MSNBC's "Hardball" host challenged Rep. Mike Pence (R-Indiana) on the Republican Party's commitment to addressing climate change during the May 5 broadcast. Matthews claimed to Pence that the GOP is not passionate about environmentalism because, "There are people that really are against science in your party who really do question not just the science behind the climate change but the science behind evolutionary fact, that we were taught - you and I - in our biology books. They don't accept the scientific method. They believe in belief itself."
Matthews prefaced his argument with, "There are people on your side of the argument who believe that all the prehistoric bones we've discovered in this world, all the dinosaur bones and all that stuff was somehow planted there by liberal scientists to make the case against the Bible."...
Mike wrote: Did he know he was a good Biblical Calvinist when he wrote: "For the soul cannot receive
Augustine the Calvinist goes on to say... "Now, should any man be for constraining us to examine into this profound mystery, why this person is so persuaded as to yield, and that person is not, there are only two things occurring to me, which I should like to advance as my answer: ‚ÄúO the depth of the riches!‚ÄĚ Romans 11:33 and ‚ÄúIs there unrighteousness with God?‚ÄĚ Romans 9:14 If the man is displeased with such an answer, he must seek more learned disputants; but let him beware lest he find presumptuous ones."
I would seek to help Augustine out here Mike; What provides the "ABILITY" to YIELD is Grace and the Holy Spirit working in the heart of the predestined elect in accordance with God's purpose and will.
Absolutely wrote: Augustine of Hippo was a good Biblical Calvinist - therefore a REAL Christian Elect Saint.
Did he know he was a good Biblical Calvinist when he wrote:
"For the soul cannot receive and possess these gifts, which are here referred to, except by yielding its consent. And thus whatever it possesses, and whatever it receives is from God; and yet the act of receiving and having belongs, of course, to the receiver and possessor." (On the Spirit and the Letter)
There are at least two reasons I object to the global warming theory:
1. It is not scientific: the evidence is scant and contradictory, and the methodology is flawed. Google Professor Gray at your Colorado State University for a very learned scientist's response to this flawed theory. (He is the most-relied-upon hurricane predictor.)
The evidence better supports the theory that short-term climate changes are more affected by sun spots than carbon fuel consumption.
2. Based on this bad theory, the social engineers want to tax us into poverty - of course, retaining the benefits of carbon fuels for themselves. It is manifestly unjust and hypocritical for people like Al Gore and UN functionaries to insist that the average person do without or with less to "save the planet" while they themselves continue to consume vast amounts of carbon products themselves (i.e., flying in jets around the globe, traveling with an entourage in six SUVs, etc.)
Carbon fuels have improved the lot of hundreds of millions of poor people, with no demonstrable impact on the "average earth temperature" (however you measure that!).
Policies based on global warming will result in the rich robbing the poor, with no benefit to the planet.
Patrick, I mostly agree with you. I believe in a literal creation and also support strict environmental regulations and cleaner and wiser use of resources. I don't think it's a contradiction, but simply a conclusion you reach on what you know--information you have received, studied, processed, how you may interpret the Bible and particularly verses related to creation and the earth, etc. I don't see a problem with your view and generally agree with you.
Something I'd like explained to me is why, when people talk about global warming, do most Christians take this as an attack on God or Christianity? It seems to almost be a religious issue with a lot of people. I am not trying to cause an argument but would really like some insight, because while I am a new earth creationist, and abhor evolution, I do believe it's entirely possible we're causing global warming and ruining our enviornment. If that contradicts itself, please help me understand. The only thing I can think of is because unregenerate people who also believe in evolution and are generally God-haters champion this, our knee-jerk reaction is to tie it in with their other incorrect beliefs without considering it. Again, I truly ask for clarification and not for the sake of contention. Thank you!
A couple of years ago on her radio program, Laura Ingram broke down a commencement address given by Matthews at a well-known college. What struck me was that significant portions of his speach were autobiographical--he spent a lot of time talking about himself, which leads me to believe that many of these media elites are far too into themselves to be objective enough to provide the rest of us with much in the way of meaningful news.
"Matthews claimed to Pence that the GOP is not passionate about environmentalism because, "There are people that really are against science in your party who really do question not just the science behind the climate change but the science behind evolutionary fact, that we were taught - you and I - in our biology books."
What has environmentalism to do with science?
What has science to do with climate change, i.e. global warming?
What has science to do with "evolutionary fact"?
I guess if we remember Chris Matthews' star-struck teenybopper response after hearing Obama speak, something about a tingling going up his leg, it's easier to 'get' his infantile grasp of science.
A very good one, John. First of all with any "good" Catholic it isn't what you believe, but what you do, that counts -- Jsutification . The Romish Church supports the religion of Evolution, Evolution and the Pope. You had better get with the program, I would hope it isn't the Romish one, however
"....question not just the science behind the climate change but the science behind evolutionary fact, that we were taught..."
Or question the wisdom of this so called science!!
Space - a vaccuum? - primordial heat/the cosmic microwave oven - produces big bang - and from this comes something as complex as your neurological system??
Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Quote "Augustine of Hippo, a Christian saint who lived in the fifth century. In those days before science, cosmology was a branch of theology, and the taunt came not from journalists, but from pagans: "What was God doing before he made the universe?" they asked. "Busy creating Hell for the likes of you!" was the standard reply. But Augustine was more subtle. The world, he claimed, was made "not in time, but simultaneously with time." In other words, the origin of the universe-what we now call the big bang-was not simply the sudden appearance of matter in an eternally preexisting void, but the coming into being of time itself Time began with the cosmic origin. There was no "before," no endless ocean of time for a god, or a physical process, to wear itself out in infinite" ...oos