Unbelievable Unbelief!

[Bushido216]

Because that's feminism, and feminism was responsible for 9/11.

 

[rmills]

Because that's feminism, and feminism was responsible for 9/11.

 

[gluadys]

Actually it is all to do with evaporation and condensation.

You know that and I know that, but did the biblical writers know that?

You and I know that above our heads is an airy atmosphere and then the vacuum of space---no solid ceiling of any sort.

But the biblical writers and natural philosophers, right up to the 16th century "knew" that sky/heaven was a solid dome or sphere enclosing the atmosphere.

And the biblical writers "knew" that dome had windows in it.

Why do you choose not to interpret literally those passages in which the biblical writers intend their references to a windowed sky/heaven to be understood literally?

Is there any reason at all to change the nature of scripture from literal description to non-literal "poetry" at these points other than that you accept MODERN SCIENTIFIC COSMOLOGY which falsifies these as literal descriptions?

Well, modern scientific geology also falsifies a recent creation and a global flood. So why can we not also change the literal timing of creation and the literal description of a global flood for EXACTLY THE SAME reason?

In fact, in regard to the timing of creation, there is even more reason to change from a literal to a poetic intepretation, because the text itself indicates it was intended from the first to be a poetic rather than a chronological narrative.

It is not my interpretation that is the problem. I agree with the author that what he wrote is the truth. You on the other hand contend that what the author wrote is in error.

I do not contend the author of Revelation wrote error. I contend he wrote an apocalypse which, by definition, is intended to be read as a symbolic vision of contemporary (to the first readers) reality.

It is only your literalistic presuppositions which identify symbolic visions as "error". I contend they are, in fact, truth. Indeed Revelation and other apocalyptic writings convey timeless truths of interest to all peoples in all ages. What they do not convey is a literal blue-print of the future. That does not make them "error".


So the problem is indeed with your interpretation.

 

[gluadys]

Because that's feminism, and feminism was responsible for 9/11.

According to the bible, women were:
judges
prophets
teachers
evangelists
deacons
apostles
and possibly elders

Indeed, why could they not write scripture?

 

[Bulldog]

Lucaspa, you are confusing christianity with religion. I am not impressed by religious titles and bodies. I prefer to recognise Christ in a persons life by seeing their fruit.
True christianity often receives more opposition from religion than it does the world. A bit like Jesus's life really.

Religion is a man made thing that forms when true christianity is compromised. That compromise can take many forms but T.E-ism is certainly a slice.
Compromise is when you lean to your own understanding. Sound familiar?

I have never been in a fold with the bunch you quote nor will I ever be. I prefer to hang out with sheep not goats.

Is Christianity not a religion?

 

[ThePhoenix]

Is Christianity not a religion?

I think he meant church. As in "You are confusing christianity with the church"

 

[Gander]

Is Christianity not a religion?

Christianity can take two forms. Pure and impure.

Pure christianity (or religion) is christianity based solely on God's word. Impure christianity (or religion) is when man starts taking away or adding to Gods word according to mans understanding.

Pure religion is based on relationship with God. Dead religion is man made and based on the letter of the law.

Just for ease I usually refer to pure religion as christianity, and impure dead religion as just "religion".

 

[Gander]

I think he meant church. As in "You are confusing christianity with the church"

No I didn't. See #47 for a fuller explaination.

 

[Gander]

Indeed, why could they not write scripture?

They could have, but there is no evidence that they did.

Not that it matters because the true author of God's word is God.

 

[Gander]

Come on, Maimonides back in 12th century was questioning if Genesis should be taken literally, based on inherint contradictions in the text. Even taken without any outside interference Genesis is inherintly contradictory.

The contradictions both you and Maimonides see are only there because of your deficient understanding. There are no real contradictions because God can not contradict Himself.

And I'm still looking for a reason why it's so unbelievable that there might have been women writing the bible.

See#49.

 

[gluadys]

They could have, but there is no evidence that they did.

Not that it matters because the true author of God's word is God.

Thank you. It was always postulated in terms of a possibility. We can only speculate that some anonymous writers may have been female. We have no evidence that any part of the bible was certainly written by a woman.

But the intensity of the reaction to the mere possibility still suggests a streak of inappropriate male chauvinism.

 

[ThePhoenix]

The contradictions both you and Maimonides see are only there because of your deficient understanding. There are no real contradictions because God can not contradict Himself.

Of course there are no contradictions, if the narrative is poetic. If it's not, and is completely literal, then there are contradictions.

 

[Bushido216]

Christianity can take two forms. Pure and impure.

Pure christianity (or religion) is christianity based solely on God's word. Impure christianity (or religion) is when man starts taking away or adding to Gods word according to mans understanding.

Pure religion is based on relationship with God. Dead religion is man made and based on the letter of the law.

Just for ease I usually refer to pure religion as christianity, and impure dead religion as just "religion".

Like the various forms the Bible has taken? And, I ask you, who decided which of the various letters should be added into the Bible and which shouldn't? Corinthians isn't the Word of God.