Jump to content


Alter2Ego's Content

There have been 2 items by Alter2Ego (Search limited from 29-March 23)


Sort by                Order  

#445290 Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?

Posted by Alter2Ego on 17 March 2013 - 05:03 AM in Theology

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:
I am a Christian and have the deepest respect for God's inspired Word, the Judeo-Christian Bible. I invite fellow Christians to participate in the questions for discussion. Two of the most basic teachings in Christendom are as follows:


1. THE TRINITY
The teaching that God is split up into three individual persons that are combined into one "Godhead" (Father, Son, and holy ghost/holy spirit). All three of these persons are said to be CO-EQUAL (meaning they have the same power) and CO-ETERNAL (meaning they have always existed at the same time and none of them can die).


2. HELLFIRE
The teaching that God will burn a person's soul in everlasting hellfire for committing wicked deeds. In other words, God will supposedly punish people forever in fiery flames of hell--despite the fact the crimes the persons committed were only done during the persons' brief human lifespan.


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1.
Are there scriptures in the Bible to support the teachings of Trinity and hellfire? If so, present the scriptures by giving Bible book, chapter, and verse and also explain why you believe the scripture you present is talking about Trinity or literal hellfire.


2. Why are these teachings found in pagan/false religions that never worshipped the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible? For instance there were pagan trinities at least 200 years before Jesus came to the earth as a human.


A. In the 2nd century B.C.E. (two centuries before Christ came to the earth), Egypt had a triad of gods consisting of (1) Horus, (2) Osiris, and (3) Isis.


B. Likewise, in the 2nd century B.C.E. (two centuries before Christ came to the earth), Babylon had a triad of gods consisting of (1) Ishtar, (2) Sin, and (3) Shamash.


C. In fact, during the 1st century AD when Jesus was on earth, Palmyra, which was an ancient city in Syria, had a triune god which consisted of (1) moon god, (2) Lord of Heavens, and (3) sun god.




3. If the Trinity and hellfire are Bible teachings, why is it that Jesus and his apostles who followed him around never taught anyone about the Trinity and literal hellfire?


4. How is it that both the Trinity and hellfire teachings did not become "Christian" teachings until the Roman Catholics copied both of them from pagan/false religions--AFTER the resurrected Jesus Christ returned to heaven?


5. If hell is a place of literal fiery torment, how is it that the Bible says Jesus went to hell for the entire three days that he was dead?


"He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that HIS SOUL WAS NOT LEFT IN HELL, neither his flesh did see corruption." (Acts 2:31--King James Version)


6. If hell is a place of literal torment, why is it that the word "hell" also means "Sheol" and "Hades" and "the grave"?


7. Does the Bible teach that humans have an immortal soul that survives the death of the person so that the soul can then be burned in eternal flames? If so, please present scriptures to this effect to prove it.


8. Are the words "Trinity" and "Godhead" in the Bible? If so, were those words part of the original writings?



#445288 Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

Posted by Alter2Ego on 16 March 2013 - 10:53 PM in Theology

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

ORGANIC/BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION THEORY is chained to abiogenesis theory (the belief that life resulted from non-life spontaneously). Evolution and abiogenesis are two different theories, but because pro-evolutionists are notoriously atheists and dismiss an intelligent Designer/God from the equation, abiogenesis is what they are stuck with. When asked how life came from non-life by itself, they have no credible answer. So to avoid the problem of the long debunked theory of abiogenesis, some have jumped onto the creation bandwagon and claim they are theists who believe in evolution theory. In fact some claim they are Christians.

According to macroevolution theory, after the first living organism developed from nonliving matter in the ocean and formed into a "primordial soup," it resulted in a "common ancestor" from which came all the different forms of life that have ever existed on planet earth, including humans. All of this is believed to have been accomplished by itself (abiogenesis), without input from a supernatural God aka Jehovah who intervened and guided the outcome. Non-living matter simply decided one day to come to life--by itself--and bring forth intelligent life by unintelligent means. (Sources: (1) LIFE--How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? Pages 10-11; (2) Encyclopedia Britannica (1978), page 1018)


CREATION, on the other hand, is the conclusion that the appearing of living things, each uniquely different, can only be explained by the existence of Almighty God who designed and made the universe and all the basic kinds of life on the earth just as they are, with the ability for each "kind" of creature to produce variations of itself up to a set point.

Clearly, the theory of evolution and the Genesis creation account are polar opposites. Those who accept the evolution theory argue that creation is not scientific. They carefully avoid the fact that science is unable to present a credible alternative for how life came from non-life by itself (abiogenesis). Furthermore, pro-evolutionists—including those in academia/the scientific community—routinely dodge the issue that their philosophy is based entirely upon speculations for which there is no credible scientific evidence. They routinely use fabricated words such as "species transition", "speciation", "Punctuated Equilibrium", etc. to mislead the gullible. I might add that many pro-evolution scientists are determined to make names for themselves and will resort to outright dishonesty when necessary. I will present proof of this later on in this thread.


Regarding the credibility of the Genesis creation account vs. evolution theory, one source states: "But in fairness, it could also be asked: Is evolution itself truly scientific? On the other hand, is Genesis just another ancient creation myth, as many contend? Or is it in harmony with the discoveries of modern science?" (Source: LIFE--How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? Pages 10-11)


FACTS TO CONSIDER:
FACT #1: Just like Charles Darwin, the modern-day evolution scientific community asserts that every single animal that has ever existed came from one common ancestor aka came from a single organism (macroevolution).


FACT #2: There is no evidence in the fossils (bones of long-dead animals) proving that humans or animals evolved from completely different beings than what they presently are (macroevolution).


FACT #3: Atheists have no explanation for how the "common ancestor" came to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then supposedly proceed. So they try to bypass that critical step by claiming evolution has nothing to do with how the "common ancestor" came to life. If they show up in this thread, you will see them doing what amounts to the usual song and dance along that line.