|
Post by Traffic Demon on Nov 23, 2004 22:39:38 GMT -5
I2AM4AndyChristianRockOmega7-11 - "Just one problem: Gen. 1-11 has never been described as being 'figuratively true', or 'consisting of parables' by anyone who is qualified to do so"
You mean, by anybody you consider qualified to do so. Many denominations accept such interpretation in order to reconcile scriptural and scientific truths.
"The people best qualified, apart from God, are those who are willing to be taught by Him through His written Word."
Thanks for the backup, Philip.
"You start with the Bible, and then you study the evidence according to what is written, which provides the framework on which to build."
100% wrong. If you would reach a logical conclusion, you cannot start by saying "I believe X to be true, therefore X must be true, and all evidence must either support X or be defined as false." You start with the evidence, and follow it wherever it leads, even if you do not like the implications of those conclusions.
"And, of course, he has gone on to deny the fact that God created Adam and Eve 'in His image', both physically and spiritually."
All I have denied is your literal interpretation of the pkmtyolpage. Try representing my beliefs with some measure of accuracy next time.
"He has gone on to deny how God created them."
See above.
"He has gone on to deny how they rebelled against God."
See above.
"He has gone on to deny that there was a global flood in Noah's time."
But only because there has not been a single shred of evidence found anywhere in the world to show that such an event ever occurred. Kind of funny how Egyptian, Chinese, and Native American culture survived through that entire time without ever noticing that they were supposed to be wiped out by this flood you keep insisting happened.
"He has gone on to deny what happened during the building of the Tower at Babel, and how it became the birthplace of the international languages."
See above.
"He has gone on to deny the 200+ year lifespans of some of our earliest ancestors who are mentioned in Genesis."
Funny, Babylonian records claim lifespans of thousands of years, do you accept those as well? Of course not; both are rejected because there is no evidence to support such claims as literal.
"I have no doubt that all these historical accounts in Genesis are true."
Likewise, you have no evidence that they actually are historical. No amount of belief is going to shape reality to your will.
--Y2Traf sparty
|
|
|
Post by AlphaOmega on Nov 24, 2004 5:44:04 GMT -5
As a matter of fact, I believe this whole heartedly. I also believe that it is complete and infallible. Good. So what is your problem with what I'm saying? Christian.
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Nov 24, 2004 7:14:23 GMT -5
I2AM4AndyChristianRockOmega7-11 - "So what is your problem with what I'm saying?"
Well, for me, it's the fact that you are unable to support a single claim of yours, and instead rely on a steady stream of baseless accusations, conspiracy theories, and lies that were discredited two hundred years ago.
--Traffic Nation Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball
|
|
|
Post by PhilipDC78 on Nov 24, 2004 8:49:43 GMT -5
Good. So what is your problem with what I'm saying? Christian. Just for the record, I have not decided what exactly I believe as far as HOW God created the universe. I wholeheartedly believe that God DID create the universe. I believe that it is possible that God could have created the universe in a literal six days, and I also believe that it is possible that God could have created the universe in 6 billion years by directing evolution. I do not believe that this universe could have come into existence without the mighty and supernatural work of God. Neither does Traffic Demon. Now, as to my objections to what you say. My BIGGEST objection is your attitude and frame of mind. I will address each of these individually. ATTITUDE: You do not show any willingness to learn, to grow, and to mature. Traffic Demon has given evidence that he thinks supports his case. You have not considered it. You do not take the time to read through it, to look at his point of view, and study why it is that you believe what you believe. This is the essence of apologetics. We must be ready always to present a defense for what we believe, it says so in the Bible. In order to adequately defend a belief that you have, you must understand the arguments against it, compare them to your own beliefs, and then see if they are valid or if you can continue with your arguments. That is the frame of mind that you must have when taking part in any debate. Otherwise you just look like a fool with a closed mind. FRAME OF MIND: You begin your debates in this area with the frame of mind that you are already right, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Worse than that, you believe that people who disagree with you are not even Christians. Guess what? How God created the universe in the grand scheme of salvation is not a primary issue, it is not even a secondary, or even tertiary issue. It is so down on the list of important issues when it comes to salvation that this whole "debate" is inconsequential. Here we are, a group of mostly Christians (there are those who do not profess to be Christians), who are arguing not about IF God created the universe, but HOW! If you have noticed, I very rarely actually gave any support for either side of the argument. I was just here trying to keep it civil, which you have not helped. I am trying to get you to not sin by accusing people of not believing in Christ simply because they think that God created the universe in a manner that you don't agree with. So, in closing, those are the problems that I have with what you have been saying. You need to remember that when you take part in ANY debate about ANY subject, that you have to keep an open mind, you have to be humble, and you have to be willing to learn. Otherwise it is just an argument and does nobody any good. Remember that you do not know everything, that you can always learn something, and that someone out there may actually know more about a certain subject than you do. Now as far as specifically with your question about whether I believed that the Bible was inspired by God and Spirit breathed, I answered yes and then said that I also believe that it is complete and inerrant. You need to understand what completeness and inerrancy means in the context of the Bible. Completeness means that the Bible is a complete manuscript. There is no removing parts of it that do not agree with your beliefs and there is no including extra things into it to support your beliefs. Completeness does not mean that all truth in the entire universe is found in the Bible. If this were true, then I could go find out how to build a nuclear reactor in it, how to solve world hunger, what the volume of a sphere is, and many other things. The Bible is a manual for how to live our lives. It shows us the life of Christ and how he lived. It shows us the history of our belief system and how we should live. It is, however, not the authoritative text for calculus, trigonometry, chemistry, biology, automotive repair, etc, etc. Inerrancy means that I cannot take something out of the Bible and say that it is wrong, or say that it has changed by copying over the years so that we don't even know if it is the same as it was 2000 years ago (the Old Testament that is). I strongly believe that God directed the hands of the poeple who copied the manuscripts, so that miscopies did not happen, and what we have today is the same as what God has always wanted us to have. Inerrancy, similarly to completeness, does not mean that the Bible is inerrant for applications for which it was not intended. The Bible was not intended to be a scientific text, so the how that God created the universe does not necessarily have to be literally true. The truth behind it that God did create the universe, that sin entered the world through the free will of mankind, and that God set up a plan to redeem man are the truths that must be there. Those are my thoughts. Oh, and you can call me Christian then too, since I am also a Christian and have just as much right to the name as you do. Also, as a personal favor to me, could you call everyone else Christian? Well, everyone that claims to be a Christian. I'm sure that heathen and Morningstar who don't claim to be Christians wouldn't want to be labelled as such. - Christian aka PhilipDC78
|
|
|
Post by AlphaOmega on Nov 24, 2004 9:46:51 GMT -5
Just for the record, I have not decided what exactly I believe as far as HOW God created the universe. I wholeheartedly believe that God DID create the universe. I believe that it is possible that God could have created the universe in a literal six days, and I also believe that it is possible that God could have created the universe in 6 billion years by directing evolution. I do not believe that this universe could have come into existence without the mighty and supernatural work of God. Neither does Traffic Demon. Now, as to my objections to what you say. My BIGGEST objection is your attitude and frame of mind. I will address each of these individually. ATTITUDE: You do not show any willingness to learn, to grow, and to mature. Traffic Demon has given evidence that he thinks supports his case. You have not considered it. You do not take the time to read through it, to look at his point of view, and study why it is that you believe what you believe. This is the essence of apologetics. We must be ready always to present a defense for what we believe, it says so in the Bible. In order to adequately defend a belief that you have, you must understand the arguments against it, compare them to your own beliefs, and then see if they are valid or if you can continue with your arguments. That is the frame of mind that you must have when taking part in any debate. Otherwise you just look like a fool with a closed mind. FRAME OF MIND: You begin your debates in this area with the frame of mind that you are already right, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Worse than that, you believe that people who disagree with you are not even Christians. Guess what? How God created the universe in the grand scheme of salvation is not a primary issue, it is not even a secondary, or even tertiary issue. It is so down on the list of important issues when it comes to salvation that this whole "debate" is inconsequential. Here we are, a group of mostly Christians (there are those who do not profess to be Christians), who are arguing not about IF God created the universe, but HOW! If you have noticed, I very rarely actually gave any support for either side of the argument. I was just here trying to keep it civil, which you have not helped. I am trying to get you to not sin by accusing people of not believing in Christ simply because they think that God created the universe in a manner that you don't agree with. So, in closing, those are the problems that I have with what you have been saying. You need to remember that when you take part in ANY debate about ANY subject, that you have to keep an open mind, you have to be humble, and you have to be willing to learn. Otherwise it is just an argument and does nobody any good. Remember that you do not know everything, that you can always learn something, and that someone out there may actually know more about a certain subject than you do. Now as far as specifically with your question about whether I believed that the Bible was inspired by God and Spirit breathed, I answered yes and then said that I also believe that it is complete and inerrant. You need to understand what completeness and inerrancy means in the context of the Bible. Completeness means that the Bible is a complete manuscript. There is no removing parts of it that do not agree with your beliefs and there is no including extra things into it to support your beliefs. Completeness does not mean that all truth in the entire universe is found in the Bible. If this were true, then I could go find out how to build a nuclear reactor in it, how to solve world hunger, what the volume of a sphere is, and many other things. The Bible is a manual for how to live our lives. It shows us the life of Christ and how he lived. It shows us the history of our belief system and how we should live. It is, however, not the authoritative text for calculus, trigonometry, chemistry, biology, automotive repair, etc, etc. Inerrancy means that I cannot take something out of the Bible and say that it is wrong, or say that it has changed by copying over the years so that we don't even know if it is the same as it was 2000 years ago (the Old Testament that is). I strongly believe that God directed the hands of the poeple who copied the manuscripts, so that miscopies did not happen, and what we have today is the same as what God has always wanted us to have. Inerrancy, similarly to completeness, does not mean that the Bible is inerrant for applications for which it was not intended. The Bible was not intended to be a scientific text, so the how that God created the universe does not necessarily have to be literally true. The truth behind it that God did create the universe, that sin entered the world through the free will of mankind, and that God set up a plan to redeem man are the truths that must be there. Those are my thoughts. Oh, and you can call me Christian then too, since I am also a Christian and have just as much right to the name as you do. Also, as a personal favor to me, could you call everyone else Christian? Well, everyone that claims to be a Christian. I'm sure that heathen and Morningstar who don't claim to be Christians wouldn't want to be labelled as such. - PhilipDC78 Traffic's salvation is highly debatable, in my opinion of course. I am willing to learn from people who know what they're talking about, because what they say makes sense most of the time. END OF STORY.
|
|
|
Post by PhilipDC78 on Nov 24, 2004 9:58:19 GMT -5
Traffic's salvation is highly debatable, in my opinion of course. I am willing to learn from people who know what they're talking about, because what they say makes sense most of the time. END OF STORY. I'm sorry, but this statement right here shows that you are not willing to listen, not willing to learn, and not willing to change. You are too proud and arrogant to realize your own mistakes. And it is not the end of the story for you, for me, for Traffic Demon, or for anyone else. - Christian aka PhilipDC78
|
|
|
Post by AlphaOmega on Nov 24, 2004 10:09:26 GMT -5
And it is not the end of the story for you, for me, for Traffic Demon, or for anyone else. - PhilipDC78 It is for me.
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Nov 24, 2004 15:44:59 GMT -5
I2AM4AndyChristianOmega7-11 - "Traffic's salvation is highly debatable, in my opinion of course."
Happily, your opinion is not the one that matters, even if you did have valid reasons for debating the topic.
"I am willing to learn from people who know what they're talking about, because what they say makes sense most of the time."
Guess what? Where science is concerned, that's me. I'm certainly not the top dog in any field, but on the threads we've got going here, I've got the goods to back up my claims, and haven't been called out on them yet.
--Blood Sugar Sex Traffic Some will die in hot pursuit in fiery auto crashes Some will die in hot pursuit while sifting through my ashes Some will fall in love with life and drink it from a fountain that is pouring like an avalanche, coming down the mountain
|
|
|
Post by AlphaOmega on Nov 25, 2004 6:56:26 GMT -5
"The conclusive proof of my reasoning is that anyone who argues further will be cut into dog meat." --Sir Geoffrey d'Tourneville
"I like to string words together into a chain and beat people with it." --Hunter S. Thompson
Traffic, is this your philosophy in life?
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Nov 25, 2004 20:41:06 GMT -5
I2AM4AndyChristianOmega7-11 - "Traffic, is this your philosophy in life?"
No.
--DX TD Oh, you didn't know?
|
|
|
Post by christian on Mar 2, 2005 7:34:56 GMT -5
Well, Hunter S.Thompson, one of Traffic's idols, is no longer on this Earth. I wonder if he beat himself with his own words? And where is Traffic Demon? He's unusually quiet.......
Andy.
|
|
|
Post by woodyblueeyes on Mar 3, 2005 16:21:03 GMT -5
Seems the entire forum is unusually quiet.
|
|
|
Post by PhilipDC78 on Mar 3, 2005 17:12:29 GMT -5
Seems the entire forum is unusually quiet. Unusually quiet? Before you started posting in the last few days, there had been a total of may 20 or 30 posts in the last two months.
|
|
|
Post by christian on Mar 4, 2005 6:12:52 GMT -5
Unusually quiet? Before you started posting in the last few days, there had been a total of may 20 or 30 posts in the last two months. Well, that's rpkmtyoleuring. Have you started reading the book that Rock sent you? Andy.
|
|
|
Post by christian on Mar 7, 2005 8:52:58 GMT -5
Mind you, an average of just one post every two days is pretty low.
|
|