Recent content by raphael_aa

See, once again you assume a dictation-type model of inspiration. It seems it is you limiting God rather than me. You seem to assume that God speaks actual words to a passive author who has no input into the text. This is a relatively minor view amongst christians today. That doesn't mean it may...

One doesn't have 'blind faith' that an assertion is not true. There are an infinite number of assertions that could be made. Assertions need to to cite evidence to be creditable. Also, you're not just asserting the Bible 'inspired'. Many (most) christians would agree with this. When we get...

There is a distinct difference in quality between miracles which momentarily and locally suspend natural law (and I'm not even convinced about them) and suspending the fundamental nature of space and time. The miracles associated with Jesus testify to His special relationship with God. They are...

What the Bible 'actually' says is anything but clear. Scholars are genuinely divided about how to read Genesis. See my thread here in the C/E forum for one example. See also here: http://www.clt.astate.edu/wnarey/new_page_6.htm...

The problem is not God's capability but His motivation. Why would an infinite being want to do something 'faster'? Why would an omnipotent, omniscient being create a universe with fundamental physical laws and constraints feel the need to later on tinker with those laws and constraints?

The Misuse of Scripture in the Creation/Evolution Debate Creationists are often very vocal in their espoused dedication to scripture. Many claim that scripture clearly (and only) supports their view in a literal interpretation. For people who claim so much respect for the Bible it is...

YEC's often make much of surveys (usually American) which show widespread public support for creationism. Another interesting take is to examine the doctrinal statements of the various deniminations and see where they stand on the issue of an inerrant scripture. SUMMARY OF US MEMBERSHIP...

Now this is a good point. Creation 'science' claims itself as verifiable objective science and yet retreats into miracle and 'you don't understand because you're not spiritual'. Either creationism is an objective explanation of the observable facts or it has at its basis a mystical personal...

and: from http://www.cesame-nm.org/Viewpoint/contributions/bible/summary.html

Enoch and Elijah I think.

The point is not adhering to one reading or another. The point is that both readings are supported by the text itself. The point is that the text, from the very first sentence, is not capable of supporting clear doctrines about origins. Those who do so interpret the text and choose one reading...

Why is everything you post now about sex?

An interesting idea. We can see that the Genesis text is rich with possibilities. It seems to me an abuse of the text to lock it down to one particular litreal simplistic reading.

You do understand creation is different to creationism, don't you? I urge you not to be patroninizing to christians who think differently to you.

“The first sentence of Genesis has often been translated: ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.’ This traditional version seems a clear statement of the doctrine – now held by all monotheists – that God created our world out of nothing: apart from God there originally existed...