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.
No, they are not. Creationists are almost all fundamentalist Protestants who subscribe to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.What is the definition of a Traditional Christian? Creationists are not Traditional Christians?
I like that "hyper-fundamentalist balderdash" and yes, that's roughly what I mean by "Bible God." In fact, you are the first person I have come across who used the term to mean anything else.
No, they are not. Creationists are almost all fundamentalist Protestants who subscribe to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.
No, they are not. Creationists are almost all fundamentalist Protestants who subscribe to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.
True, but the number of Orthodox creationists in this country--and in forums like these--is almost nothing compared to the number of Protestants.The Eastern Orthodox Church doesn’t have an official doctrine on creation and many of them believe in both a young earth and a 6 day creation.
True, but the number of Orthodox creationists in this country--and in forums like these--is almost nothing compared to the number of Protestants.
True, and there is no "one size fits all." But the fact of it is that most of the biblical creationists who visit this forum are fundamentalist Protestants who are hostile to Traditional Christianity, especially Roman Catholics.While you're correct on a certain level, keep in mind too that there are some Traditional Christians such as Francis Collins and folks at his BioLogos organization who consider themselves "creationists" of sorts.
BioLogos Article: How is Evolutionary Creation different from Evolutionism, Intelligent Design, and Creationism? - Common-questions
Of course; there are even some Episcopalians who do.I absolutely agree, I just wanted to point out that there are many traditional Christians who do believe in the biblical creation account.
So Episcopalians are not Protestants?True, but the number of Orthodox creationists in this country--and in forums like these--is almost nothing compared to the number of Protestants.
Feel free to link to the post where somebody changed topic.In your imagination. At least be honest
True, and there is no "one size fits all." But the fact of it is that most of the biblical creationists who visit this forum are fundamentalist Protestants who are hostile to Traditional Christianity, especially Roman Catholics.
You were asked several times to respond, and you kept asking which framework you should use. I then suggested you use any framework you liked. In fact, it was my first post in this conversation. Sorry to say we're still waiting for your response.No, I didn't "dance away." I asked you to engage and you didn't. Anyone can clearly see you disengaged...and conveniently disappeared after that with no response to that particular post. I don't believe in explaining "my framework." I'm not here to supply you with some replacement for a faulty framework. I'm here to test YOURS!!
Why would I want to do that?And you know why, right? You've been keeping up with my epistemological identity all along and everywhere I've said something on CF, right?
Still waiting on that definitionTrue, but the number of Orthodox creationists in this country--and in forums like these--is almost nothing compared to the number of Protestants.
That's not how this works epistemically. I'm not here to use my 'framework' in an explanation about the 'veracity' of the Christian faith, or the 'correctness' of the Bible's expressions of ethics or history or theology.You were asked several times to respond, and you kept asking which framework you should use. I then suggested you use any framework you liked and..... we're still waiting. Dance, Philo, dance.
Essentially, you'd do it for the sake of honesty and transparency. That's just part of leaning in the direction of an epistemology that has even the thinnest hints of virtue. Or do you not care about honesty and transparency?Why would I want to do that?
Dance, Philo, dance.That's not how this works epistemically. I'm not here to use my 'framework' in an explanation about the 'veracity' of the Christian faith, or the 'correctness' of the Bible's expressions of ethics or history or theology.
And you know why, right? One reason is that I'm an Existentialist. My view is Subjective in the Pascalian and Kiergegaardian sense of the word. Secondly, if YOU'RE asking me to attempt to provide an explanation in terms that YOU may accept, then it is encumbent on you to inform me what your epistemic expectations are, as well as your axiological positioning in the area of Ethics.
If you won't do this, then I have nothing clear to aim for and no focal point to upon which to have a discussion with you, let alone present to you an analysis. If you're going to tell me to "use any framework, willy nilly," then I might as well be blinfolded and play pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey for all the good it's going to do either one of us.
Lol. In order to have an honest conversation I have to read every post you make on CF?Essentially, you'd do it for the sake of honesty and transparency. That's just part of leaning in the direction of an epistemology that has even the thinnest hints of virtue. Or do you not care about honesty and transparency?
That's not what I asked. I asked you to link to the post where the topic was changed.Look at the title of the thread compared to the discussion.
Stonewall, Bungle Bear, stonewall. It's what you're apparently best at.Dance, Philo, dance.
I don't think I implied that. But continue on with the fallacy of "poisoning the waters" if you feel you must. At least we can all see that you're enjoying yourself in doing so.Lol. In order to have an honest conversation I have to read every post you make on CF?
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?