How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[BrianW]

Public witness matters. Jesus Himself said "if you deny Me before men, I will deny you before the Father."

That's serious business, because the Word of God states that "in the mouth of two or three witnesses, everything shall be established." Stated by a God who never changes. Jesus Himself said that "where two or three are gathered in my name, I am in their midst". See the continuance of that same principle? I hope you do.

We confess with our mouth that "Jesus is Lord". Before others. Because God places us in a Body of believers who are joined with us in faith.

That's why I said you're only giving people part of the Gospel. It's not just about a prayer. Confession of sin is important. Believing in Jesus matters. Believing that He was raised from the dead is absolutely crucial, and turning to Him in faith. But then there has to happen a public confession. That's the other side of the coin.

The "attending Bible believing church" serves that purpose of a) public witness and b) being able to be discipled by others stronger and mature in their faith. So that one can be baptized (also happening before others) and discipled and encouraged and supported, and grow up together with the rest of His Body into the unity of the Spirit.

So please, please please, for the love of God, guide people into the whole truth, and not just part of it. Thank you.

Just in case anyone missed this post or didn't bother reading the OP or following posts.

Becoming a Christian is much, much more than just saying a simple prayer and if your life isn't fundamentally changed, if you don't start hungering and thirsting for righteousness, if you don't start regarding God's will as the most important thing in your life ( Even more important than you yourself are) then the "sinners prayer" hasn't done you a bit of good.

Nothing wrong with that prayer in and of itself what so ever as long as it isn't put forth as the be all end all, just say the prayer and you are "set" walk away live how you want.

[XFRODOBAGGINSX]

what about mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Jesus may have made an exception for the thief on the cross, but we are told directly to be baptized to be saved. It is written in black and white.

First of all, who is condemned in that passage? Only those who don't believe. With that said, the gospels were written to Jewish believers who were still under the law. Jesus Christ hadn't risen from the dead yet. Paul was the apostle to the gentiles. He is the one who began preaching salvation by grace through faith alone, without works. Peter and Paul admitted that they preached different gospels. Peter to the Jews, Paul to the Gentiles.

Paul writes:

Ro 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

Gospel to the uncircumcision (Gentiles) to Paul, Circumcision to Peter:

Ga 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Peter had a hard time understanding Paul's gospel by grace through faith without works, because Peter preached a different Gospel to the Jews:

2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Paul had his own Gospel that was comitted unto Him by God, notice that it was kept secret since the world began. That means that it wasn't even revealed to the 12 disciples:

Ro 16:25 ¶ Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,



Who taught Paul after his vision from the Lord? God did from heaven for 3 years. It says that he conferred NOT with flesh and blood. After 3 years he went to Jerusalem and met with Peter. God didn't want Paul to be taught by the disciples because he was given a different message than they and he didn't want them to taint Paul with the Jewish message.

Ga 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. {went up: or, returned}

[mailmandan]

what about mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Jesus may have made an exception for the thief on the cross, but we are told directly to be baptized to be saved. It is written in black and white.

In Mark 16:16, if we look at this verse closely, we see that it is composed of two basic statements. 1—He who believes and is baptized will be saved. 2—He who does not believe will be condemned. Clearly, the determining factor regarding whether one is saved or condemned is whether or not he believes. In interpreting this passage correctly, it is important to realize that while it tells us something about believers who have been baptized (they will be saved), it does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized. In order for this verse to teach that baptism is necessary for salvation, a third statement would have had to be included, that statement being: "He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned" or "He who is not baptized will be condemned." But, of course, neither of these statements is found in the verse.

While Jesus does give the positive condition of baptism (whoever is baptized) in Mark 16:16, nowhere in the Bible do we find the negative condition of baptism being taught (such as whoever is not baptized will not be saved). If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus Himself not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. If water baptism was absolutely required for salvation, then God would not make so many statements in which He promises salvation to those who simply BELIEVE. (Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5;24; 6;29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13;39; 16:31; Romans 3:22; 4:5,11,24; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 3:22; Hebrews 10:39; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

[BrianW]

While I agree with you somewhat I always wonder what a persons reason would be to refuse to be baptized.

In other words Jesus was baptized, the apostles were baptized, many of those who the apostles gave the word to were baptized along with their whole families. So why would any believer who is not restricted or prevented from being baptized refuse to do so?

[andrew_no_one]

So why would any believer who is not restricted or prevented from being baptized refuse to do so?

Exactly. I do not believe baptism to be necessary for the imparting of grace and I do not believe that it cleanses of sin, rather it is an act of obedience and a way in which to identify oneself with the Lord.

[BrianW]

I want to be clear, there is nothing that we can do to merit our salvation/be born again. That is a free gift of God.

What does scripture tell us to do? Believe, repent, be baptized and remain faithful until death. Being baptized isn't by any means a work it is instead an act of obedience to God.

When Paul was on the road to Damascus the Lord appeared to Paul and struck him blind. When Paul asked the Lord what he must do the Lord told him to go into the city and he would be told.
Ananias was sent by the Lord and healed Paul's blindness and said to him "And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

Why should we do any less? How many times do we see in the scriptures people told be be baptized and they obeyed? How many times in the scriptures do we see someone instructed to be baptized and they made an excuse not to?
Is baptism salvific? It can be argued that it is but to me it's a moot point. Why would I consider myself better than those who obeyed and make excuses as to why I don't have to be baptized?
What good excuse is there?

[Zaida]

In other words Jesus was baptized, the apostles were baptized, many of those who the apostles gave the word to were baptized along with their whole families. So why would any believer who is not restricted or prevented from being baptized refuse to do so?

Quakers and the Salvation Army believe water baptism ended with John the baptist, and that when scripture mentions baptism after that that it means the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Some also take the position that more Christians have killed eachother over what form of baptism they use or don't use than over any other issue, so they're just not going to mess with it.

[andrew_no_one]

Quakers and the Salvation Army believe water baptism ended with John the baptist, and that when scripture mentions baptism after that that it means the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Some also take the position that more Christians have killed eachother over what form of baptism they use or don't use than over any other issue, so they're just not going to mess with it.

Acts 8:36-39
As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?” And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.

[salesman]

Here is the prayer let's compare it with the scriptures:


1)Dear LORD JESUS, I believe that YOU died on the Cross and Rose from the dead for my sins. 2)I ask you to come into my heart and forgive me for my sins, take me to heaven when I die. 3) I now receive You as my Lord and Savior. Thank You for saving me. In Jesus holy name, Amen."

Let's do check the scriptures.


1) Ro 10:9 Because if you confess the Lord Jesus...

The prayer does this

2) and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead,

The prayer does this if from the heart

3) you shall be saved.

The prayer does this

2) For with the heart one believes unto righteousness

If you say the prayer from your heart this will happen

and with the mouth one confesses unto salvation.

The prayer does this. You pray with your mouth.

Ro 10:13 For everyone, "whoever shall call on the name of the Lord will be saved."

The prayer does this


Do you believe these verses or not?


By the way, belief ON the Lord Jesus Christ IS repentence. It IS turning away from your sins. You cannot believe on the Lord Jesus Christ WITHOUT turning away from your sins. That's where the struggle comes in for folks to get saved in the first place.

Ac 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

I will agree with you that many folks pray that prayer and don't mean it. Those folks won't be saved. You MUST mean it. Praying that prayer from a sincere heart IS one way of repenting and believing the gospel. Who are you to judge people's hearts wheather they trust in the Lord or not? That's His job, not yours. Just because you were led to the Lord with a specific method, doesn't mean that YOUR method is the only way. The fact is that I am preaching the true gospel. I was saved by praying to God and have no doubt that I am saved by His grace.


These folks confessed with their mouths unto salvation as well:

Joh 11:27 She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.

Ac 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.


Lu 23:42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.


Let's look at the thief on the cross:

Confessed that he was a sinner:

But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

Believed on the Lord and asked Him to save him:

Lu 23:42And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.

What did Jesus say to Him? Did He say, "no you can't call upon me that way"? NO, He said:

Lu 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

What about this
Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

What about this?
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.

What about this?
Hebrews 6:9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. 10 God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11 We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. 12 We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

[Withoutfcf]

I didn't say the prayer.

I fell in love with Christ though... Looks like I am going to hell..

[XFRODOBAGGINSX]

What about this
Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned..

First of all notice that it says that only those who don't believe will be condemned, no mention of baptism there. Secondly, that gospel is the gospel of the Kingdom which was given to the Jews who were under the law before Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. That's not Paul's gospel. We are under Paul's gospel, which does NOT include water baptism.

1Co 1:17 ¶ For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. {words: or, speech}

The gospel is what saves, yet Paul says that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. That means that Baptism is NOT part of the Gospel.

Ro 1:16 ¶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

What about this?
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it..

Again, the Gospel of the Kingdom, not Paul's gospel. These people in this verse were still under the law.

What about this?
Hebrews 6:9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. 10 God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11 We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. 12 We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

I'm not sure what your point is by this verse.


Baptism doesn't save. It's not the gospel of grace. Baptism is something that you do AFTER salvation.

Ro 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
Ro 16:25 ¶ Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
1Co 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
1Co 9:18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.
Eph 6:19 ¶ And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
Php 1:7 ¶ Even as it is meet for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart; inasmuch as both in my bonds, and in the defence and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are partakers of my grace. {I have...: or, ye have me in your heart} {of my...: or, with me of grace}
Php 4:3 And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.
1Ti 1:11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
2Ti 2:8 ¶ Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

[mailmandan]

First of all notice that it says that only those who don't believe will be condemned, no mention of baptism there. Secondly, that gospel is the gospel of the Kingdom which was given to the Jews who were under the law before Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. That's not Paul's gospel. We are under Paul's gospel, which does NOT include water baptism. 1Co 1:17 ¶ For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. {words: or, speech} The gospel is what saves, yet Paul says that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. That means that Baptism is NOT part of the Gospel. Ro 1:16 ¶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. Again, the Gospel of the Kingdom, not Paul's gospel. These people in this verse were still under the law.

Interesting comments. So you see a "distinction" between the Gospel of the Kingdom (law) and Paul's Gospel? (grace) This sounds like dispensational theology. There are some dispensationalists that would argue, and I quote:

Acts 2:38 is probably one of the most misunderstood verses in the Bible. Take time now to read Acts 2:22-40. In Acts 2:22, Peter was the speaker and he was addressing "ye men of Israel." No other group is mentioned. He told of Jesus' earthly ministry (vs 22) and pointed out that they crucified him (vs 23). In vs 24 he proclaimed the resurrection and then freely quoted Psalms 16:8-11 in verses 25-28. The "men and brethren" of vs 29 were Israelites, and Peter again proclaimed the resurrection, and added Jesus' exaltation, and quoted Psalm 110 as an explanation in verses 34 and 35. Now vs 36 again identifies his audience as "all the house of Israel." This was made clear. Jesus himself said: Matthew 10:5-6 - These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matthew 15:24 - But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. In Acts 2:36-37, "Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart." That "they" is JEWS not Gentiles. Then, in Acts 2:38, Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Those Pentecostal Jews were baptized in water to receive the Holy Ghost. And even though vs 39 is quoted to prove otherwise, that is not how one receives the Holy Ghost today. Verse 39, For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. The "you" is obviously Jews and the "your children" must be Jews, but what about "all that are afar off?" Peter quoted the Old Testament all through Acts 2 and he did again. Daniel 9:7a "O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off..." Those "afar off" are Jews too! The entire setting of Acts 2 is Jewish. If that doesn't clinch the time element, look at the last part of verse 40. "Save yourselves from this untoward generation." This untoward "generation" is Jewish. They were responsible for the crucifixion. They placed themselves under condemnation (Matthew 27:25.) A person today isn't saved "from this untoward generation." The time of "this" generation is LONG PASSED! This is NOT the day of Pentecost, everyone isn't a Jew whose specific generation crucified Christ, and the Lord is not dealing with the Israelites as a nation now (Matthew 21:43; Acts 10:34,35) as he was then. Even if a person was a full-blooded Jew today, he couldn't get back under those circumstances because they have passed! Acceptance into the Earthly Kingdom promised to Israel required faith and water baptism. However Israel rejected the Kingdom, even after the resurrection of their King - The Lord Jesus Christ. When they did, God set Israel (as a nation) aside and postponed that promised Kingdom. This is what Romans 11:11,12,15, & 25 is about. Rather than God sending the prophesied judgement of the tribulation upon them, He set that Kingdom program aside and began a NEW AGE. It is referred to as "THE MYSTERY" and is called "THE AGE OF GRACE" - see Ephesians 3:1-11 and Colossians 1:24-27.

Does this line up with your theology?

[XFRODOBAGGINSX]

The Laws of Conservation




The laws of conservation are basic laws in physics that state which processes can or cannot occur in nature. Each law maintains the total value of the quantity governed by that law (e.g. matter and energy) remains unchanged during physical processes. Conservation laws have the broadest possible application of all laws in physics and are considered to be the most fundamental laws in nature. In 1905, the theory of relativity showed mass was a form of energy and the two laws governing these quantities were combined into a single law conserving the total amount of mass and energy. This law says neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. This fact leads to an inescapable question.





If matter and energy cannot be created, how did they originate?

Where did the entire physical universe come from?




Again, it is impossible to create matter and energy through natural methods. However, they do exist, so we find ourselves in a quandary. It would seem to the unbiased either matter and energy made themselves from nothing or a supernatural creator made them. Both answers violate the law of conservation. The fact that matter and energy cannot be created is consistent with the claim in Genesis which says God rested from his work and all he created. This law of science contradicts the notion that matter came from nothing through natural means. Bible believing theists understand the universe was framed by the Word of God and what is seen did not come from things that are visible. God is the one who calls those things that do not exist as though they did.





Why couldn't the universe have always existed?

Because nothing that has a beginning and an end could have always existed.




Today, virtually all scientists accept theBig Bang theory which says the entire universe came into existence at a particular point in time when all of the galaxies, stars and planets were formed. The Law of Entropy says closed systems go from a state of high energy to low energy and from order to disorder. All closed systems, including our universe, disintegrate over time as they decay to a lower order of available energy and organization. Entropy always increases and never decreases in a closed system. All scientific observations confirm everything continues to move towards a greater state of decay and disorder. Because the available energy is being used up and there is no source of new energy, the universe could not have always existed. If the universe has always existed, it would now be uniform in temperature, suffering what is known as heat death. Heat Death occurs when the universe has reached a state of maximum entropy. It is a fact that one day our sun and all stars in the universe will burn out. Electromagnetic radiation will disappear and all matter will lose its vibrational energy. Because the stars cannot burn forever and because they are still currently burning, they could not have always existed because they would have already burned out by now.



Some believe the law of entropy cannot be applied to the universe because they feel the universe is an open system and not a closed one. A closed system is defined as a system in which neither matter nor energy can be exchanged with its surroundings. Matter and energy cannot enter or escape from a closed system. It has boundaries that cannot be crossed. The definition of the word universe is all matter and energy, including the earth, the galaxies and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole.





If the universe is "all matter and energy", how could it be an open system?

If the universe is everything, how can there be something else out there to provide more matter and energy?




The skeptic asks, "If God created the universe, then who created God?" God is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question, "Who created God?" is illogical. A better question would be, "If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn't God need a cause? And if God doesn't need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?" Everything which has a beginninghas a cause. The universe has a beginning; therefore, the universe has a cause. It is important to stress the words "which has a beginning". The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so he does not need a cause. Einstein's general relativity shows that time is linked to matter and space. Time itself would have begun along with matter and space at the beginning of the universe. Since God is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time and is independent and outside of time. He is not limited by the time dimension he created, so he has no beginning in time.





There is not even one generally accepted scientific theory on the origin of matter and energy.




__________________________________________________ _______________________________






The Law of Biogenesis




This law is composed of two parts. The first part states that living things only come from other living things and not from non-living matter. Life only comes from life. The second part of this law states that when living things procreate, their offspring are the same type of organism they are. This is consistent with the account revealed in Genesis which says all living things reproduce after their own kind. Sharks only come from other sharks, snakes from other snakes, owls from other owls, orange trees from other orange trees, etc. Every living organism alive today is a product of and evidence for biogenesis. Some people feel biogenesis is not a scientific law, but biogenesis is a law because no one has ever documented a single case of non-living matter coming to life in self-replicating form.It is as true today as it has ever been. On the other hand, abiogenesis has been debunked many times over. When someone observes the first example of spontaneous generation which includes self-replicating machinery (DNA and RNA), biogenesis will no longer be a law. Until that time, it remains one.



If one stretched out a strand of DNA from the oldest and most basic organism known to man, a bacterium, it would be almost1,000 times longer than the diameter of the bacterium itself. Its DNA pattern is about 4 million blocks long. Where did all of this exquisite information come from? The components of a bacterium are far more complex than any machine mankind has ever made. There is absolutely zero scientific evidence of the existence of any organisms between the supposed event of abiogenesis and bacteria. This is the biggest missing link of all. There is absolutely no evidence any such organism is alive today or was ever alive in the past. Some feel it makes total sense no such fossils exist because the creature would have been made up of parts which do not fossilize well. If this argument was valid, there would not be any fossils of bacteria but there are.



Replication requires the complex machinery of DNA and RNA which are collectively known as the genome. According to evolution, something like the genome could only achieve its utter complexity through replication, cumulative selection and mutation.





How could DNA and RNA evolve from something very rudimentary into their present day intricacy when the organism containing the basic genome would require the more complex, present day DNA and RNA to replicate?





The Gene Emergence Project has sponsored an event called The Origin of Life Prize.They are currently offering 1.35 million dollars to anyone who can offer a credible, verifiable and reproducible explanation of the origin of life. They are by no means a creation science group. Their advisors include biochemists, molecular biologists, biophysicists, information theorists, artificial life and intelligence experts, exo/astrobiologists, mathematicians and origin-of-life researchers in many related fields. The Foundation's main purpose is to encourage interdisciplinary, multi-institutional research projects by theoretical biophysicists and origin-of-life researchers with special focus on the origin of genetic information/instructions/message/recipe in living organisms. They want to know by what mechanism initial genetic code arose in nature. They are requiring full reign be given to the exploration of spontaneously forming complexity and to inanimate systems of self-organization and replication.





There is not even one generally accepted scientific theory on the origin of life.




__________________________________________________ ______________________________




Scientific Method




The scientific method is held in high esteem by most atheists and it is composed of the following parts...





1) Careful observation of a phenomenon.

2) Formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomenon.

3) Experimentation to demonstrate whether the hypothesis is true or false.

4) A conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis.





Nobody has ever observed the creation of matter or energy.

Nobody has ever observed a molecular cloud collapse or any planet form.

Nobody has ever observed abiogenesis.

Nobody has ever observed the evolution of any genome.

Nobody has ever observed any phylum, class, order or family change.





Evolutionists are excellent at Step 2 -Hypothesizing.



The only problem comes on Steps 1, 3 and 4 -Observation, Experimentation and Validation.



We read about their theories and the conclusions of the failed experiments they performed in an effort to validate their opinions about a phenomenon that has not only never been proven scientifically but has never even been observed.



The definition of a miracle is an event which is inexplicable by the laws of nature. The fact is there are zero generally accepted scientific explanations on these issues. If you want to believe in naturalism it is fine with me but please don't make the erroneous claim that "science" is on your side.







What term is used to describe something you believe to be true but has no empirical evidence?



Faith.




The bottom line is we live in a universe which completely frustrates any attempt to explain its origin and content by natural processes alone. The best evidence for the possible existence of a supernatural creator lies in the total lack of any scientific evidence in these key areas. Can God be scientifically proven? No, it would be nice but his existence cannot be proven scientifically. The reason is God is supernatural; he exists outside thenatural, scientific world. While our scientific tools cannot prove God exists, they do provide us with evidence we can use to determine if there is a better explanation for what has taken place besides the existence of a supernatural creator.



It is interesting how atheists reject any notion of the supernatural because of what they perceive to be a lack of evidence when they could use that same objectivity to reject their naturalistic world view. Most atheists are not even honest enough to apply the same burden of proof for naturalism that they demand of supernaturalism.



The laws of science falsify the notion that this physical, living world came to be through natural means. These laws provide very credible evidence for the possible existence of a supernatural being. Atheism violates these basic laws of science. Atheism requires not only a tremendous amount of faith but also a belief in miracles. And not only miracles but natural miracles, an oxymoron. Both naturalism and supernaturalism require faith and which one you place your faith in is one of the two most important choices you will ever make.





How did life begin?

[XFRODOBAGGINSX]

Please take the time to read thist first post.

[XFRODOBAGGINSX]

Personally, I don't know whether or not I'd go to Heaven when I die. I am saved but I don't know whether or not I'd go to Heaven because I don't know for sure if I am in a good relationship with God or not. I also don't know if once saved always saved is true or not.

We are not saved of our own works. It is by FAITH in the work of God. It is a free gift from God that cannot be earned. All you need to do is accept it. Once accepted, the work belongs to God. The reason is so that no one will boast before God and brag, saying that they got into heaven because they were good enough.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.