The Pinnacle of Evolution

[bhsmte]

The best example is your attack on Christianity is very anti science.

Explain.

 

[Loudmouth]

The best example is your attack on Christianity is very anti science.

Examples?

 

[Hoghead1]

I am not saying that about anyone, that would be against the rules. I can not judge who is and who is not a christian. I am just saying what the Bible says in general about people that are not saved. What we judge here is not people, we judge thoughts. Most of the thoughts here originated somewhere else and we have to weigh those thoughts to see if they are worthy of our attention of if those thoughts come from a reprobate mind. This is why I began a tread dealing with Steve Wells because he wrote the Skeptics Bible that is quoted here so often. Rather then to deal on a individual basis with his many many attacks on the Bible it is better to deal with his mistaken understanding of the Bible. His approach and his method are in error. In the same way there is no reason to argue against reprobate thinking. We just identify what it is and dismiss the argument accordingly because it is not based on sound logic and sound reasoning.

People that call themselves Christians and are in error are usually into some sort of revisionism. This is covered by the Statement of Faith just who is and who is not a Christian. It is up to them to judge themselves.

Yes, but you are not speaking directly from the Bible. There is an intervening step. Yu are speaking from the standpoint of how fundamentalist ideology views Scripture. The issues here really aren't about God per se or the Bible per se; the issue here is how accurate is fundamentalaistic ideology. Now, I don't doubt fundamentalism may work for some Christians. After all, the right wing is a well-established, well- recognized part of Christendom. However, it does not work for everyone. Not all Christians are on the right, no should they be. God wants Christians to be right, not just on the right. I found fundamentalism dos not even begin to meet my spiritual and intellectual needs. I found it an intolerant, anti-intellectual approach. The SOP is that any scholar, Christian or otherwise, who dares disagree with fundamentalaistic ideology and its view of teh Bible is automatically written off as a heretic, lost soul, reprobate, you name it. While that may be "in" in the Bible Belt, it dos not even begin to cut it in scholarly studies.

 

[Hoghead1]

The point was that I am not going to waste my time to answer absurd questions from people with a reprobate mind. If people want to perish in their sin then that is there choice to make. There is nothing we can do to help them. We are here for the redeemed and to do what we can to help those who know how to make a right correct choice. We are not here for the people that want to suppress the truth and make that their primary objective in life. So I agree with you that it is a waste of time to try to help people with a reprobate mind that are not interested in knowing the truth.

Your post is a major no-no in any serious theological discussion. It is off limits for you to try and hit below the belt and attack others on the basis that they aren't good Christians. That's simply the defensive tactic many use to get off the hook and save face when they know they have a weak argument they can't support, i.e., you can't rebut his ideas, so you try and win by cheating and attacking his character.