Right. But in the case of The Flood you instead invoke God "cleaning up" after himself to hide the evidence.
Feel free to to show me where I ever said that --- please take any of my posts on the Flood and highlight that part in red. In fact, I've denied that several times.
I have to respectfully disagree, Guardian, on a technicality.
God created this universe ex nihilo --- and that type of creation did not leave an audit trail that we can trace back.
Therefore, and in my opinion, the Creation Week cannot be ascertained scientifically.
We must go by faith in the Documentation as to how it happened, when it happened, Who did it, why it was done, what order it was done in, and even who the eyewitness were --- which said Documentation gives us all that information, and more.
God bless!
What makes you think your own interpretation of the bible is correct? The inquisition were certain heliocentrism was heretical.
Besides, all the other documentation God gave us tells us that your interpretation of the bible is incorrect. Soooo, who should we believe? You, a human being, or the creation itself - written by the hand of God?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Originally Posted by Martin Luther King Jr.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim:
The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.
"no man can serve two masters; ye cannot serve both God and mammon." - Bible (Matthew 6:24)
Even you (I think) admit that you can't prove a negative, and if there was no global flood, you'll never prove it.
Note to all: Can we get off this flood stuff now? It has nothing to do with the Creation Week.
You cannot 'prove' anything at all. You can merely find out what is most likely.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Originally Posted by Martin Luther King Jr.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim:
The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.
"no man can serve two masters; ye cannot serve both God and mammon." - Bible (Matthew 6:24)
What makes you think your own interpretation of the bible is correct?
What kind of question is that?
Are you asking why I don't follow someone else's interpretation and not defend the Bible from my own point of view?
Originally Posted by faith guardian
The inquisition were certain heliocentrism was heretical.
The Inquisition was in spite of the Bible, not in respect to It.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Besides, all the other documentation God gave us tells us that your interpretation of the bible is incorrect.
What "other documentation"?
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Soooo, who should we believe?
Well, that choice is yours, Guardian.
If you want to believe in a figurative interpretation, and by so doing, conclude that Christianity and the Creation are irreconcilable, it's your call --- but it also shows a willingness to be hostile to, and not friendly with, Genesis 1.
Your bringing up the Inquisition is indicative of that.
In all my years here, I've yet to see someone who interprets the Bible figuratively not blame the Inquisition on Christianity.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
You, a human being, or the creation itself - written by the hand of God?
This sentence lacks a verb, and I don't understand it.
Allow me to reiterate then.
All texts are interpreted by the readers. There is no such thing as a literal reading. Given that, what makes you think your own interpretation of the Genesis story is accurate?
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
Are you asking why I don't follow someone else's interpretation and not defend the Bible from my own point of view?
I guess I am asking what makes you think your own interpretation is infallible.
The Inquisition was in spite of the Bible, not in respect to It.
They didn't think it was in spite of the bible. They thought it was perfectly in-line with 'literal' interpretation of it.
What "other documentation"?
Creation itself. Kind of silly to disregard that, don't you think?
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
If you want to believe in a figurative interpretation, and by so doing, conclude that Christianity and the Creation are irreconcilable, it's your call --- but it also shows a willingness to be hostile to, and not friendly with, Genesis 1.
No, I am not hostile to genesis. I think that I interpret it differently than you do. Also, note that I never said creation was antithetical to Christianity, only creationism. And by that I mean the belief that the world and universe at large was created in 6*24 hours 6-10 000 years ago. The belief that evolution, big bang etcetera are all false based on a "literal" interpretation of a few verses in Genesis.
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
Your bringing up the Inquisition is indicative of that.
Are you sure you're not just a little paranoid?
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
In all my years here, I've yet to see someone who interprets the Bible figuratively not blame the Inquisition on Christianity.
I didn't do that. I said that the inquisition did what you do, interpret the bible a specific way and honestly believed that this way was the only way.
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
This sentence lacks a verb, and I don't understand it.
Really? Let me rephrase then.
Who should we believe? Your human interpretation of a written work, or the mathematically accurate creation itself?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Originally Posted by Martin Luther King Jr.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim:
The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.
"no man can serve two masters; ye cannot serve both God and mammon." - Bible (Matthew 6:24)
Thank you --- I'm not the smartest person in the world to talk to.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
All texts are interpreted by the readers.
That is correct.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
There is no such thing as a literal reading.
Wrong --- it is technically called the Historical-Grammatical Interpretation.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Given that, what makes you think your own interpretation of the Genesis story is accurate?
This thread for one --- it makes me glad I'm a literalist.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
I guess I am asking what makes you think your own interpretation is infallible.
The literal, or Historical-Grammatical method of Bible interpretation was used by our forefathers all throughout history; as well as by Jesus Christ and His disciples, themselves.
The Allegorical Method was made popular by Philo of Alexandria, in an attempt to meld Christianity with Platonic thought.
This book is an excellent source of information on this subject:
Originally Posted by faith guardian
They didn't think it was in spite of the bible. They thought it was perfectly in-line with 'literal' interpretation of it.
What they thought is none of my business; especially since I'm an Independent Baptist. The thing is though, they were wrong.
If I interpret G=m1m2/r2 to mean that I can walk on air, and I step off of the top of the Empire State Building, whose interpretation is going to prevail --- mine or nature's?
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Creation itself. Kind of silly to disregard that, don't you think?
Creation does not have "another documentation".
Originally Posted by faith guardian
No, I am not hostile to genesis.
Glad to hear that --- funny though --- why didn't you quote from it then to support your OP?
Originally Posted by faith guardian
I think that I interpret it differently than you do.
What method do you use? It sounds to me like you use Philo's Allegorical Method.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Also, note that I never said creation was antithetical to Christianity, only creationism.
Creationism, to me, is simply a belief in the Creation Week --- but again --- that's just my definition.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
And by that I mean the belief that the world and universe at large was created in 6*24 hours 6-10 000 years ago.
So how long are those periods, specifically? 1,000,000 years? If so, how did the plants survive that long without the sun?
Originally Posted by faith guardian
The belief that evolution, big bang etcetera are all false based on a "literal" interpretation of a few verses in Genesis.
I like to put it this way:
Genesis 1 pwns Evolution.
Genesis 1:1 pwns Atheism.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Are you sure you're not just a little paranoid?
I've been called worse ---
Originally Posted by faith guardian
I didn't do that. I said that the inquisition did what you do, interpret the bible a specific way and honestly believed that this way was the only way.
Do you do the same thing? Do you interpret the Bible a specific way, and honestly believe that this is the only way? Or, as the saying goes: If you don't believe in something, you'll fall for anything.
Originally Posted by faith guardian
Really? Let me rephrase then.
Who should we believe? Your human interpretation of a written work, or the mathematically accurate creation itself?
AVVET, Christianity has always held that God has twobooks. Why do you keep insisting in ignoring the second book? It's very ironic, considering that second book is Creation. In saying we must only look to scripture, you deny that God created!
.
Why ignore book 2?
The second book is difficult to read. It does not allow for literalism. It requires intelligence and very hard work to read it.
That is unsatisfactory for someone who wants to always be right, just by dint of attitude or ism, or maybe "inspiration".
Reading book 2 you can never be sure you are getting it right.
Note to all: Can we get off this flood stuff now? It has nothing to do with the Creation Week.
But it does, AV -- it undermines the credibility of the "Documentation," which, by your own admission, is the only reason to accept the "Creation Week."
Would you agree that without the "Documentation," you have nothing to go on? If the "Documentation" is wrong on one of God's acts, then it's not infallible -- just the work of mere mortals.
__________________
Don't talk like one of them. You're not! Even if you'd like to be.
To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other.
See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Linear Mode
