believes in evolution cannot believe the Bible literally.

This is indeed correct. A person who believe in evolution does not take the following verses literally:

Psalm 98:8
"Let the rivers clap their hands,
Let the mountains sing together for joy;

Isaiah 55:12
"You will go out in joy
and be led forth in peace;
the mountains and hills
will burst into song before you,
and all the trees of the field
will clap their hands.

I am one such person - I freely admit that I do not take these verses literally.

Seriously folks, sometimes the Scriptures employ metaphor and allegory in order to achieve their purposes - the Bible is not a technical manual.

Now, we can certainly discuss whether the creation account in Genesis is to be taken as literal or as a myth intended to convey certain important truths about the nature of God and man.

The issue is, of course, not whether we take the Bible "literally", but whether our interpretation is in accord with the intent of the writer. Sometimes that intent is literal and sometimes it is not (as per the example texts above).

 

[Solo]

Evolutionists have a real problem taking the following verses literal as God intended:

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:3-5

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day F4 from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, F5 and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. Genesis 1:14-19

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. Genesis 1:21-23

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. Genesis 1:24-25

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:26-27

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Genesis 1:31

They would rather believe a lie from the enemy than the truth of God.

 

[Drew]

Greetings Solo:

You state:

Evolutionists have a real problem taking the following verses literal as God intended

I assume that you have an actual case to make to defend your implication that you know what God intended. You must have come "know what God intended" somehow. Can you possibly explain this to us? I maintain that unless you are going to claim that you received clear and direct personal revelation from God, your account will be something along the lines of "I determined that God's intent was for this material to be taken literally for reasons x, y, and z...." I am interested in what these reasons are.

I realize that answering this question might involve a lot of work. In the spirit of fairness, I hope to provide a similar account of why I believe this material is not intended to be taken "literally".

Talk of a "lie from the enemy" seems to me to be rhetoric. If your position is actually defensible, why do you need to apply this label to those who hold contrary views. Let's say some of us do indeed ascribe to a lie from the enemy. Please, then, explain how this is a lie.

 

[Solo]

Greetings Solo:

You state:

Evolutionists have a real problem taking the following verses literal as God intended

I assume that you have an actual case to make to defend your implication that you know what God intended. You must have come "know what God intended" somehow. Can you possibly explain this to us? I maintain that unless you are going to claim that you received clear and direct personal revelation from God, your account will be something along the lines of "I determined that God's intent was for this material to be taken literally for reasons x, y, and z...." I am interested in what these reasons are.

I realize that answering this question might involve a lot of work. In the spirit of fairness, I hope to provide a similar account of why I believe this material is not intended to be taken "literally".

Talk of a "lie from the enemy" seems to me to be rhetoric. If your position is actually defensible, why do you need to apply this label to those who hold contrary views. Let's say some of us do indeed ascribe to a lie from the enemy. Please, then, explain how this is a lie.

Greetings Drew,
Before I was born again, I did not have God, the holy Spirit living inside me to reveal his truths in the Word of God. Many today have the same problem. Also many have been deceived with lies by the enemy, whereby they must tear down the strongholds that have been built in their lives by the enemy, before the truth can permeate the barriers. This can take years of prayer, study of the Word, meditation, and excercise in the spirit, before growth and understanding can be accomplished. Some take well into their 30s, 40s, 50s, before they understand. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit teaches believers ALL things, and without his instruction, a believer believes whatever.

God does not lie, and when he makes an implication, it is obvious. When he makes a literal statement it is obvious. When God says that morning and night is equal to one day, then that is literal. When God says that it took him six days to create the heavens and the earth, that too is literal. Anything apart from that understanding is supposition and guesswork of the flesh.

Those who buy the lies of the devil are deceived on purpose so that they can place doubt on the Word of God. This has been the devil's strategy from the first temptation forward. The old, "Did God really mean that" is the first hint of deception. The devil is the father of lies, and those that believe him over God are deceived.

If you are born again, then you have the holy Spirit to guide and direct you into all truth. If you are not born again, then you are without spiritual direction, and are deceived.

Are you born again?

 

[Drew]

God does not lie, and when he makes an implication, it is obvious. When he makes a literal statement it is obvious. When God says that morning and night is equal to one day, then that is literal. When God says that it took him six days to create the heavens and the earth, that too is literal. Anything apart from that understanding is supposition and guesswork of the flesh.

Those who buy the lies of the devil are deceived on purpose so that they can place doubt on the Word of God. This has been the devil's strategy from the first temptation forward. The old, "Did God really mean that" is the first hint of deception. The devil is the father of lies, and those that believe him over God are deceived.

If you are born again, then you have the holy Spirit to guide and direct you into all truth. If you are not born again, then you are without spiritual direction, and are deceived.

Are you born again?

In answer to your question, Yes I am born again.

I find that the style of argument I see in your post is certainly not uncommon. It basically amount to simple claim of the correctness of the literal view and strongly implies that those who believe otherwise are the dupes of Satan.

One problem with your post is that it simply asserts that the literal interpretation is correct - there is no argument, no defence, nothing. I am mystified that you and others would consider this to be any kind of meaningful contribution to this debate about the creation story. Anybody can just claim something- real understanding and learning occurs when we analyze propositions and examine the evidence for and against them.

Your position seems to sidestep many of the principles that have served mankind well in his quest to figure out the world. One of these is the discipline of rational thinking - understanding how a substantial case is built, how conclusions can or cannot be justified, etc. This style of thinking is not "mankind's vain imagination" - it is a God-given faculty that works exceedingly well in the real world.

Another dimension of this problem is that of the empirical evidence - what do the findings of scientific inquiry tell us about the question of origins?

Finally, we need to be open to the richness of language, and in particular to literary devices like metaphor and allegory. These are used throughout the Scriptures. Because it is so clear that God has used metahpor in the Scriptures in some case, one cannot just assume that He has not done so in the case of the creation account.