ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Are Men Beasts

Evolution is Satanic. Some so-Called Christians say Man being a beast, as evolution says, and the Bible is agreeable. One cannot serve two masters, the Bible is true, or we are a 'beast.' Am I wrong?

Join Our Christian Dating and Take The World Religions Quiz
 ---Robert on 12/19/05
     Helpful Blog Vote (10)

Post a New Blog



Warwick:

You said: StrongAxe, you reject any Scripture which contradicts your nonBiblical views regarding creation day-length.

You have yet to show a single scripture that ACTUALLY says what the creation day-length is.

You said: Jesus (Mark 10:6) says man was made at the beginning of creation: you would have us believe He is wrong!

Genesis says God created man on day 6, but close enough. I never said man and woman WEREN'T male and female at the beginning.

You said: If you don't believe what Jesus said (Mark 10:6) of earthly things How then will you believe when He speaks of heavenly things?

I DO believe Jesus. YOU put words in my mouth, then judge me by them.
---StrongAxe on 8/26/10


Michael you wrote that God's description in Gen 1:3-5 "Looks like a normal day to me."

May I say it looks like a day to you because that's what God's word says. Your understanding is Bible based so you have no motive to retranslate it.

"And the evening and the morning were the first day." Considering the Bible was written for us, what does "evening" mean in our terms-the end of the daylight portion of a 24hr day. What does "morning" mean-the end of the dark part of a 24hr day. The phrase "evening and morning" therefore can only mean 24hr day.

Evening and morning are used together without day 38 times outside Genesis 1 and it always indicates an ordinary day.
---Warwick on 8/27/10


micha9344: "Looks like a normal day to me."

It IS a normal day. Those who argue in favor of Uncle Charlie's Animal Fables do so for a reason. It may be that they prefer the "oppositions of science falsely so called" to the Word of God, that they are so scientifically weak that they don't understand the difference between evolution of a species and mendellian genetics, or that their concept of God is as an intentional deciever (like them).

Then again, perhaps they are trying to prove that they are no more than brute beasts by acting like them.
---jerry6593 on 8/27/10


Gen 1:3-5 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Looks like a normal day to me.
---micha9344 on 8/26/10


Cluny, what we now know about genetics shows Darwin was wrong. Scientists know natural selection cannot create massive amounts of new, unique, specific genetic information required to cause one kind of creature to evolve into a completely different kind. Scientists now talk of Neo-Darwinism.

It is not about how one species evolves into another but how completely different 'kinds' have evolved. There are numerous species of seagulls for example, many of which cannot reproduce with one another. They are visibly identical but are not evolving into a non Seagull, as no new genetic information has arisen.

Remember evolution is about how one kind evolved into another. What for example was the proposed evolutionary ancestor of dogs?
---Warwick on 8/26/10




Alan what you see as accusations and insults I consider statements of reality.

You have been asked to show where Scripture says that Genesis is not historical reality, as written. But you cannot but nonetheless persist with your story. This is evasion.

As I have previously said you and others reinterpret Genesis via nonBiblical beliefs. Therefore man is your authority. This is why you and others will not accept what Scripture says both in the OT and NT about the historical reality of Genesis.

You would have us believe that when someone says they work for 6 days we cannot know what they mean!
---Warwick on 8/26/10


StrongAxe, you reject any Scripture which contradicts your nonBiblical views regarding creation day-length. Genesis is the historical foundation of the gospel and Psalm 11:3 says "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"

Jesus (Mark 10:6) says man was made at the beginning of creation: you would have us believe He is wrong!

Jesus says (John 11:2,3) that ".. you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe, how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

If you don't believe what Jesus said (Mark 10:6) of earthly things How then will you believe when He speaks of heavenly things?

And some say it doesn't matter!
---Warwick on 8/26/10


jerry6593:

Nowhere in Genesis does it say the 6 creation days are 24 hours long - that is merely inferred. And as I repeatedly point out to Warwick, even if one assumes days 3-7were 24 hours (i.e. sunset to sunset), days 1-2 had no sun to measure buy.

The day Joshua commanded the sun to stand still (Joshua 10:12-14) was also from sunset to sunset - so longer than 24 hours, so NOT all Biblical days are 24 hours long.

And does 2 Peter 3:8 mean that God continuously deceives us? I don't think so.

The Bible is not a textbook on science or mathematics. It isn't intended to be. It only touches most briefly on such subjects as they impact on the weightier matters it actually DOES deal with.
---StrongAxe on 8/26/10


\\Cluny speciation is not evolution.\\

As a matter of fact, speciation IS evolution.

Remember the title of Darwin's book: ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY NATURAL SELECTION?

The whole theory is about how one species develops into another.

In other words, about speciation.
---Cluny on 8/26/10


Warwick:

Yes you are right. We HAVE been over this over and over again before. But just as we have not been able to show the creation days were NOT 24 hour days, you have not been able to show that they ARE 24 hour days. The Bible does not say one way or other. It is pointless to argue that the Bible gives any specific definition.

In fact, the Bible NOWHERE mentions a day as being 24 hours long. EVERYWHERE that days are mention (outside of the creation account), they are measured from one sunset to another - and while one could assume that such a measure would also apply to creation days 3-7, it CANNOT apply to days 1-2 because THERE WAS NO SUN to rise or set at that time.
---StrongAxe on 8/26/10




Warwick ... We have been through this before. My Faith in Christ is totally unaffected byb the debate over the Creation time scale.

It is so sad that you seem unable to avoiud personal insults of those who don't beleive exactly as you do. You sound like someone else here.

I have proof of evolution ... from clouds to animal life. Yesterday it was raining cats and dogs.
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/26/10


Axey: You have correctly summarized my argument. Now, an honest reading of the language of Gen 1 combined with Exo 20:8-11 can ONLY result in one of two conclusions.

(1) God created the heaven and the earth in six ~24-hour literal days, or

(2) God actually created the heaven and the earth in thousands to billions of years and just wrote all that specific six morning-evening stuff to deceive us.

Is your God a deciever???
---jerry6593 on 8/26/10


Alan, the days of creation are carefully, and fully defined as everyday ordinary earth days in Genesis 1. When did the length change? This is proved beyond doubt by Exodus 20:8-11.

Nowhere in Scripture are the 6 days of creation defined as other than ordinary 24hr days. The problem is that you have a nonBiblical starting point, reinterpreting Scripture through this.

It is pointless debating Scripture with you as you are a master of evasion and misrepresentation.

I trust Jesus and His word and know from it that He, the Creator, took Genesis as literal history. And He alone is in the position to know the facts.

He definiely did not believe in the days of creation being long periods.

Trust God not man!
---Warwick on 8/25/10


Warwick ... Yes you have said it before .."As I said before people who hold views like you will not accept what Scripture says. You are on the sloppery slope that leads away from faith"

You would not be able to hold such views without losing faith in Jesus and His work.

But others can, and do. And we find no slippery slope. It is sadly i---------t to say that of us

This issue of the literality or figurativoness of the Genesis account is pointless and damaging to us all if it is allowed to sescend into the accuations that you now make.

The point is there is no real proof either way.
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/25/10


Cluny speciation is not evolution.

Here we are discussing the false idea that God used evolution to create.

In Genesis ch.1 God says (ten times) that He created His creatures to reproduce after their own kind. That is cats have cats and dogs have dogs. On the other hand microbe-to-man evolution says one kind of creature has evolved into a completely different kind. The belief is that birds evolved from reptiles.

What do we see? Cats have cats, and dogs have dogs etc, just what God's word says. Amazing variety but cats are still cats and dogs dogs.

We do not see one kind evolving into a completely different kind.



---Warwick on 8/25/10


StrongAxe we have been through this days thing over and over and no one has been able to give Scriptural support for the '6 days' of creation being anything other than 6 earth-rotation 24hr days.

I trust God alone knows and tells absolute Truth and He says He created in 6 days (Exodus 20:11) with no hint that the days were not 6 equal length earth-rotation days. The idea is nonsensical. If we cannot understand such simple language then we can understand nothing.

BTW 2 Peter 3:8 demonstrates God is outside of time. Time was created for us and day-length defined in Genesis 1:3-5.

As I said before people who hold views like you will not accept what Scripture says. You are on the sloppery slope that leads away from faith.
---Warwick on 8/25/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


Jacob sadly this site does not allow us to include links to information, as other sites do. However if you enter 'creation' into a search engine you will find the 'Creation' site when there are numerous articles on the peppered moths story.
---Warwick on 8/25/10


Evolution is proven a lie. Back to the Truth people: "In the begiining God created...And God created every water creature and God created every winged creature and God created every land creature and God created every human male and female after their kind." Genesis 1:1,20-21.
---Eloy on 8/25/10


jerry6593:

God did not actually SAY he didn't use evolution. You INFER this from the syllogism:
1) God created everything in six days
2) Evolution takes eons
3) Therefore, God couldn't have used evolution.

God didn't say he used 24-hour days (a term not in the Bible). We measure day length based on the sun - which didn't exist during days 1+2, so those days must have used a different measurement of time. God does not use the same measure we do: 2 Peter 3:8:
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

Also, many end-time prophecy proponents equate "days" in Daniel's prophecy to mean years.
---StrongAxe on 8/25/10


\\According to theory, Evolution takes eons to perform its magic. Do you agree or disagree?\\

Not necessarily.

All pet house cats, Felis cattus, have been determined (by genetic testing) to have descended from only 5 African wildcats, Felis lybica, 8,000 years ago.

This is a very short time for speciation to take place.
---Cluny on 8/25/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


Axey: "When did God SAY he didn't use Evolution?"

According to theory, Evolution takes eons to perform its magic. Do you agree or disagree?

God wrote the following with His own finger:

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is

Thus, God declares that He didn't use Evolution. What compells you to believe that He did? Your atheist college professors?
---jerry6593 on 8/25/10


Warwick: This is very interesting to me, for it has always been a question for me....

Could you provide some more places where I can search?

To my human mind (the idea of if you are seen, you will be eaten) it seems reasonable.

We also have to set a limit, which is hard to do: when do we reject research done and published on peer-reviewed journals because other evidence has appeared, but has not been published in similar journals.

Is it perhaps time to set up a similar journal, but NOT one simply to publish articles that reject evolution - it must be a general journal, accepting research papers from anyone, whatever that person believes
---Jacob on 8/25/10


Jacob do a little research outside of evolutionary textbooks and you will discover the peppered moth (Biston betularia) story is a fake. A set up!

However whether fraudulent of not the story at best demonstrates natural selection. 'Natural selection' is the term used to refer to changing gene frequencies within a species or kind, selected out by natural forces. This phenomenon does not support microbe-to-man evolution as it is conservative removing genetic information from a population. It cannot not create the massive amounts of new, unique, and specific genetic information which would be absolutely necessary to transform a reptile into a bird (the evolutionary idea) for example.
---Warwick on 8/24/10


StrongAxe I am glad you see Scripture and evolution are incompatible.

You wonder about one of nine examples I gave. See Job 40: 15-24 which describes 'Behemoth,' made along with man, as God says.

Read also Job ch. 41 where the whole chapter is given over to the description of 'Leviathan.'

Neither of these descriptions can refer to any living creature. Behemoth is assuredly what we today would call a dinosaur. Being an aquatic monster Leviathan is technically not a dinosaur but most people would call it that.
---Warwick on 8/24/10


Send a Free Romance Ecard


Hi, Robert . . . the Bible doesn't say men or man is a beastie, but . . .

"A man who is in honor, yet does not understand,
.Is like the beasts that perish." (Psalm 49:20)

Satan's kingdom is like an animal kingdom, with its competition and survival of the fittest, with predator and prey animals . . . like how people live selfishly. So, such people can tend to see things to be the way they are, supposing that survival of the fittest has caused things.

I don't think evolution is scientific, for one thing because of how complicated so many human functions are. These interrelated abilities and functions would need various genes, all evolving in coordination with each other . . . by "chance".
---Bill_bila5659 on 8/24/10


Warwick:

You said: Bible: Man and dinosaurs lived together

Please cite chapter and verse describing men living with dinosaurs (or, for that matter, anything mentioning dinosaurs at all).
---StrongAxe on 8/24/10


when white moths are more fertile then black moths, or not, do not support false doctrine. Evolution is lie. period. No "ifs" and no "ands" and no "buts", just "lie". Whenever I hear lie, my ears authomatically turn off to the sound. The earth is young and not millions of years old, The Lord God Jesus created it and there was no big bang and there is no evolution and no dinosaurs. Ignorant and foolish humans, along with Hollywood movies made by them, do not have the truth for you. Read the record, for the Holy Scriptures bear witness to the truth.
---Eloy on 8/24/10


What about the actual cases of evolution that have ALREADY been observed (yes, they are not the creation of anew species, but I think many people will take them as good evidence that the METHOD of evolution works). I mean things like, 100 years ago (when photography was good enough to provide good evidence) there were more white moths, as the land was white. As black soot gathered, moths became black, as that prevented them from being eaten. Any suggestions?
---Jacob on 8/24/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture


StrongAxe:

Bible: Earth before sun/stars
Evolution: Stars/sun before earth

Bible: Earth covered in water initially
Evolution: Earth molten initially

Bible: Oceans first then dry land
Evolution: Dry land then oceans

Bible: Life first created on land
Evolution:Life started in oceans

Bible: Plants created before sun
Evolution: Plants long after sun

Bible: Fish/ birds created together
Evolution: Fish formed long before birds

Bible: Land animals created after birds
Evolution: land animals before whales

Bible: Man and dinosaurs lived together
Evolution: Dinosaurs extinct long before man appeared

Bible: big bang future
---Warwick on 8/24/10


Robert, whenever mankind chooses to put their own imaginations ahead of God's recorded and historical truth, as the false idea of evolution does, then they are liars and have become fools.
---Eloy on 8/23/10


Warwick:

First:
See how humans are born (9 months) and raised (several decades), how we process food (very messy), how we reproduce (even more messy), how we live (1/3 of it unconscious) - all very slow wasteful and inefficient processes. Yet God seems to have no problem using such processes.

Second:
When did God SAY he didn't use Evolution? There are two verses in Genesis 1 & 2 that describe in the most general terms that God created man, but they do not get into specific details. It would take much longer to just name the parts of the body than to read those two verses. Neither one of them (nor any others) mention any specific ways that God did NOT create man, nor is evolution ever mentioned anywhere.
---StrongAxe on 8/23/10


Strongaxe, you take an axe to Scripture-pun intended.

I cannot understand how any Christian can imagine Almighty God would use such a slow, wasteful, violent process, as evolution, to create. Especially when He has said He didn't!

God is outside of time and when He acts in time (our time) He performs His miracles immediately. He does not even need minutes to perform wonders let alone billions of years.

I know some Christians believe God created via evolutionary processes but they don't get that belief from Scripture. Most will not change their minds when shown evolution is contrary to and contradicted by Scripture. This is not a position of faith and as God's word says: that which is not of faith is sin-Romans 14:23!
---Warwick on 8/23/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops


Strongaxe a seed growing into a plant is not evolution but entelechy the unfolding of a predetermined plan. The plans for the plant were already in the seed. Apple seeds always grow apples. They do not evolve into anything else.
---Warwick on 8/23/10


Eloy:

You said: Strongax, Read the Holy Bible it is filled with details, and if you overlook them or if you do not read the Holy Bible at all...

Many of my posts provide scriptural references for what I say.

Genesis 1:27 and 2:7 say how God created man in extremely general terms, but provide very little detail about the exact process. It takes much longer to even just list the names of the parts of the body than it takes to read these two verses. To create a human being these days takes 9 months (plus decades of subsequent training), and many thousands of books have been written about the processes involved, and our understanding of them still only begins to scratch the surface.
---StrongAxe on 8/23/10


Axey: I once believed as you did. I questioned everything in the Bible and believed everything my university professors said. But God switched that around. When I investigated the "scientific theories" of life origins for myself, I found that the professors were wrong and God was right.

God wrote with His own finger in stone (and commanded us to remember) that He created the earth and all life in it in 6 literal days. [Note: if it is not 6 literal days, then His language is intentionally deceiving, and we have yet another problem.]

So again I ask the question: should I believe you or God?

Besides, the evolutionary development of increasingly complex life forms by natural processes is scientifically impossible.
---jerry6593 on 8/23/10


Strongax, Read the Holy Bible it is filled with details, and if you overlook them or if you do not read the Holy Bible at all, then your lack of knowledge is "your" lack of knowledge, and not any lack of revelation on God's part. So read, and pay attention the details that are evident, and stop bearing false witness against the scriptures which have an abundance of details for all to know.
---Eloy on 8/22/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer


God created man on day 6.
This is enough time to evolve.
---micha9344 on 8/22/10


jerry6593:

I didn't say we made ourselves. When you plant a seed, it grows into a plant. God doesn't micromanage it and bring each individual seed into fruition - instead, he designed each seed to grow by itself. This is a MUCH more remarkable thing.

It is wonderful to make something. It is more wonderful to make something that can make something else, and much more wonderful to make something that can make more of its own kind all by itself.

Those who believe in a God who continuously turns the wheels of the universe believe in a much smaller God than those of us who believe that He created a universe capable of turning its own wheels. (Besides, who turned them on the 7th day when He rested?)
---StrongAxe on 8/22/10


I can't find the scripture in Genesis that says this. Would you be so kind as to provide it for us? My Bible says that God made man (but not animals) in His image. He also personally breathed the breath of life into Adam's nostrils, but there is no record of His having done that with animals.
---jerry6593 on 8/19/10

Man and animal was both made from the dust of the earth and God gave both life BUT man is the only one made in God's image.
How else do you suppose animals came to be?
God is in everything that was ever created. John 1 attest to that, brother.
John chapter one is the record you asked for.
---ginger on 8/22/10


Eloy:

While God created man out of the dust of the earth, Genesis doesn't give very much detail about the process involved. It doesn't say how long the process took, other than at the start there was dirt and God's breath, and at the end there was man. One could infer that the intermediate steps involved bacteria, and protozoa, and fish, and monkeys. One could also inver that the intermediate steps did not involve any of these things. But both of these positions would be assumptions, and Genesis does not imply (nor deny) either one of them.
---StrongAxe on 8/22/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting


Axey: "Why is it so much harder to believe...."

You are a smart guy, but you are not God. God said that He made us. You say that we made ourselves from animals. Do you honestly expect us to take your word over God's? Not likely!
---jerry6593 on 8/22/10


strongax, Because when God says something we know it is truth, but when man says something contradicting God word we know that it is false. God gave us very explicit details on how he made man from the dust and shaped him to look like himself, much like a potter builds a vessel or a statue, and then how he breathed into this shape into his nostrils and the shape became animated. That does not sound fantastic at all to scuplturers, but what is not only fatastic, but completely ludicrous is to think that a human's ancestors are monkeys and fish and sludge in the water, that is completely rediculous and an imaginary lie contradicting Truth. Foolish people, just read the Holy Bible.
---Eloy on 8/21/10


cluny: "What else can "let the earth bring forth living creatures" mean but that they were made from the earth?"

Nice try, but the issue was "dust" (aphar) - not earth" (erets). Further, animals were not made in God's image as man was - unless you happen to be a pagan animal worshipper.
---jerry6593 on 8/21/10


StrongAxe, we do not believe man is descended from animals because God is very clear in saying He did not make man from any creature.

God has no problem with creating as He alone can, if he wishes, create anything from nothing.
---Warwick on 8/20/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing


Eloy:

Why is it so much harder to believe that man is descended from apes, guppies and protozoa than it is to believe that man is descended from dirt? That is an even more startling transformation.
---StrongAxe on 8/20/10


\\I can't find the scripture in Genesis that says this. Would you be so kind as to provide it for us?\\

Try Genesis 1:24.

24And 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.

What else can "let the earth bring forth living creatures" mean but that they were made from the earth?
---Cluny on 8/20/10


ginger: "The animals were also created from the dust of the earth. Genesis says this."

I can't find the scripture in Genesis that says this. Would you be so kind as to provide it for us? My Bible says that God made man (but not animals) in His image. He also personally breathed the breath of life into Adam's nostrils, but there is no record of His having done that with animals.
---jerry6593 on 8/19/10


Evolutionists are fools to believe such foolishness. All my ancestors are people, not King Kongs, nor guppies, nor protozoan and amoebic sludge.
---Eloy on 8/18/10


Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service


I forgot to post that I do not believe that humans are animals in the sense that animals are animals.

Forgive me for that oversite.
---ginger on 8/18/10


I would say we should really think on this.

We KNOW that darwinism is false.

So, what does the Bible tells us?

That we were created from the dust of the earth. The animals were also created from the dust of the earth. Genesis says this.

That explains why we have some similar genetic material the same as animals.
---ginger on 8/18/10


Not long ago, I got our 'atheist' visitor to admit that he believed his ancestors were animals (since he believes in the religion of Darwinism). Any Christian who believes in the evolution of the species, and the ascent of man from them - in any form (e.g. theistic evolution) - by definition considers himself a descendant of animals and thus an animal himself.

Yes, the origin of Darwin's folly is satanic. It is a seldom published fact that Darwin made a trip inland in South America and attended a witchcraft ceremony before making his "great discovery" on the Galapagos Islands. It was here also that he became sickly for the rest of his life.
---jerry6593 on 8/18/10


Psalms 33:12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.
---Chipper on 3/9/07

Wow, sure is nice to see someone post politically incorrect scripture for a change.
The democrats will be upset though. B.K.(baby killer) hussien,is the lord for a few here. And some from the U.K. which would be strange...but, then they've practically given away their little island.
Malachi 2:2
If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name, saith the LORD of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to heart.
---Trav on 8/12/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


**One cannot serve two masters, the Bible is true, or we are a 'beast.' Am I wrong?**

Yes, you are.

The "no man can serve two masters" is not talking about how you used it.

It cannot be denied that, on a biological level, Homo sapiens is similar to primates and other mammals.

The biology is even based on DNA, which is shared with one celled creatures.

But human beings are more than their biology.
---Cluny on 8/12/10


The Bible is true and we are humans, made in the image of God. Humans are the only one of God's creations that He made in His very own image. I only hope I said that well enough. Hallelujah. Ahhh
---catherine on 8/12/10


Man kind 2nd.Peter 2 v 12.

One cannot serve 2 masters.
You canNot have one foot in to serve God & the other foot in to serve the devil & what he has, the glitter & glamor of worldly pleasures. < Yr's gone by, I see that's just what the Man - made trin relig - org's beginning with the rcc
are doing just that.
---Lawrence on 8/12/10


Hey Paul:
I hope they all stick around and maybe they will learn something. This may be the only gospel they will ever be exposed to.
Psalms 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works,...
Psalms 33:12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.
---Chipper on 3/9/07


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


Remember the audience out there. There are aethiests, pagans, witches, and other non-Christian beliefs.
Remember, they take delight in all religious bashing, that's why they're here. Their vote will be for anyone that raises the most Cain and contention. I can see that, clearly.
---Paul on 3/8/07


Ah, another serial blog killer. When you make them mad, they will use your name in vain. This Paul is not lost.
I stood up for Catholics that believe Jesus Christ died for their sins. The Catholics bloggers could spend a lifetime fighting the onslaught of criticism. Or be the unique witness for Christ with God's unique fingerprint on you. I hear a motor revving, getting harsher, driving at break-neck speeds. Carry on Jack, Emcee, Augusta.
---Paul on 3/8/07


To Paul:
I don't find the word "beast" in the book and chapter you refer to. Maybe you are thinking of 1st Corinthians 15:32. The word "beasts" Paul was refering to here meant gladiator type or furious men. Strongs #2341. They were not lions and tigers.
---Chipper on 3/8/07


Revelation 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
"dogs" is a metaphor for a man of an impure mind, an impudent man. It is also refered to as a male prostitute.
---Chipper on 3/8/07


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


Read Colossians Chapter 2. I don't know understand what they say about man being a beast, I'm lost.
---Paul on 3/8/07


Eloy:: So you are using scripture to claim goats & sheep have souls,or was that metaprorically speaking (Meadow for giving cows souls)nice try your humor runneth over the tiny cup.the goats are the foolish & the sheep are his own.he will winnow them out.
---Emcee on 12/30/05


Mike:: I believe there are 3 kingdoms Animal mineral or Gaseous if you are not Animal you must be full of hot air because you are not mineral--not intended for the humor blog.Ha ha
---Emcee on 12/30/05


i may be a sinner, but not an animal.
---mike on 12/21/05


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


What's a metaphor? answer= to put cows in (ie: meadow for). The unregenerate are called goats and dogs, and the born-again are called sheep. Please read Psalm 22:16; Matthew 25:32,33.
---Eloy on 12/21/05


Metaphorically speaking both men & women belong to the animal kingdom,the only differenceis Men & women have souls which they are accountable for.Animals dont have souls.Women allude to men being beasts on account of some mens behaviour like animals.
---Emcee on 12/20/05


Yes, men are beasts, and so are women. This is why we all need Jesus.
---Pete on 12/20/05


Robert, I don't know if you are wrong or not mainly because I can't figure out what in the world you are trying to say.
---ralph7477 on 12/20/05


Read These Insightful Articles About Software


YES; Without salvation mankind are brast. WHY? Simply because of Adam's folly in the garden of eden!!--mima 12/18/3005
---mima on 12/20/05


Evolution is one man's theory of how changes have occured in the same species of animal in different parts of the world, and through time.It is only theory since it can't be proven on speculation and that is all Charles Darwin had ,was his own beliefs and speculation.Not Satanic, only a man looking for answers to differences which have only one answer-God.
---Darlene_1 on 12/20/05


Mankind in general can be 'beasts,' unkind or hateful.
You seem to have more than one question mixed in here, and its confusing. 'Evolution is satanic,' where did that come from, or fit into this ques.? I don't believe we evolved from sea scum, but as the human race we have evolved in many ways. Make your ? clearer.
---NVBarbara on 12/20/05


Robert ... Evolution cannot be satanic. Satanic is real. If you deny evolution, it cannot be real, therefore it cannot be satanic. For something to be satanic it has to be real. If evolution is the way in which life developed, it would not be satanic, because it would be the way in which God created as all.
---alan8869_of_UK on 12/20/05


Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising


a beast? Or God's greatest creation? A creation so wonderful, that He was willing to give His Son to save him.
---mike on 12/20/05


Men, the gender are not beasts. But Man, the race is exceedingly wicked. That puts women in the same camp!
---Yvonne on 12/20/05


Satanic???? Where did you come up with this?

Confused maybe, by not satanic.
---NurseRobert on 12/20/05


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.