Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I am not in the least bit interested in disproving God, or the Bible for that matter. Just the fundamentalists' interpretation of it.
I don't believe you.
But either way, same question remains...why do you even care what our interpretation is?
Because I care about the future of Christianity, and it is about time some people left the nineteenth century behind.
If you cared about the future of Christianity, you would care about preserving the Bible as the truth, because if the Bible isn't true, what reason have we got to believe Christianity has any viable basis?
Did I say the Bible wasn't true? No, I said your interpretation wasn't true.
And I said why do you care about our interpretation,
as well as how do you expect any bible believing Christian to interpret Adam was made from the dust of the earth??
But there is a rather obvious problem here. Clearly anybody's understanding of the Bible is "their own" in the sense that we rather obviously bring our own understanding of what words and concepts mean to the very act of reading.The Bible says we are not to lean upon our own understanding, yet you choose to do that over what the Bible says, so what am I supposed to think here?
Because if people in the twenty first century are told that, in order to be a Christian, they have got to turn their back on established scientific truths, which almost every biologist on the face of the Earth agrees are beyond reasonable doubt, then they will turn their backs upon an obscurantist Christianity instead.
I expect them to ask themselves what it was that the author was trying to say, and realise that he wasn't trying to give them a physics or biology lesson.
I confess that I am not exactly sure what that text you refer to really means (the one about not leaning on your own understanding).
I think what you are doing is suggesting they think the way you choose to
So there is no particular reasoning for us to assume your interpretation
I confess that I am not exactly sure what that text you refer to really means (the one about not leaning on your own understanding).
I am suggesting that they thought like people living two to three thousand years ago, and not like present day fundamentalists.
Did I even hint you personally should do that?
Yes, repeatedly, and it is about the only thing fundamentalists ever do say:
Which means:
"If you do not accept my understanding of the Bible...." [Because I, of course, am endowed with the gift of infallibility.]
God nor his word changes with time, and no amount of knowledge will change that.
Kenny, I see I was born one day before you (May 29, 1954).
Lest I forget: HAPPY BIRTHDAY!
To quote John Walton, "The Bible was written for us, but not to us."
It was written so that people living two to three thousand years ago could understand it.
So the 4th Commandment is based on a lie?reason forces us to conclude that all references to a 7 day creation event are not to be taken literally.
You appear to assume that there is a way to read "what the Bible says" that does not require an act of interpretation.Did I even hint you personally should do that? I suggest you read it for yourself and either believe it or not. If you choose not to or to teach others to go against what the Bible says, up to you and IMO, your problem, not mine.
My answer would be the same as given by another poster - the guy whose head is sideways - in post 69.How would you interpret the verse Proverbs 3:5?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?