(November 15, 2011 at 3:00 pm)chadster1976 Wrote: Moses, raised as an Egyptian, is trying to rationalize the stories from the oral tradition. The time of creation from scriptures comes from an inaccurate, arbitrary countback to zero. It was not measured from zero upwards. Adam and Eve had no calendar to record their passage through time. Who says I don't believe God could communicate with Moses? What I say is Moses is not infallible so neither are his scriptures. Simple logic, surely?
The Jewish calendar existing only in GS head comment was relating to the fact that there were generations before it was brought into being. Generations of poorly understood and poorly counted passages of time.
I don't want to repeat myself but... insisting God must have acted in a way contrary to basic observation is not "faith", it is ludicrous. Accepting that God created all we observe is rational and realistic, not limiting. I don't say God couldn't have made the universe in 6 days, I say he didn't because all observation and measurement is to the contrary. Whoever said either the Bible is the word of God or it isn't is missing the point. The Bible is the Word of God, interpreted and transcribed by men; fallible (and sometimes political) men.
When I was coming back to Christianity after a long time as a self-declared atheist, I spoke to a Priest about my doubts. His response was "Good. I'm glad you have doubts. Blind faith is no faith at all. Hopefully we can find some answers."
The Catholic church also does not teach that all other churches are wrong. Why, Herr Pope has even made a special allowance for Anglicans to join, if they aren't happy about reforms by the General Synod.
God is who God is. I think we have a fundamental disagreement insofar as I say the scripture is there to help is find him, you say the scriptures define him and thus you have found him. Knowing how fallible man can be (you should see how many times I've had to sort out my tax-code, no thanks to the man at the Inland Revenue), I think your opinion is dangerously close to putting your fingers in your ears, shouting loudly and ignoring the potential truth. There truly is nothing more dangerous than a man who knows they are right...

I do not think you really understood what the priest was saying, I find my faith to be true through scriptures. Now would you explain how scripture could be the Word of God if it were not revealed to man by God.

I think you have not understood what Chadster was saying.

Quote:I do not think you really understood what the priest was saying,

That is one of the more patronising and annoying things said by many apologists. A patronising thing to say to anyone most of the time,and an ad hominem. It implies the person is ignorant and/or stupid. Well,yeah, I guess, a tempting response with most of the apologists we get here.

(November 15, 2011 at 3:23 pm)frankiej Wrote: I think you have not understood what Chadster was saying.

I understand clearly, he wants to have christianity his way and not God's.

How are you certain that his way isn't god's? Maybe you are interpreting the scriptures incorrectly.

(November 15, 2011 at 9:48 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(November 15, 2011 at 3:23 pm)frankiej Wrote: I think you have not understood what Chadster was saying.

I understand clearly, he wants to have christianity his way and not God's.

LOL. All christians do that, including you.

The only way to be sure you are doing it god's way and not yours is to take every single word in the bible literally, and we all know what happens when someone does that.

If you don't take it all literally, you are doing it your way because there is no way of knowing for sure which bits are supposed to be metaphor and which literal.

(November 15, 2011 at 5:47 pm)padraic Wrote:

Quote:I do not think you really understood what the priest was saying,

That is one of the more patronising and annoying things said by many apologists. A patronising thing to say to anyone most of the time,and an ad hominem. It implies the person is ignorant and/or stupid. Well,yeah, I guess, a tempting response with most of the apologists we get here.

You really know him to be different, now I'm not saying he is I was wandering how you know he's not.

---

(November 15, 2011 at 9:56 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote:

(November 15, 2011 at 9:48 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(November 15, 2011 at 3:23 pm)frankiej Wrote: I think you have not understood what Chadster was saying.

I understand clearly, he wants to have christianity his way and not God's.

LOL. All christians do that, including you.

The only way to be sure you are doing it god's way and not yours is to take every single word in the bible literally, and we all know what happens when someone does that.

If you don't take it all literally, you are doing it your way because there is no way of knowing for sure which bits are supposed to be metaphor and which literal.

For christians who care to try and do it God's way it will be revealed what we should be striving for. God gave us His Word so He could reveal to His people what His truth is.

---

(November 15, 2011 at 9:54 pm)aleialoura Wrote: How are you certain that his way isn't god's? Maybe you are interpreting the scriptures incorrectly.

He's not even interpreting scripture he is trying to avoid it, go back and read the things he said about it and you will see he changes from post to post to fit the moment.

Fuck.

Anyone who wants to be a xtian can be one for all I care. It's not as if its an honorable title.

It's all up for interpretation and you have no way of knowing if you've got it right. I interpret it as a disgusting book of bullshit. Maybe I'm the one who has it right... considering the evidence behind my interpretations, I think that there is a better chance that I am right, and you're just plain wrong.

(November 15, 2011 at 11:05 pm)aleialoura Wrote: It's all up for interpretation and you have no way of knowing if you've got it right. I interpret it as a disgusting book of bullshit. Maybe I'm the one who has it right... considering the evidence behind my interpretations, I think that there is a better chance that I am right, and you're just plain wrong.

We'll see shortly.