SR540Beaver

Rooster,

I think we are pretty close to thinking the same way. I will say that some people view predestination and election as one and the same. Others do not. I knew of one couple who were pretty devout "fundamentalists" who prayed that God would give them children who were of the "elect". They only wanted children who would be heavenbound. What parents don't? But the idea was that regardless of how they raise the child and what they teach it, it was God who was going to make the decision whether the child could be saved or condemned.

sctmom,

Hey, maybe the Scout Shop can start selling the Bill Engvall "here's your sign" signs to clueless campers. I very well know that tents are not sound proof. We had a one nighter a few weeks ago and had snorers all around us. Also, the kid in the tent next to us had a couple of cans of beenie weenies that night and kept "sounding off" late into the night. This campout did not have designated campgrounds per pack, all campers were in on huge open area. As far as the flashlight and silleohoutes, maybe I need to stay up later and wait for the show!

acco40,

Bravo!!! As another leftie, I applaud your efforts on our behalf!

sctmom,

I wasn't poking fun at you. I agree. It is the same people who don't know that you are not supposed to use a blowdryer in the tub. Hence, all the "stupid" sounding common sense warning tags on everything we buy.

sctmom,

No, I don't want to burn my shelter or aspyxiate (sp) my son and I. LOL

Rooster,

With all due respect, I don't think you answered the question. I agree with most of what you said. The other side I speak of is free will as opposed to divine election. One (free will) says that God has given us the choice to accept or reject him and that we are responsible for where we spend eternity. The other (election) says that regardless of what you do, God has made a choice that person A is going to heaven and person B is going to hell. Those are two totally different concepts from the same Book. While God may know ultimately who will accept and reject him, the question is, was it a freely made choice by man or was it a forced decision by God? There is an old joke about those who believe in predestination. "What did the predestination believer say after falling down a flight of stairs? Boy, I'm glad that's behind me now!"

OGE,

Good question and one that has baffled people since the Bible has been read. I for one, even with my degree in religion don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. I've heard all sorts of explanations over the years. Ranging from no defects because they were perfect and the gene pool wasn't yet diluted to God allowed incest relations to populate the earth before later giving the Law that would condemn it. Poor explanations that I do not subscribe to. The other view that drives the creationist folks crazy is that the creation account in Genesis is alligorical and that Adam and Eve represented mankind as a whole.

That is ALL I have to say on it as I don't pretend to have any answers to this question myself.

Just curious, are gas lanterns OK for Cub Scout campouts as long as they are handled by an adult? I could swear I read somewhere that they were not. Perhaps I read that the Cubs can't handle it, but I'm not sure. Flashlights are great for somethings, but not for putting up a tent in the dark. Been there, done that! I know they make the battery lanterns, but I don't want to buy both kinds.....one for Cub campouts and another for personal campouts unless I have to.

packsaddle,

The forum owner informed everyone that Zorn and Yaworski were one in the same person presenting himself as two different people. He did not ban either ID, just wanted people to be aware of what our multi-personality rabel-rouser was up to. Neither Zorn or Yaworski has posted since being outted. I'm sure he will show up under a new name eventually.

littlebillie,

In my way of thinking, there is still a difference between foreknowledge and election. One says that because God is God, he already knows the outcome. The other says that he made the choice of who he wants and who he rejects. While subtle, there is a difference. While the Bible mentions the word "elect", I can't square it with other verses that says we can affect the outcome of situations (change the mind of God) thru prayer and petition or that God "desires" all men to come to Him. If He has already decided who will be saved and who won't, then why would He desire ALL men to come to Him. He is God, if He wants ALL men, then He could have elected all men and Jesus's sacrifice for our sins and the resulting salvation wouldn't be needed. Interesting puzzle. I don't know that I would call it a discrepency in the Bible as much as I would say we just don't fully understand the intent of the election verses. There is much more Bible evidence for free will than for election.

DeMann,

My words that you quoted and thanked me for were not in support of your view. They were a response to OGE of what I thought your view of the link between Creation and Salvation would be. You ignored the rest of my post that said I believe God is the Creator, but that scientific evidence shows the possibility that he used evolution over a huge period of time in the process. I personally believe that man is unique in the process.

I still don't follow you on the divine election thing. Are you just saying that it is another issue from the Bible that people disagree over? I assume you mean that God selects who will be saved as opposed to the Biblical teaching of free will and that God desires all men to come to him with the knowledge that not all men will. There is a difference between God having foreknowledge and selecting. Not that I want to open another can of worms that can never be settled like Creation, but......if you believe that their was no need for Salvation if the world evolved instead of the account in Genesis, then likewise, there is no need for Salvation if God already decided who he would save and who he would reject. That is kind of like Iraqi elections where Saddam is "elected" by a 100% vote. Whats the point of having the election if the outcome is already known? Why would God provide a means of Salvation and give man free will to accept or reject Him if he laready decided before the creation who he would accept and who he would reject? Please don't fall back on the old, "because the Bible says it". The Bible also says the other side too.

OGE,

I could be wrong, but I think the answer you will receive is one of black and white. If you believe that man evolved, then you MUST believe that God did not create man. If God did not create man, then God had no need to provide salvation for a creature that evolved.

As I have stated previously, I believe that God created everything and that he created man in his own image. I do not believe that man evolved from apes no matter how much similarity there may be between us and apes and extinct species in the fossil record.

However, I can not simply ignore scientific findings concerning the POSSIBLE evolution of species over millions and billions of years or the age of the earth. I won't simply stick my head in the sand. My faith in God is strong enough to still believe he is the creator regardless of the method he used.....which is subject to interpretation. As I stated earlier, The "HOW" of creation isn't nearly as important as the "WHO" of creation. My relationship with God is vastly more important than whether the earth was created in six 24 hour days or 6 billion years. My thoughts on that subject in no way determines the sacrifice Christ made to save me from my sins.

The solution is simple. Surely there are more teachers than there are bathrooms. The teachers should pull bathroom duty to monitor the bathrooms for the few minutes between classes. They could set up a rotating schedule. Of course you are going to have teachers that say, "that isn't in my job description". Which is another problem with our society.

A few weeks ago I went to our local surplus store looking around and came across the BDU's. Many may already know this, but there is a company called Propper that makes official military issue BDU's in a variety of colors. They make shorts and pants in an olive green. They make them in kid's sizes too. They are better cut, heavier ripstop material than the scout shorts. They have larger functional pockets that have hidden buttons under the pocket flaps. The pant legs can be worn straight or have a drawstring for gathering and wearing inside boots. The waist has an adjustment tab on both sides for custon fit. Many scouters frown on BDU's because they are thinking of camo BDU's. These can be ordered in olive. I think they are a great alternative for the lousy uniform shorts. I'd suggest having scout shorts for full uniform events and using the BDU shorts for outdoor use. You can find these pants at http://www.propper.com.

Divine election? As in predestination? How are you relating that to creation?

It is highly unlikely that Zorn was Yaworski's kid. If I recall correctly, Zorn ridiculed a number of people for spelling, grammar and word usage. In short he was picking nits and seemed to have a good grasp of "proper" English. Not to sell any young teen short, but I doubt that a kid was writing Zorn's comments. Plus, if you'll look at some of the philosophies and ideas put forth by Zorn, they (regardless of how tastless or outrageous) seemed a bit advanced for a kid.

I suspect we saw here what I have witnessed in a number of non-scouting forums I frequent. An egotistical confrontational person who has a desire to be liked. The have one ID where they can participate in the forum without causing too much ruckus and another ID where they can unleash their "superior" minded rhetoric. One ID can be admired and they can monitor the threads from it while the other ID can spout whatever they want and care less how it is taken by others. They think they are pulling the wool over the eyes of everyone and having a good laugh at our expense. What many of these people who pull this kind of thing do not realize is that they are not as anonomous as they think. Having built web pages and run guestbooks on them, I know that many programs like this forum do track the IP address of the poster. It is a sort of finger print of the machine the message comes from. The fact that Yaworski and Zorn have identical IP's and post within minutes of each other suggests that it is indeed one person. The language and views suggest it is an adult.

Yaworski/Zorn is obviously intelligent, but not as smart as he wants everyone to think.

For a guy who tries to use two different personalities and identities to actually go away is suspect. He'll be back under a new name. I just hope Terry keeps an eye out for his IP address and lets us know when he is up to his old tricks. For someone who "claims" to like scouting, he sure walked all over the oath. Sad!

I keep seeing a trend here that is somewhat disturbing. Many see the Tiger Cubs as being lightweight and wanting to borrow activities and ideas from Wolves and Bears. Many want the Tigers to be awarded with belt loops to stay encouraged and feel a part of things. Are we starting them too soon kind of like the Dad who wants to start his 4 year old in Tee-ball? If they earn a belt load of belt loops and borrow from the higher ranks, what are they going to do when they get to the higher ranks? Do it over? Is Tigers spreading Cubs too thin? Don't get me wrong, I know the kids enjoy it and so do the parents, but if it isn't substantial enough to stand on it's own, aren't we hurting our chances at keeping them interested down the road when they have already "been there, done that"?

Yaworski - I'm afraid that I'm going to sound like "Bob White" but when mom and dad wear the pins on their uniforms they send a message to the kid that rules don't apply to them.

Heaven forbid!!! LOL

MOVING RIGHT ALONG - here's for the rest of the forum. Anyone else who's read this far, I extend to you my apologies. I relatively new here, and for all I know, Zorn P is one of your old and cherished members. It's not entirely appropriate for me to chastise him whom I perceive as a boor and a twit, if you do not. Indeed, it's presumptuous of a new participant to do so, and so, to you I offer my apologies. By way of explanation, I can only say that when I see that kind of rudeness and disregard for form, well, my sense of fair play gets the better of me.

Littlebillie,

No apology is needed on my part. I'd say you are dead on.

Guys,

I like a lively debate as well as anyone else. Just ask my wife, she'll tell you that I 'd argue with a fencepost. However, to have a good debate, both parties must have an open mind. Once a person decides they firmly have the answer, the only solution or the single way of approaching a subject....debating is fruitless and frustrating. And if there are two subjects that people are often personally convinced of, it's politics and religion. I watch the political talk shows almost nightly. The conservative commentators speak each night and write books telling how the liberals HATE America and want to destroy it. The liberals do the same by saying that the conservatives are fascist and draconian and want to take our civil liberties away from us. EVERY night this same old "debate" goes on and on because each side is totally convinced they are right and won't entertain anything the other has to say. Right now we have the Falwells and Robertsons blaming 911 on the homosexuals, lesbians, atheiests, etc. They are claiming that Islam is an evil religion, etc. Absolutism has no place in debates and people tend to be absolute in politics and religion. While I am always willing to debate the subjects, I won't with someone who shows that their mind is closed. I'm not accusing anyone here of being that way. I'm just saying that it is safer to pick and choose who you will debate these subjects with.

Because I introduce a question about how long the "days" of creation are, I'm urged to read the Bible as if I have no clue what I'm talking about. As I pointed out before, it is because I read and "study" the Bible that I have the ideas I have. I don't discount the possibilty that the days were a literal 6 24 hour days. But my responders won't consider that it could not be. That ends the debate.

Littlebillie,

Perhaps the word impartial was the wrong one to use. As a college student and then a seminary student, I attended many classes on individual books of the Bible. Each verse was broken down one by one and studied and then considered in the whole context of the writing. The professors teaching these classes were Christians, so I suppose you could say they were not impartial. What I meant was that they were teaching the scripture all the way from one individual word in a verse all the way to the purpose and meaning of the whole book. They didn't start out with a subject like adultry, homosexuality, abortion, creation and then try to support their view with a hodge podge of scriptures strung together. Many of the popular books on bestseller lists today are by an author who has a certain view on a subject and they cobble together a defense of their position. Granted, they may have gone thru the same analysis of scripture as what I described, but their view is one man's opinion. As I have had many pastors and teachers tell me over the years......don't take my word for it, use my words as a springboard to to search for the answers for yourself. I have nothing against people reading these books. I just don't want them to blindly accept everything the book says without seeking God's enlightenment thru personal serious Bible study. There is no substitute.

This may be my last post in this thread. I didn't follow my Dad's advice about not arguing religion or politics.

Scoutparent,

If you will go back and read your responses to mine in this thread, you'll see that you suggested I read the Bible so I can understand the answers to the questions like you do. To me, that is an assumption that I do not read the Bible or have an understanding of what it says. As I pointed out, I have been a life long student of the Bible.

I mean don't read the books off of the shelve written by authors with a particular axe to grind on a subject like evolution/creation to form your opinions. Study the Bible alone all by itself with the aid of impartial Bible study helps or Scholars/Professors to come to an understanding of God's Word. When we develop our relation with God thru his Spirit, he will reveal himself to us thru his Word. It is a one on one relationship that we come to with Him, not thru listening to the opinions of others in books. I do not mean to imply that you do not study the Bible. I'm just saying to form your own opinions and not let them be guided by what others say.

Rooster,

It is late and I'm tired...I'll try to make sense. Yes, I am a Christian. See the Origin of Man thread for a run down of my background. The problem with typing messages in threads is that there is no tone of inflection. It was something of an attempt at humor. You mentioned where Jesus says to shake the dust from your feet if your message is ignored and move on. I was just contrasting something else he said when he said to go out and COMPEL people towards God. I find the Bible as a whole very consistent. However, a verse taken out of context (not saying you or I did that) can be used to say or support anything you want. If you watch the political analysis shows on the cable news channels, you see the talking heads spin individual quotes of politicians everyday. You can do the same with the Bible or any other text for that matter.

Agreeing with or backing Zorn isn't my cup of tea. Personally, I don't see how you can be an effective scout leader and totally ignore the religious aspects of it because it does not suit you. That would be like telling scouts they don't need to be honest, that it is over rated. All of the aspects of scouting compliment each other. Without each one in place, it is like an 8 cylinder engine running on 7 cylinders.

ScoutParent,

Just because my opinions don't jive with yours, please don't get the idea that the Bible is foreign to me. I've attended Southern Baptist churches in the Bible Belt of America for all of my 45 years. I've been a Christian for 38 years. I have a bachelors degree in Religion from a Southern Baptist university and went about halfway thru working on a Masters of Religious Education from a Southern Baptist seminary. I've taught Sunday School for many years, preached on foreign mission trips, served as a Youth Minister and am an ordained Deacon. I think I am very well acquanted with the Bible. It is from my study that I've learned much about the original languages it was written in and what the words actually mean as opposed to how they have been translated into English. God never intended the Bible to be worshipped as it is by many today. It's purpose is to reveal him to people. One of the raging controversies in the Southern Baptist Convention today is how the Baptist Faith and Message is slowly being changed to elevate the place of the Bible over the place of Jesus. My study has led me to a firm belief and faith. My suggestion is to quit reading popular books and delve into the Word under the teaching of respected scholars of the Bible. There is a world of difference.(This message has been edited by kwc57)

Rooster,

Ahhh, quoting the Bible can be such a fun game. What about this counter:

Luke 14:23 - And the master said to the servant, 'Go out to the highways and hedges, and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled.(This message has been edited by kwc57)