Ask the Evangelical!

[shrapnel]

Hitler has nothing to with the thread. He killed all religious people. focused more on the jews but people of faith were a threat to him.

Hitler kills religious people! and you said that has nothing to do with the CHRISTIAN thread. Operation enduring justice is a good ole bible belt spankin if I ever seen one

Just to let you know this is a warning. we dont appreciate trolls.

Don't disagree with our moderate minded moderator everyone...by the way that shattered girl cussed at me, and you yourself are guitly of trolling

They run the world if you allow them to... There are Christian extremists, just like there are extremists in everything else in life. If you'd get your head out of your ass, you'd see that MOST (with few exceptions) of the Christians that frequent this place are pretty cool, and don't fit into your "mental" qualifications.

need to get your head out of the chat room, mainstream run-of-the-mill blind followers such as yourself who throw around cliches and stereotype as substitution for thought are exactly the problem, christian or no christian


Or his preconceived "stereo-type". Funny, I bet he is a liberal that runs around telling everybody how they need to be tolerant and that they shouldn't "stereo-type" people yet here he (it) is doing just that.

Come on folks, am I tolerant or intolerant? wontcha' figure it out on your way to the rodeo

 

[Shattered]

Hitler has nothing to with the thread. He killed all religious people. focused more on the jews but people of faith were a threat to him.

Hitler kills religious people! and you said that has nothing to do with the CHRISTIAN thread. Operation enduring justice is a good ole bible belt spankin if I ever seen one

Just to let you know this is a warning. we dont appreciate trolls.

Don't disagree with our moderate minded moderator everyone...by the way that shattered girl cussed at me, and you yourself are guitly of trolling

They run the world if you allow them to... There are Christian extremists, just like there are extremists in everything else in life. If you'd get your head out of your ass, you'd see that MOST (with few exceptions) of the Christians that frequent this place are pretty cool, and don't fit into your "mental" qualifications.

need to get your head out of the chat room, mainstream run-of-the-mill blind followers such as yourself who throw around cliches and stereotype as substitution for thought are exactly the problem, christian or no christian


Or his preconceived "stereo-type". Funny, I bet he is a liberal that runs around telling everybody how they need to be tolerant and that they shouldn't "stereo-type" people yet here he (it) is doing just that.

Come on folks, am I tolerant or intolerant? wontcha' figure it out on your way to the rodeo

Kickass! You're an illiterate moron, to boot! Ta-ta!

 

[dilloduck]

Hitler has nothing to with the thread. He killed all religious people. focused more on the jews but people of faith were a threat to him.

Hitler kills religious people! and you said that has nothing to do with the CHRISTIAN thread. Operation enduring justice is a good ole bible belt spankin if I ever seen one

Just to let you know this is a warning. we dont appreciate trolls.

Don't disagree with our moderate minded moderator everyone...by the way that shattered girl cussed at me, and you yourself are guitly of trolling

They run the world if you allow them to... There are Christian extremists, just like there are extremists in everything else in life. If you'd get your head out of your ass, you'd see that MOST (with few exceptions) of the Christians that frequent this place are pretty cool, and don't fit into your "mental" qualifications.

need to get your head out of the chat room, mainstream run-of-the-mill blind followers such as yourself who throw around cliches and stereotype as substitution for thought are exactly the problem, christian or no christian


Or his preconceived "stereo-type". Funny, I bet he is a liberal that runs around telling everybody how they need to be tolerant and that they shouldn't "stereo-type" people yet here he (it) is doing just that.

Come on folks, am I tolerant or intolerant? wontcha' figure it out on your way to the rodeo

Cant' really tell---so far you seem to enjoy mocking people---all people

I guess that makes you at least a cynic

 

[dmp]

You base your life on imaginary people....you bet your mental, just commit yourself and be done with it.

Here's a warning - Relax, and learn:

a) To spell/proper use of 'your' and 'you're'.
b) to debate without insults


Or we'll ban your account. Easy. Especially on b) above

 

[Hobbit]

You base your life on imaginary people....you bet your mental, just commit yourself and be done with it.

I doubt you could conjure one bit of evidence contradicting the existance of Biblical characters, and atheistic explanations of phenomena like creation are no more provable than the existance of God. Scientifically and psychologically, I am no more or less sane for believing in God than you are for not believing in Him. However, if you are right and people like you are normal, then I'd rather be insane, personally. I don't like being bitter and the spelling's better over here.

 

[Merlin1047]

Just to let you know this is a warning. we dont appreciate trolls.

Don't disagree with our moderate minded moderator everyone...by the way that shattered girl cussed at me, and you yourself are guitly of trolling

We're willing to consider any viewpoint which is presented rationally and has some basis in fact. The abusive and condescending tone of your posts do not fit the guidelines for membership in this forum.

I suggest that you check the attitude and tone down the belittling rhetoric.

 

[5stringJeff]

why aren't all christians locked away in a mental hospital? I don't understand.

For the same reason that all atheists aren't locked away in a mental hospital. We believe things about God based on historical evidence.

 

[5stringJeff]

Can I request a taller body, then?

Funny...

Honestly, I have no idea. But you have to get in first!

 

[Zhukov]

What do you think of the pope?

Not about his current health problems, and not you specifically, but just how do non-Catholic denominations view the opinions of the pope.

 

[5stringJeff]

What do you think of the pope?

Not about his current health problems, and not you specifically, but just how do non-Catholic denominations view the opinions of the pope.

In general, I think evangelicals view the Pope favorably, though we certainly don't agree with the Catholic doctrine of Papal Infallibility, which states that while acting in official duites, the Pope is incapable of doing wrong or of pronouncing an incorrect doctrinal statement. Thus, when the Pope speaks, evangelicals weigh his words against Scripture, just like when a Protestant preacher speaks.

 

[Hobbit]

In general, I think evangelicals view the Pope favorably, though we certainly don't agree with the Catholic doctrine of Papal Infallibility, which states that while acting in official duites, the Pope is incapable of doing wrong or of pronouncing an incorrect doctrinal statement. Thus, when the Pope speaks, evangelicals weigh his words against Scripture, just like when a Protestant preacher speaks.

I agree fully. The Pope is a wise and religious man with deep dedication to God, but he is still just a man, and while I hold his words above the words of many others, he is still just a man.

 

[clumzgirl]

I know you (Jeff) provided a link to the definition of evangelical (quite a while back I believe) but I'm still unsure. I mean, I'm ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Lutheran, and it's right in the name, but I don't understand how we're different. Aren't ALL Christians evangelicals? I mean, I know there are some ultra-conservative sects that like to be exclusive, but I thought we all had to follow the great commission?

 

[5stringJeff]

I know you (Jeff) provided a link to the definition of evangelical (quite a while back I believe) but I'm still unsure. I mean, I'm ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Lutheran, and it's right in the name, but I don't understand how we're different. Aren't ALL Christians evangelicals? I mean, I know there are some ultra-conservative sects that like to be exclusive, but I thought we all had to follow the great commission?

The term "evangelical" as it is used today is used to differentiate Protestant Christian thoelogical leanings. Many Christian denominations can be categorized into three areas (though there is overlap): fundamentalist, evangelical, and pentacostal. None of these is necessarily "better" than the other, they just have different interpretations of how to best fulfill Christ's purposes on earth. Evangelicals do place a bit more emphasis on mission work, but that's not to say that others ignore missions. In fact, the Southern Baptists, a very fundamentalist denomination, greatly emphasizes missions. But you are absolutely right in saying that all of us Christians should be concerned in mission work.

 

[Hobbit]

The term "evangelical" as it is used today is used to differentiate Protestant Christian thoelogical leanings. Many Christian denominations can be categorized into three areas (though there is overlap): fundamentalist, evangelical, and pentacostal. None of these is necessarily "better" than the other, they just have different interpretations of how to best fulfill Christ's purposes on earth. Evangelicals do place a bit more emphasis on mission work, but that's not to say that others ignore missions. In fact, the Southern Baptists, a very fundamentalist denomination, greatly emphasizes missions. But you are absolutely right in saying that all of us Christians should be concerned in mission work.

"there is overlap" is a bit of an understatement, at least where I'm from. Assemblies of God (my denomination) is labelled as pentecostal, as is the Church of God, but I think AG is both evangelical (their original purpose was to change how missions work was donw) and pentecostal. I'd call Church of God fundamentalist and pentecostal. There's usually overlap. There's also a fourth catagory I use, but you may have under a different catagory, and that's traditionals. By traditionals, I mean those who, like the old Catholic churches, place a lot of stock in having formal, ritualized services. This would be Catholics and a lot of the more traditional churches whose services resemble Mass.

 

[CivilLiberty]

I know I'm not the only evangelical on the board, and I'm not claiming a corner on the market. But here's the premise of the thread: you ask a question, I give you an answer from an evangelical Christian viewpoint.

1) Do you prefer the KJV or NIV bible?

2) How old is the earth?

3) How do you account for dinosaurs?

4) In Genesis the lord says that all green plants are for eating, though we know that some green plants are poisonous. Also, the lord says that all animals are for our eating, but in later books, retracts this and demands that we only eat split-hoofed-cud-chewers, fish and birds. How do you account for these discrepancies?


A

 

[5stringJeff]

Good questions.

1) Do you prefer the KJV or NIV bible?

I personally prefer the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the English Standard Version (ESV). Of the two you listed, I prefer the NIV. Among evangelicals, I think the NIV is the most popular. Many of the KJV-only people (those who believe that of all the English translations, only the KJV is correct) are of the strict fundamentalist denominations.

2) How old is the earth?

I personally believe that the earth is something like 3-4 billion years old. This is because I believe that God created the universe through the Big Bang, and that there is no contradiction between the creation accounts found in Genesis and the scientific evidence that the universe is 11-12 billion years old.
There are some who believe that the earth, and universe, are about 6-7 thousand years old. These people argue that God created the universe the way he did to test people's faith in His creative ability, i.e. those who truly believe in Him would believe that the earth is 6000 years old, while those who believe that the universe is billions of years old don't really believe in God. I have not studied a lot about the "young earth" theory, but I know enough to know that I don't believe it. Again, many "young earth" people are fundamentalists, kind of like the KJV-only people.

3) How do you account for dinosaurs?

I don't know if there's an official "evangelical answer" to this question, but
I personally believe that dinosaurs lived on the earth a long time ago and died out for some reason.

[/quote]4) In Genesis the lord says that all green plants are for eating, though we know that some green plants are poisonous. Also, the lord says that all animals are for our eating, but in later books, retracts this and demands that we only eat split-hoofed-cud-chewers, fish and birds. How do you account for these discrepancies?[/QUOTE]

My take on the first part (about the plants) is that God was saying to mankind that whatever plants he wanted to eat, that was fine with him. Obviously, not all plants are edible, posionous or not. But God issues this command after the Fall. Prior to this, Adam and Eve were in a garden, which provided fruit for them without any work on their part. So now God is bascially saying to them, go find plants to eat - whichever ones you determine you can raise.
As for the animals... the allowance to eat flesh was given to Noah after he got out of the ark. The restrictions to mention are part of the Mosiac Law, in which God specifies which foods are clean and unclean. I don't know if I can explain exactly why God determined some animals to be unclean, although modern science recommends that we stay away from some animals (like pigs) because they are not as healthy for us as other animals (like cows). In any case, Jesus lifted all dietary restrictions.

 

[CivilLiberty]

I personally prefer the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the English Standard Version (ESV). Of the two you listed, I prefer the NIV. Among evangelicals, I think the NIV is the most popular. Many of the KJV-only people (those who believe that of all the English translations, only the KJV is correct) are of the strict fundamentalist denominations.

Is the NASB significantly different than the NIV? These bibles are damn long - not sure how many I can read!

Again, many "young earth" people are fundamentalists, kind of like the KJV-only people.

Is "KJV only" a component of mort or all fundamentalists? As I try to divide and understand here, I know that about 25% of the US population identifies themselves as "evangelicals". Many "lump" fundamentalists into this category, though I recognize some of their differences. Do you happen to know the percentage of fundamentalists, and where they really part from evangelicals?

My take on the first part (about the plants) is that God was saying to mankind that whatever plants he wanted to eat, that was fine with him. Obviously, not all plants are edible, posionous or not. But God issues this command after the Fall. Prior to this, Adam and Eve were in a garden, which provided fruit for them without any work on their part. So now God is bascially saying to them, go find plants to eat - whichever ones you determine you can raise.
As for the animals... the allowance to eat flesh was given to Noah after he got out of the ark. The restrictions to mention are part of the Mosiac Law, in which God specifies which foods are clean and unclean. I don't know if I can explain exactly why God determined some animals to be unclean, although modern science recommends that we stay away from some animals (like pigs) because they are not as healthy for us as other animals (like cows). In any case, Jesus lifted all dietary restrictions.

I don't eat pork, I think it sucks. I eat fish, chicken, turkey, and cow. Sometimes buffalo.

I have not gotten to the new testament yet - why, and on what grounds, did jesus life these food bans? If god placed these bans, then why would god's son repeal them?


Thanks again for your input.



Andy Somers

 

[MrMarbles]

This may have been asked already, but i haven't been around lately, and did not feel like reading all six billion questions, but here are mine.

1) Do evangelicals believe that the world is going to end soon?

2) If so, what are the direct circumstances that would cause this to happen?

 

[5stringJeff]

Is the NASB significantly different than the NIV? These bibles are damn long - not sure how many I can read!

The NASB is a "word-for-word" translation. It seeks to translate each word as accurately as possible. The NIV is a "phrase-for-phrase" translation. It seeks to translate ideas as accurately as possible. The NASB is a bit choppier, though more technically accurate. Here's a passage for you to see the difference:

Psalm 1 - NIV

1 Blessed is the man
who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked
or stand in the way of sinners
or sit in the seat of mockers.
2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.
3 He is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither.
Whatever he does prospers.

4 Not so the wicked!
They are like chaff
that the wind blows away.
5 Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.

6 For the LORD watches over the way of the righteous,
but the way of the wicked will perish.

Psalm 1 - NASB

1How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked,
Nor stand in the path of sinners,
Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!
2But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
3He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water,
Which yields its fruit in its season
And its leaf does not wither;
And in whatever he does, he prospers.

4The wicked are not so,
But they are like chaff which the wind drives away.
5Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
Nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.

6For the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
But the way of the wicked will perish.

Is "KJV only" a component of mort or all fundamentalists? As I try to divide and understand here, I know that about 25% of the US population identifies themselves as "evangelicals". Many "lump" fundamentalists into this category, though I recognize some of their differences. Do you happen to know the percentage of fundamentalists, and where they really part from evangelicals?

This blog post and this essay (which I've linked to before) should be able to define the difference for you. As far as percentages, I would have to Google some stats for you.

I don't eat pork, I think it sucks. I eat fish, chicken, turkey, and cow. Sometimes buffalo.

I have not gotten to the new testament yet - why, and on what grounds, did jesus life these food bans? If god placed these bans, then why would god's son repeal them?

Thanks again for your input.

Andy Somers

This gets into the bigger question of why Jesus was able to repeal the Mosiac Law. If you have a Bible, I suggest reading the book of Hebrews (about 3/4 of the way through the New Testament) for the full answer. But in short, Jesus's death and resurrection brought a new covenant into effect, so the laws of the first covenant (i.e. the Mosiac Law) were negated.

 

[5stringJeff]

Andy, I apologize, I accidentally edited post #57 instead of replying to it! I tried to reconstruct it the best I could. Sorry!