Were you born again as a young child? How old were you when you were saved?

[ALAYMAN]

...there is a lot more i could write about all that .... about what it all meant to me and how reading what i did from it gave me not only a hunger to read more...  but also an assurance that the salvation God gave me on that bus when i was 8 years old was real and genuine......  ..  but that would turn into a very heavy novel... so whether i will try again to write on this forum more about how God brought me to Himself i really don;t know yet... .

..... but bottom line is...  whether i ever understand it or not..  i trust God with it....live or die.. i;m in His hands... . 

If ya get around to it that'd be great, if not, okie-dokie too, but thanks for bringing the thread back on track.


Anybody else want to testify how the Lord saved you, especially if at a young age?

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

Pantheists thus do not believe in a personal or anthropomorphic god.

I have shared my own personal testimony of my personal relationship with the personage of Jesus Christ. Pantheists do not believe such and no one but a dishonest liar like yourself would claim such.

Pantheists also believe that God is creation itself. You've created a mush of Christianity and pantheism, but it's still pantheism.[/quote]

I'm give up on the rest of your comments. I have explicit stated that Time was not created. Thus, I do not believe in pantheism. Also, I have a personal relationship with God's only Son. A pantheist would not claim such. You can't show one pantheist that has ever claimed such. You're a dishonest hack and blatant liar.  I know you would love to tie me down with heresy. It would make you feel all warm and fussy. You pretend you're this all loving all caring.... "REAL" Christian and you could care less about how you throw around the term "heretic." You fabricate lies and use innuendo to scorn your brother in Christ..... Hack..

I am in good company when I claim that time wasn't created. There are many scientific scholars that now believe "Time" preceded space. I believed this more than 20 years ago. There are even physicists that believe that light is not a constant.  Something I've believed for many years. Have fun.... When you get a chance. You should try and be honest. Answer as to what/who Adam is in your view of creation. I don't expect you to do this. You don't know. You probably haven't even thought about it. You're nothing but a pretender.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]I'm give up on the rest of you comments. I have explicit stated that Time was not created. Thus, I do not believe in pantheism. Also, I have a personal relationship with God's only Son. A pantheist would not claim such. You can't show one pantheist that has ever claimed such. You're a dishonest hack and blatant liar.  I know you would love to tie me down with heresy.[/quote]

I don't "tie you down" with heresy. You have explicitly stated that God is time. That is heretical. Your own words tie you down to heresy. I'll ask again...pick the Christian faith tradition...any one...and I'll show you where they would label you as unorthodox.

[quote author=christundivided]It would make you feel all warm and fussy.[/quote]

Actually it makes me a bit sad for you.

[quote author=christundivided]You pretend you're this all loving all caring.... "REAL" Christian and you could care less about how you throw around the term "heretic." You fabricate lies and use innuendo to scorn your brother in Christ..... Hack..[/quote]

I've reconsidered a formal debate with you and decided against it. I'm aware that it would ultimately end up in you resorting to name calling and not addressing any actual points. And the simple fact is that I haven't used "innuendo and scorn" unless those words suddenly mean "your own words" when discussing your position.

[quote author=christundivided]I am in good company when I claim that time wasn't created. There are many scientific scholars that now believe "Time" preceded space. I believed this more than 20 years ago. There are even physicists that believe that light is not a constant.  Something I've believed for many years. Have fun.... When you get a chance. You should try and be honest.[/quote]

You are in good company. I can name several atheist theoretical physicists off the top of my head who would claim that exact thing. Others would claim that gravity has always existed. Of course they admit its pure speculation and that the science points towards a view that time was created at the Big Bang. The Christian ones that I've read all claim that time had a beginning.

[quote author=christundivided]Answer as to what/who Adam in your view of creation. I don't expect you to do this.[/quote]

My answer is "it doesn't matter".

[quote author=christundivided]You don't know.[/quote]

Yes. I will readily acknowledge this.

[quote author=christundivided]You probably haven't even thought about it. You're nothing but a pretender.[/quote]

Yes...that is a frequent claim you make.

 

[christundivided]

I've reconsidered a formal debate with you and decided against it. I'm aware that it would ultimately end up in you resorting to name calling and not addressing any actual points. And the simple fact is that I haven't used "innuendo and scorn" unless those words suddenly mean "your own words" when discussing your position.

Very simple. Don't brand me with heresy and I won't call you a liar or an idiot. Fair? We can have a formal debate. FSSL can edit the posts according to the rule of no name calling. I have no problem with that. I suspect you're not really capable of having such a debate.

You are in good company. I can name several atheist theoretical physicists off the top of my head who would claim that exact thing. Others would claim that gravity has always existed. Of course they admit its pure speculation and that the science points towards a view that time was created at the Big Bang. The Christian ones that I've read all claim that time had a beginning.

Not so but that is neither here or there.

My answer is "it doesn't matter".

Sure it does. Its essential to establish an adequate hypothesis. Right or wrong, you have to have a functional hypothesis. You're not even forming one.

Yes. I will readily acknowledge this.

Sad. Theistic evolution has that effect on people. For all you talk of "yom" in the debate. You missed a key component of discussion. You form opinions without any thought as to their effect on your overall systematic theology. This the very basics of reasoning in Theology. Basics you ignore.

Want to debate time or election? Either one is fine with me.

 

[rsc2a]

I've reconsidered a formal debate with you and decided against it. I'm aware that it would ultimately end up in you resorting to name calling and not addressing any actual points. And the simple fact is that I haven't used "innuendo and scorn" unless those words suddenly mean "your own words" when discussing your position.

Very simple. Don't brand me with heresy and I won't call you a liar or an idiot. Fair? We can have a formal debate. FSSL can edit the posts according to the rule of no name calling. I have no problem with that. I suspect you're not really capable of having such a debate.

Then stop making heretical statements. Simple enough?

And I'm not interested. The fact that you stated FSSL can edit the posts if there is name calling proves why.

[quote author=christundivided]

You are in good company. I can name several atheist theoretical physicists off the top of my head who would claim that exact thing. Others would claim that gravity has always existed. Of course they admit its pure speculation and that the science points towards a view that time was created at the Big Bang. The Christian ones that I've read all claim that time had a beginning.

Not so but that is neither here or there. [/quote]

Names then?

[quote author=christundivided]

My answer is "it doesn't matter".

Sure it does. Its essential to establish an adequate hypothesis. Right or wrong, you have to have a functional hypothesis. You're not even forming one. [/quote]

What does the color yellow taste like?

[quote author=christundivided]

Yes. I will readily acknowledge this.

Sad. Theistic evolution has that effect on people. For all you talk of "yom" in the debate. You missed a key component of discussion. You form opinions without any thought as to their effect on your overall systematic theology. This the very basics of reasoning in Theology. Basics you ignore.

Want to debate time or election? Either one is fine with me.[/quote]

You apparently don't realize that there are theologians who are theistic evolutions who believe in an actual Adam and there are theologians who are theistic evolutionists who do not.

 

[christundivided]

You apparently don't realize that there are theologians who are theistic evolutions who believe in an actual Adam and there are theologians who are theistic evolutionists who do not.

I'm sure you just discovered that today. Either way, those who believe in a literal Adam have a very hard time trying to explain just how that fits into Theistic Evolution. Many of them basically relegate pre-Adam humanoid species to obscurity. Needless to say the system still establishes the judgement of sin... "death" as preexisting "Adam". If that's not heresy..... tell me what is? Yet, I am not the one running around calling you a heretic.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]I'm sure you just discovered that today. Either way, those who believe in a literal Adam have a very hard time trying to explain just how that fits into Theistic Evolution.[/quote]

Actually two of my favorite authors are theistic evolutionists and each one falls on different sides of the Adam question, but thanks for trying.

[quote author=christundivided]Many of them basically relegate pre-Adam humanoid species to obscurity. Needless to say the system still establishes the judgement of sin... "death" as preexisting "Adam".[/quote]

See those quote marks around "death". Those are important.

[quote author=christundivided]If that's not heresy..... tell me what is? Yet, I am not the one running around calling you a heretic. [/quote]

It's a difference of opinion that many in the Church disagree on, a difference that Christendom as a whole hasn't decided merits the claim of an essential for the faith. In other words, neither one is a heretical position...completely unlike claiming that God is part of His creation or trapped by His creation.

 

[christundivided]

It's a difference of opinion that many in the Church disagree on, a difference that Christendom as a whole hasn't decided merits the claim of an essential for the faith. In other words, neither one is a heretical position...completely unlike claiming that God is part of His creation or trapped by His creation.

Just one more reason I don't believe you are an honest man. You take your exception to a "traditional orthodoxy" view of "Adam" as just being a difference that doesn't really mean anything. You then claim I trap God in His creation because I believe time is a characteristic of God. You don't even know why I say this or what I specifically believe about it. You pulled the trigger on your claim without even looking at what you're shooting at. I have a rather unique view. Its a view I have established over many years and I have never known anyone that shares it. I didn't get it from anyone and I don't follow anyone with it. I'm not trying to be different nor am I looking for followers. I just honestly believe it for myself. Take or leave it. It doesn't matter to me at all. I do enjoy discussing it with someone that doesn't throw around "heretic" when they see it.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]Just one more reason I don't believe you are an honest man. You take your exception to a "traditional orthodoxy" view of "Adam" as just being a difference that doesn't really mean anything. You then claim I trap God in His creation because I believe time is a characteristic of God. You don't even know why I say this or what I specifically believe about it. You pulled the trigger on your claim without even looking at what you're shooting at. I have a rather unique view. Its a view I have established over many years and I have never known anyone that shares it. I didn't get it from anyone and I don't follow anyone with it. I'm not trying to be different nor am I looking for followers. I just honestly believe it for myself. Take or leave it. It doesn't matter to me at all. I do enjoy discussing it with someone that doesn't throw around "heretic" when they see it.[/quote]

The difference being that I can show 2000 years of various interpretations on the historicity of Adam from within Christendom by people from all sides. I cannot show the same for any belief that God is time because the historical belief has always been, even from Judaism, that God is outside of time. I can show you where all of Christendom came together to declare that God is apart from time. You cannot show anything remotely of the sort regarding the historicity of Adam.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]Just one more reason I don't believe you are an honest man. You take your exception to a "traditional orthodoxy" view of "Adam" as just being a difference that doesn't really mean anything. You then claim I trap God in His creation because I believe time is a characteristic of God. You don't even know why I say this or what I specifically believe about it. You pulled the trigger on your claim without even looking at what you're shooting at. I have a rather unique view. Its a view I have established over many years and I have never known anyone that shares it. I didn't get it from anyone and I don't follow anyone with it. I'm not trying to be different nor am I looking for followers. I just honestly believe it for myself. Take or leave it. It doesn't matter to me at all. I do enjoy discussing it with someone that doesn't throw around "heretic" when they see it.

The difference being that I can show 2000 years of various interpretations on the historicity of Adam from within Christendom by people from all sides. I cannot show the same for any belief that God is time because the historical belief has always been, even from Judaism, that God is outside of time. I can show you where all of Christendom came together to declare that God is apart from time. You cannot show anything remotely of the sort regarding the historicity of Adam.
[/quote]

Then you should have no problem providing such references in the creation thread. I asked for it there. You can't provide evidence for your flavor of Theistic Evolution. You can't show much of anyone promoting the preexisting state of sin and death before Adam. Better yet, you don't even claim to make a choice on who/what Adam represents.

 

[prophet]

I was 5.

Anishinabe

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]Just one more reason I don't believe you are an honest man. You take your exception to a "traditional orthodoxy" view of "Adam" as just being a difference that doesn't really mean anything. You then claim I trap God in His creation because I believe time is a characteristic of God. You don't even know why I say this or what I specifically believe about it. You pulled the trigger on your claim without even looking at what you're shooting at. I have a rather unique view. Its a view I have established over many years and I have never known anyone that shares it. I didn't get it from anyone and I don't follow anyone with it. I'm not trying to be different nor am I looking for followers. I just honestly believe it for myself. Take or leave it. It doesn't matter to me at all. I do enjoy discussing it with someone that doesn't throw around "heretic" when they see it.

The difference being that I can show 2000 years of various interpretations on the historicity of Adam from within Christendom by people from all sides. I cannot show the same for any belief that God is time because the historical belief has always been, even from Judaism, that God is outside of time. I can show you where all of Christendom came together to declare that God is apart from time. You cannot show anything remotely of the sort regarding the historicity of Adam.

Then you should have no problem providing such references in the creation thread. I asked for it there.[/quote]

I stand corrected. I cannot find ancient interpretations questioning the historicity of Adam. On the other hand, I cannot find catholic (little "c") statements condemning any such view. A belief that God is not outside of time on the other hand...

[quote author=christundivided]You can't provide evidence for your flavor of Theistic Evolution.[/quote]

My flavor? What would that be exactly?

[quote author=christundivided]You can't show much of anyone promoting the preexisting state of sin and death before Adam.[/quote]

You honestly haven't researching this much at all, have you? (Aside: sin ≠ death)

[quote author=christundivided]Better yet, you don't even claim to make a choice on who/what Adam represents.[/quote]

In some part, yes. Tell me: what does the color blue taste like?
In other parts, no. Adam represents Israel. Adam represents humanity.

 

[Sherryh]

I was 12 years old when I was saved............Thank you to a SS teacher who shoowed me how to be saved. I went home and knelt beside my bed and ask Jesus to save me.I dedicated my life at Bill Rice Ranch to serve God and I haven't looked back.  God is good!!

 

[Castor Muscular]

John the Baptist wasn't born again.  He was born before. 

 

[MrsRow]

I grew up going to church half heartedly in a Southern Baptist Church.
Basically it was just a social thing for me, but i learned some bible verses and loved to sing, learned the story of Jesus Christ and i believed it was true - i guess.  My older brother walked the isle when we were kids.
I wanted to do everything he did and i thought it took alot of guts to step out of my pew and walk the isle and by golly if my big brother did, well i wanted to do it too!
So i did walk the isle and i know a lady opened a little New Testament and read some verses to me, but i wasn't really listening.  My stomach had butterflies cos i had just did what my big brother had done a few weeks prior and i thought i was pretty cool and brave.  I must have prayed a prayer with that lady because the following Sunday i was baptized.  I did it all for attention pretty much and to show myself i could do what my big bro had done.
For years i thought i was probably going to heaven.
Then i grew up and lived the life as a low down hell raiser, got married, went to a family funeral where a Pastor presented the Gospel and i can remember it as clear as day - i was 21 yrs old and trusted Jesus Christ to take me to heaven cos i sure knew i couldn't make it on my own. 
It was weird cos even being raised in a Baptist church, for some reason (prior to getting saved at 21) i thought i had to be good enough to go to heaven.  I thought heaven was something we earned  :-\

so yea.. i was 21 years old. 
And since getting saved i've backslidden and got back into church, living obedient , backsliding / then getting back to submitting so many times.  it's caused me to question my salvation all the time and wonder if i've ever been saved at all.

 

[Sherryh]

I can't think of the verse but no man can pluck us from God's hands..............

 

[Izdaari]

I was 12, in a GARBC Sunday School. It felt awesome! 

But later in my teens I drifted away, didn't really know what I believed anymore. 

I explored all the world's religions, parapsychology, New Age and pagan spiritual paths. A lot of it was interesting, but nothing was really convincing. Finally I checked out atheism, reading Ayn Rand and George O. Smith. That wasn't convincing either. They couldn't prove there's no God, and just assuming there isn't in the absence of proof that there is didn't seem like a sound approach to me. :-\

But I found clues, pieces of the cosmic jigsaw puzzle if you will, in Adam Smith's Invisible Hand, in Locke's version of Natural Law, in Taoism and Zen Buddhism. Ok, some stuff was starting to fit together, but the big pieces I needed to see the big picture were still missing.

I found keys to it all in C.S. Lewis' spiritual autobiography, Surprised by Joy, the story of how a rationalist intellectual atheist, an Oxford don no less, became convinced against his will that the Gospels were true. Hmm, really? This I gotta see for myself! And after looking into it, it seemed Lewis was right: Jesus fulfilled a highly improbable number of OT prophecies, and that the Resurrection actually happened as described in the Gospels appeared to be the only plausible explanation for what happened afterwards. I found further clues to fit it all together in what George MacDonald, Lewis and Tolkien had written about True Myth.

After mulling all this over for 2-3 years, I returned to the Christian fold at 21, joined an Open Bible house church and was baptized in a pond in a park. The road forward since then has been rocky at times, but I've never stopped believing.

 

[Castor Muscular]

I found keys to it all in C.S. Lewis' spiritual autobiography

C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity was instrumental in one of my turning points.  I hear that from a lot of people.  God used him mightily. 

 

[Izdaari]

I found keys to it all in C.S. Lewis' spiritual autobiography

C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity was instrumental in one of my turning points.  I hear that from a lot of people.  God used him mightily.

That one too, but Surprised by Joy was the one that got me started on Lewis. Of course then I wanted to read more...

And yes, he's a been a huge influence on like a gazillion people.  8)

 

[MrsRow]

yea! i've never stopped believing either. 
like ever since i got born again at the age of 21, i can't understand how i could NOT be saved.
Just because i backslid in behavior, i never backslid in belief.  I believe that in fact, i COULDn'T stop believing even if i wanted to! It's IMPOSSIBLE for me to be an unbeliever in Christ Jesus just as stronly as it's impossible for me to believe that i'm not a mother of four children.