Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Farewell

Expand Messages
  • Stephen E. Jones
    Pim (cc. CED) On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 16:37:50 -0000, pimvanmeurs wrote: PV The moderator has required me to reject my Christian faith before he ... On Fri, 03 Sep
    Message 1 of 4 , Sep 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Pim (cc. CED)

      On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 16:37:50 -0000, pimvanmeurs wrote:

      PV>The moderator has required me to reject my Christian faith before he
      >will allow me to continue posting on CED. I can hope that you can
      >appreciate that the cost of such is too high.

      Since you claim that "natural law IS God" (emphasis yours):

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
      On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:16:32 -0000, pimvanmeurs wrote:

      PV>Let me rephrase my statement, natural law IS God and any
      >interaction of God with His Creation becomes indistinguishable from
      >natural law. [...]
      --------------------------------------------------------------------------

      and that the miracles of the Bible (including the virgin birth and
      resurrection of Christ) were not supernatural events, you don't even *have*
      a Christian faith in the first place. What you *think* is your "Christian
      faith" is actually a form of Pantheism.

      PV>In violation of his own rules people now have to declare their faith
      >in accordance with the perceptions of the moderator. The moderator is
      >playing a bit too much the role of God here.

      Since you think that "natural law IS God", then to you *everyone* and
      *everything* would be "playing ... the role of God"!

      PV>That the moderator is willing to ignore his own rules is one thing,
      >that the moderator requires a fellow Christian to reject his faith is
      >just unacceptable to me.

      *** See above. ***

      PV>I hope you understand that the cost would be too high and thus I have
      >to sadly say goodbye to my fellow Christian friends who helped me
      >reconcile my faith and science.

      *** Having slept on it, I have reinstated your posting privileges, on the
      clear understanding that I (for one) do not regard your position as Christian,
      but in fact a form of Pantheism. You do not have to agree with my assessment.

      Under my existing policy, trolls (i.e. those who claim to hold a position
      that they don't really hold in order to undermine that position) can continue
      posting on CED, as long as they have been exposed as trolls. In your case
      you have now been exposed as claiming to hold a position (Christianity)
      when your position *really* is Pantheism, albeit possibly unrealised to
      yourself. ***

      You have admitted that your `god' is Nature. Therefore you are an idolater
      who has "exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served
      created things rather than the Creator" (Rom 1:25). Again I don't claim
      you necessarily realise it.

      There is nothing unusual about this, BTW. As I have pointed out many
      time, it is actually a *prediction* of Jesus (see tagline) that at the Last
      Judgment there will be "*Many*" who sincerely *thought* they were
      Christians but weren't because they never had a personal relationship with
      Him.

      You have been warned by myself (and other Christians) that your position is
      not Christian (even though you may sincerely *think* it is). If you don't
      heed their warnings then at the Last Judgement you cannot complain you were
      not warned.

      *** Welcome `back' to CED. Please remember the four (4) posts a day rule. If
      you personally exceed four (4) posts in any one day, your posting
      privileges will be *automatically* suspended for one (1) week. ***

      Steve

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Mt 7:21-23 [21] "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the
      kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in
      heaven. [22] Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not
      prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform
      many miracles?' [23] Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away
      from me, you evildoers!'"
      Stephen E. Jones http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones
      Moderator: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign
      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    • Stephen E. Jones
      Group On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 16:07:09 -0700 (PDT), Pim van Meurs wrote: [...] ... PV Remember what you are requiring here namely that a ... This is false. I made
      Message 2 of 4 , Sep 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Group

        On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 16:07:09 -0700 (PDT), Pim van Meurs wrote:

        [...]

        >>PV>In violation of his own rules people now have to
        >>declare their faith
        >>>in accordance with the perceptions of the
        >>moderator. The moderator is
        >>>playing a bit too much the role of God here.

        >SJ>Since you think that "natural law IS God", then to
        >>you *everyone* and
        >>*everything* would be "playing ... the role of God"!

        PV>Remember what you are requiring here namely that a
        >Christian rejects his faith.

        This is false. I made it quite clear that you did not have to agree with my
        assessment:

        --------------------------------------------------------------------------
        On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 06:59:31 +0800, Stephen E. Jones wrote:

        >*** Having slept on it, I have reinstated your posting privileges, on the
        >clear understanding that I (for one) do not regard your position as Christian,
        >but in fact a form of Pantheism. You do not have to agree with my assessment.
        --------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PV>The implications are startling. But you are again
        >misquoting me since I corrected my statement that
        >natura is God.

        Quite frankly I have not seen the correction. But your repeated denial
        of God intervening supernaturally in nature (including the miracles of
        the Bible and even the virgin birth and resurrection of Christ) shows
        your position is either a form of Pantheism, or Gnosticism, or Deism
        (see tagline). One thing it isn't is Christianity. But I accept that you may
        be unable to realise that.

        PV>Your stance is becoming more and more tenuous Stephen.
        >It started with an inability to forgive my past sins
        >(references to a 1998 posting of mine),

        Thus you neatly transfer the blame to me. It is *highly* relevant to remind
        CED members that you once admitted to having misled an entire list
        (including me) for several years about what your *real* position was.

        PV>followed by
        >insisting that I reject my Christian faith (not a
        >trivial request from a Christian to a fellow
        >Christian) and now we notice that you are focusing on
        >out of context quotes, which I have already corrected.

        This is false (see above). You can of course continue with what you call your
        "Christian faith". But I (and other Christians) reserve the right to point out
        it is not what they regard as a *true* "Christian faith". It would be the same
        if a Mormon or Jehovah's Witness joined CED and claimed to be hold the
        "Christian faith".

        PV>This whole affair is quite shocking to me. I had never
        >expected that a fellow Christian would require another
        >Christian to reject his faith as a requirement for
        >posting on CED. This feels like the twilight zone to
        >me.

        This is false (see above). I originally required you to admit you were not a
        Christian in order to post on CED, but then I reconsidered and reinstated your
        posting privileges, stating that you did not have to accept my assessment (see
        above).

        PV>I'll keep you in my prayers my dear Christian friend.

        If you think that God does not intervene in nature (even in the case of the
        miracles in the Bible, including the virgin birth and resurrection of Christ)
        then the lack of your "prayers" on my behalf would be of no great loss to me
        (see tagline)!

        Pim, I have assignments to do and I just don't have the time to deal with
        your problems right now. So I have again reinstated the suspension of your
        posting privileges on CED, until you send me a message saying you will
        just get on with debating other issues and leave me alone. We have each
        stated our positions and you are free to resume your debates on CED with
        other members.

        But if you keep sending me private messages, then I will add you to my
        Mailwasher bounce list.

        Steve

        --------------------------------------------------------------------------
        "Van Till's strong preference for a nature that evolves based on its
        properties (or giftedness) and his aversion to any `intervention' by God, his
        gapless economy, borders on a deistic world view. Deism is the view that
        God created a universe that operates independently, like a windup clock, in
        contrast to biblical theism that sees God as Creator and Sustainer, like an
        electric clock. His description of how he would pray for his surgeon was
        surprisingly deistic in tone. When I have had surgery, I had no hesitation in
        praying that God would give my surgeon supernatural skill and insight as
        needed to give me a maximum outcome." (Bradley W.L., "Response to
        Howard J. Van Till," in Moreland J.P. & Reynolds J.M., eds., "Three
        Views on Creation and Evolution," Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, 1999,
        pp.224-225)
        Stephen E. Jones http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones
        Moderator: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign
        --------------------------------------------------------------------------
      • pk4_paul
        ... privileges, on the ... as Christian, ... assessment. ... Paul: Pim s statement that nature is God was made repeatedly in our exchanges. I immediately
        Message 3 of 4 , Sep 6, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In CreationEvolutionDesign@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen E. Jones"
          <sejones@i...> wrote:
          > Group
          >
          > On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 16:07:09 -0700 (PDT), Pim van Meurs wrote:
          >
          > [...]
          >
          > >>PV>In violation of his own rules people now have to
          > >>declare their faith
          > >>>in accordance with the perceptions of the
          > >>moderator. The moderator is
          > >>>playing a bit too much the role of God here.
          >
          > >SJ>Since you think that "natural law IS God", then to
          > >>you *everyone* and
          > >>*everything* would be "playing ... the role of God"!
          >
          > PV>Remember what you are requiring here namely that a
          > >Christian rejects his faith.
          >
          > This is false. I made it quite clear that you did not have to
          agree with my assessment:
          >
          > -------------------------------------------------------------------
          -------
          > On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 06:59:31 +0800, Stephen E. Jones wrote:
          >
          > >*** Having slept on it, I have reinstated your posting
          privileges, on the
          > >clear understanding that I (for one) do not regard your position
          as Christian,
          > >but in fact a form of Pantheism. You do not have to agree with my
          assessment.
          > -------------------------------------------------------------------
          -------
          >
          > PV>The implications are startling. But you are again
          > >misquoting me since I corrected my statement that
          > >natura is God.


          Paul: Pim's statement that nature is God was made repeatedly in our
          exchanges. I immediately pointed out to him that this belief was
          pantheistic and unchristian. This is an expression of core belief
          and not an interpretation matter. Anyone is entitled to believe
          anything they please but presenting pantheism as Christianity is an
          obvious sign that one does not hold to basic beliefs prevalent
          throughout the Christian world. People should have their feet held
          to the fire when their statements are incompatible with their
          beliefs. Christ is God not nature.

          >
          > Quite frankly I have not seen the correction. But your repeated
          denial
          > of God intervening supernaturally in nature (including the
          miracles of
          > the Bible and even the virgin birth and resurrection of Christ)
          shows
          > your position is either a form of Pantheism, or Gnosticism, or
          Deism
          > (see tagline). One thing it isn't is Christianity. But I accept
          that you may
          > be unable to realise that.
          >
          > PV>Your stance is becoming more and more tenuous Stephen.
          > >It started with an inability to forgive my past sins
          > >(references to a 1998 posting of mine),

          Paul: Why aren't the 1998 statements relevant when they are
          confirmed by statements made within the last few days.
        • Chris Doyle
          Dear Group, I didn t want my final post to CED to be one that attacks Christianity. Despite everything I said Christians, Jews and Muslims as believers are on
          Message 4 of 4 , Jul 22, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Group,

            I didn't want my final post to CED to be one that attacks
            Christianity. Despite everything I said Christians, Jews and Muslims
            as believers are on a much surer path than atheists as non-believers.
            Creationists have the facts overwhelmingly on their side,
            evolutionists do not. On the contrary, the rational basis for faith in
            evolution is so weak now, that there is hardly anything constructive
            an evolutionist can bring to the debate any more. As our knowledge of
            the universe we live in increases, the case for God and Design becomes
            increasingly convincing. The degree of biological complexity and
            information found on this planet alone is enough to rule out the
            slightest possibility that life could have evolved in a random,
            unguided manner. Denial of Intelligent Design is now nothing more than
            a demonstration of ignorance and delusion.


            CED represented the last chance that a lot of evolutionists had to
            make their case free from personal attacks. Ironically, we have
            confirmed that a lot of evolutionists don't actually have a case to
            make and therefore resort to nothing but personal attacks. There are
            now a number of evolutionist back-slapping clubs (such as the pathetic
            "anti-ced" group) filled with sad, lonely, insecure, ignorant and
            twisted people who have no life and therefore nothing better to do
            than to allow their hatred of God and believers to consume them. Like
            all stupid bullies, they draw strength in numbers but are truly
            nothing more than ignorant cowards. Even when biologists universally
            reject their faith in evolution (and that day is coming), the
            "anti-ced" cowards will continue to irrationally hate God and
            believers because they are losers and, deep down, they know it.


            Steve, I'm very sorry that my final exchange with you was a
            disagreement about Christianity. I trust that it is clear that
            although I was strongly attacking the position, I would never attack
            the Christian. I respect Christians enormously and if the world was
            full of Christians, it would be a much, much better place. I am also
            sorry that I may have broken CED rules in the previous paragraph, much
            as I cherish them, there are times when we all act a little recklessly
            and I figured it's now or never for me in CED! I hope you'll forgive
            me on both counts.

            I wish Steve and all group members the best of luck and maybe I'll see
            some of you around in another forum.

            Take Care,

            Chris
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.