Skip to main content

Home/ Christians/ Contents contributed and discussions participated by Adam Skinner

Contents contributed and discussions participated by Adam Skinner

Adam Skinner

Welcome to the Christian Classics Ethereal Library! | Christian Classics Ethereal Library - 0 views

  •  
    The Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) seeks to build up the church by making classic Christian literature widely available and promoting its use for edification and study by interested Christians, seekers and scholars. The CCEL accomplishes this by selecting, collecting, distributing, and promoting valuable literature through the World Wide Web and other media
Adam Skinner

Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind! - 0 views

shared by Adam Skinner on 24 Sep 08 - Cached
  • “A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation,” Croskey wrote.
    • Adam Skinner
       
      Easy to understand how they'd want to dissolve homeschooling, then. If homeschooling is indoctrination to obedience to the state, they want to make sure that the state controls it.
Adam Skinner

PWM - Homo Nexus - 0 views

  • Could they be “changed” so that they are no longer created in the image of God?
    • Adam Skinner
       
      All of his further statements in this paragraph are hinged on the veracity of this speculation.
  • Homo nexus will never exist! Mankind will never evolve into a higher lifeform! For macro-evolution only takes place in the minds of those who have rejected God!
    • Adam Skinner
       
      This is a mischaracterization. Macroevolution, or "evolution as a theory of origins", is a different concept than one species changing into another over time.
  • Cross-breading was attempted in the Bible
    • Adam Skinner
       
      Referenced here is the (plausible) theory that the Nephilim were angelic crossbreeds. I'm not sure if they were ontologically different from humanity at that point insofar as their relationship to God and his expectations from them are concerned.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • ionlike men of Moab
    • Adam Skinner
       
      misinterpreation to support the argument. "lionlike men" just means mighty warriors. cf: http://jfb.biblecommenter.com/1_chronicles/11.htm et al
  • every hand six fingers
    • Adam Skinner
       
      Six fingered men are post-human? This does not support the argument.
  • Being converted into a transhuman no longer bearing God's image is the real hazard of re-engineering the human race!
    • Adam Skinner
       
      "no longer bearing God's image"? So we bear the image of God in our genetic code? Is that it? Is that interpretation even within the pale of orthodoxy? If we lose this image when we "add superhuman capabilities" due to genetic changes, why is it that these images are not lost when genetic mutations naturally occur (eg "genetic disorders")? They both stray from the path of the "image" of the genetic code, supposedly perfect and complete in Adam. I don't buy this argument.
  • But to give up the physical image is eternally damning, with no chance of salvation!
    • Adam Skinner
       
      This assertion is a fabrication, and unsubstantiated by scripture.
  • Noah and his family were spared. Why? They were perfect in their generations (Gen 6:9). They were fully human.
    • Adam Skinner
       
      misinterpreation. If Noah was spared because he was "fully human", why weren't the other fully human people on earth spared? Is that really the rationale that scripture gives? I don't think so. "blameless in his generation", "a righteous man" seems a more correct interpretation.
Adam Skinner

Modern History Sourcebook: John Calvin: On Predestination - 0 views

  • gives to some what He refuses to others
    • Adam Skinner
       
      It is not that he "refuses", for that predicates a request. The unregenerate make no such request of God for salvation (cf 2Cor4:4).
Adam Skinner

Why Does God Allow Suffering? - 1 views

  • The questions readily rise to mind and on the surface seem reasonable: yet a candid look at them shows that they carry certain implications. They imply that suffering in human life is inconsistent either with the power or with the love of God: that as a God of love either He has not the power to prevent the suffering, or if He has the power then He has not the will, and is not a God of love. It is assumed that the prevention of suffering as it now affects the apparently innocent is something we should expect from a God of love who is also Almighty. Are these assumptions justified?
  • Underlying all the loose thinking on the subject which has been surveyed so far is one basic assumption: it is that suffering is evil in itself.
  • suffering is not evil in itself, but a symptom of a deeper evil. The Scriptures portray suffering as a consequence of sin: not necessarily the sin of the individual who suffers, but sin in the history of man and in human society.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • The larger problem of suffering remains, and the only answer to be extracted from the Book of Job is that man cannot question the majesty and wisdom of God: He is the Creator and Sustainer of all life, and His works are beyond man's knowledge.
Adam Skinner

Azariah Southworth, Popular Christian TV Host, Announces He Is Gay - Media on The Huffi... - 0 views

  • I know I will be cut off from many within the Christian community, and if so, then they didn't get the point of the life of Christ.
Adam Skinner

Christmas - 0 views

shared by Adam Skinner on 16 Apr 08 - Cached
  • Christ's TRUE followers or disciples called themselves "Followers of The Way" or "Those True to The Covenant" (Nazrim ha-Brit), NOT christians.
  • This is directly opposed to the true teaching of Christ who says that YOU must NOT go to church (Matthew 6:5-6 where synagogue means all churches)
    • Adam Skinner
       
      Mat 6:5-6 is talking about prayer, not congregation. He's also talking about the reason that these hypocrites are praying, not where they're praying. By the logic propsed on this site, Christ also says YOU must NOT go to street corners as well. Manifest absurdity.
  • doctrine of the Nicolaitanes
    • Adam Skinner
       
      JFB has this to say on the subject: "Compare Rev_2:14, Rev_2:15, which shows the true sense of Nicolaitanes; they are not a sect, but professing Christians who, like Balaam of old. tried to introduce into the Church a false freedom, that is, licentiousness; "
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • imagine or theorize on what Christ would like or not like
    • Adam Skinner
       
      As the author of this document clearly has a proclivity for. This whole theology is riddled with claims lacking any scriptural basis.
  • Also, if you take the word CONIFER, which is the name given to the family of trees to which the Christmas (Fir) tree belongs, and split the word in two, you get: CON-IFER CON - Satan is known as the biggest con-artist ever. He invented it. IFER - The last half of Lucifer's name. HE'S LAUGHING AT ALL OF US RIGHT NOW!
    • Adam Skinner
       
      This kind of nonsequitor is actually very common in the church at large, and I'm not surprised to find it here. As though the english word for a tree was somehow a mockery for Satan's masterminding the remembrance of the very birth of Jesus Christ. Not to mention that the connection itself is flimsy at best. The author would have done better to simply keep quiet than make such claims.
Adam Skinner

The Woman's Headcovering - 0 views

  • the headcovering practiced in the churches is emblematic of womanly submission; and he also indicates that this is a symbol which even the angels (who are not subject to changing fashions) take a real interest in. So the practice cannot be dismissed as being merely cultural
  • when we consider that the bare-headed fashion of our times came into vogue at the same time that the "women's liberation" movement began, along with the wearing of pants and the cutting of hair, we ought to pause before we say that these things are really so devoid of symbolism in the culture at large
  • I do not think it is safe to assume that, despite his arguments, Paul's real intention is merely to affirm and interpret the fashions of his day (especially in Corinth) or that he would affirm in like manner the fashions of modern women if he were writing the letter today. Rather, it seems that Paul wants Christian women to observe a churchly tradition, irrespective of what happens to be in vogue outside the church. (20) Are we really honoring Scripture if we say that, despite its conspicuous absence in the passage, the counsel of cultural conformity is the real and unspoken motive for the ordinance?
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • Paul provides a rationale which is based on an appeal to creation, not to the custom of Corinthian harlots. We must be careful not to let our zeal for knowledge of the culture obscure what is actually said. To subordinate Paul's stated reason to our speculatively conceived reason is to slander the apostle and turn exegesis into eisogesis.
    • Adam Skinner
       
      This is Sproul speaking here.
  • It often becomes difficult for me to hear and understand what the Bible is saying because I bring to it a host of extra-biblical assumptions. This is probably the biggest problem of "cultural conditioning" we face. No one of us ever totally escapes being a child of our age ... I am convinced that the problem of the influence of the twentieth-century secular mindset is a far more formidable obstacle to accurate biblical interpretation than is the problem of the conditioning of ancient culture.
    • Adam Skinner
       
      Zing!
  • Fashions of women's dress have changed and will continue to change, but Paul in this passage has explained very carefully that the headcovering symbolizes something which does not change.
  • How are we to apply this rule to ourselves as Christians in the twenty-first century? The whole passage has been treated with some uneasiness in recent times. Since about 1960, not only have hats and scarves gone out of fashion for women in Western nations, but it has become "politically incorrect" to even suggest that women ought to submit to male authority. The very idea that women should be required to wear headcoverings as a sign of their subordination is almost intolerable in the modern context.
  • After a few paragraphs Sproul goes on to say, "What if, after careful consideration of a biblical mandate, we remain uncertain as to its character as principle or custom? If we must decide to treat it one way or the other but have no conclusive means to make the decision, what can we do? Here the biblical principle of humility can be helpful. The issue is simple. Would it be better to treat a possible custom as a principle and be guilty of being overscrupulous in our design to obey God? Or would it be better to treat a possible principle as a custom and be guilty of being unscrupulous in demoting a transcendent requirement of God to the level of a mere human convention? I hope the answer is obvious."
  • We should not be asking how much we are allowed to ignore the literal instructions of this passage or any other passage of Scripture so long as we claim to be observing the "spirit." We should be asking how we may best obey it both in spirit and in the letter.
  • Symbols have a powerful effect on our lives, and it is not safe to treat them with contempt, especially when the symbol in question has been appointed in Scripture itself.
  •  
    I happened to be listening to 1 Cor this morning and it stuck me again that the argument for women wearing a head covering doesn't come from the culture, but is a physical manifestation of a spiritual submission.  Paul spoke strongly on the matter.  I did a little more looking, and the argument presented here is well laid out, with man salient points (especially Sproul's comments).
1 - 10 of 10
Showing 20 items per page