What would you say?

[Northern Christian]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

 

[Lilandra]

to see your patent on true Christianity.

Seriously, I don't feel that Christianity is something anyone or group owns.

Each of us are accountable for our own actions.

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

 

[AirPo]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

That's the difference between science and religion.

 

[Praxiteles]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

I'm uncomfortable furthering this fallacy of evolution vs Christianity, but...

Change Christianity? Haven't the 20,000 or so (or whatever the figure it is) denominations already done that?

Nevertheless, you're equating a scientific theory with a revealed religion. *shrug* You just can't do that if you want a workable analogy.

 

[Dannager]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

You'd better belong to the Eastern Orthodox church, because I guarantee you, if you are not a member of the above church your denomination most certainly is guilty of "chang[ing] Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass[ing] it off as Christianity" (and is still likely guilty of it even if you are Eastern Orthodox).

Judge not, Northern Christian, lest you yourself be judged.

 

[Donkeytron]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

A few battles lost or won here and there, a bit of imperial influence spread to the west or east, and you could be claiming the same thing while under the sway of Arian or Manichean doctrines.

The premise of this thread was thin to begin with, and considering the big payoff was a clunky double putdown of evolution and "liberal" (e.g. thinking) christians, I feel rather cheated.

 

[Valkhorn]

how does one creatively redefine a theory which is ill defined to begin with, "allele frequency changes over time" conveys nothing to the thinking truth seeker other than absurdism

I quite agree. How absurd it is to claim that I am genetically different than both of my parents, their parents, and their parents, so on.

Alleles changing and genes changing over time. Pish posh.

I'm a perfect clone I tell you! We all are!

 

[Guywiththehead]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

You mean like when liberal (translation: evil) Christians abandoned Geocentricity and the flat Earth?

Hey, have I introduced you to my friend Peppy? He'd love to tell you just how much of a True Christian™ he is.

 

[DailyBlessings]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

Ah, I thought that was where you were going with this. I assure you that us liberals have no intention of "watering down" Christianity- many of us are actively seeking the true Christianity, as it was passed to us through Christ and before it became encumbered with the trappings of human religion and baggage that has nothing to do with Christ's message. Biblical literalists, for instance, force a modern notion of historical fact onto the Bible that would never have occurred to its authors.

The difference between me and you, however, is that I would never dream of denying the fact that you are a Christian. We are all children of Christ, and semantic disagreements about the nature of the creation are not what defines us. If they are, then someone's priorities are quite out of line.

 

[Praxiteles]

Ah, I thought that was where you were going with this. I assure you that us liberals have no intention of "watering down" Christianity- many of us are actively seeking the true Christianity, as it was passed to us through Christ and before it became encumbered with the trappings of human religion and baggage that has nothing to do with Christ's message. Biblical literalists, for instance, force a modern notion of historical fact onto the Bible that would never have occurred to its authors.

The difference between me and you, however, is that I would never dream of denying the fact that you are a Christian. We are all children of Christ, and semantic disagreements about the nature of the creation are not what defines us. If they are, then someone's priorities are quite out of line.

Yeah. That's just what I would expect one of you God-deniers to say.

 

[danaman5]

The effect of this thread was somewhat dimished by the fact that several posters immediately saw Northern Christian's true intentions with the OP.

If you want to take jabs at liberal Christians, go somewhere else. Such things are not welcome in the C&E forum.

 

[Nathan Poe]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

While you're at it, why not just change the theory of gravity and claim that everything falls to the left?

 

[Praxiteles]

While you're at it, why not just change the theory of gravity and claim that everything falls to the left?

Everything does fall to the left.

I don't think that has anything to do with changes in Gravity. It only started after I had my right leg lengthened.

 

[urbanxy]

It's amazing how everyone would have a problem with me changing the theory of evilution and then claiming it to be true, while it's perfectly alright for liberal Christians to change Chrisitanity as much as they like and then pass it off as Christianity, thereby watering down, and making it more difficult to preach the true message.

What is the true message?

 

[nvxplorer]

Will someone please tell me what a “liberal Christian” is?

 

[Praxiteles]

Will someone please tell me what a “liberal Christian” is?

A very big one.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Will someone please tell me what a “liberal Christian” is?

Anyone who is different from the norm. It's a general sort of insult, not a specific description. Similar to when Republican politicians describe their opponents as liberal.

 

[nvxplorer]

Anyone who is different from the norm. It's a general sort of insult, not a specific description. Similar to when Republican politicians describe their opponents as liberal.

I wasn’t aware of a norm for Christians. Anyway, it appears the term “liberal Christian” is ambiguous and meaningless.

 

[Grengor]

"Appears"? It is. Though it seems to be used the most often when describing Christian who don't read the Bible literally, or liberally.

 

[nvxplorer]

A very big one.

I thought that was a copious Christian.