(April 2, 2016 at 9:14 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:(April 2, 2016 at 8:41 am)athrock Wrote: Can you prove this? You know...prove a negative?
How does parting the Red Sea violate anyone's free will? Or leaving an image on the Shroud of Turin?
These are signs of God's action, but people still reject them. No one is forced to believe because of miracles.
Lol, what? That was snark, Athrock.
<snort> Coming from you, easily the Queen of Snark in this forum, that's pretty funny.
(April 2, 2016 at 9:14 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: My point is, you don't (logically) get to make 101 supernatural assertions about God in one breath, and then in the same breath try to compare him to a humanoid, physical world scenario, and expect the analogy to hold.
The Red Sea? (Or "sea of reeds" depending on your interpretation, ofc.) Okay...I didn't realize I was talking to a literalist here...
Do you know what I have learned from this thread? That theists are capable of rationalizing ANYTHING when it comes to God. No matter how ridiculous.
I AM a literalist - which means that I look for the intended meaning of the author. (It's raining cats and dogs means it is raining very hard.)
What you probably meant to say is that I take the scriptures literally. (It's raining cats and dogs means cats and dogs are falling from the sky.)
And you would be wrong about me.