RE: Josh McDowell
August 30, 2011 at 1:43 pm
(This post was last modified: August 30, 2011 at 1:48 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
You know early histories writers had a habit of viewing the "heathens" which they encountered through the lens of their own cultures. They had no reason to even consider their own cultures. Imagine the wonder, and false attribution that has been passed down through the centuries by this quirk of early anthropology. We may criticize you for your beliefs, but only because they are a snapshot of a time we all feel that we are thoroughly passed. This is the heart of most of the criticism you'll receive. You can refer only to the bible, and many of do not believe that to be a credible source of information, nor a textbook of contemporary ethics.
In other words, if you receive criticism, avoid the tendency to quote scripture in support of scripture. Your ratings will skyrocket.
I could play the role of the apologist for example:
I personally have a faith in christ. Now, I have to admit that some part of me has doubts about the factual accuracy of some of the dicier narratives. For example, the idea of a global flood, all the animals on an ark. That's a stretch for me. It doesn't shake my faith in christ, but on the face of it it seems a bit far fetched. On the other hand, if we remove the fanciful, can we still draw a useful lesson from this story? Would there still be practical application of the principles espoused (if any) in the event that the narrative was completely devoid of actual miracles?
See, theres no need to post scripture unless directly challenged (say in the case of showing those principles you believe this story can establish)
In other words, if you receive criticism, avoid the tendency to quote scripture in support of scripture. Your ratings will skyrocket.
I could play the role of the apologist for example:
I personally have a faith in christ. Now, I have to admit that some part of me has doubts about the factual accuracy of some of the dicier narratives. For example, the idea of a global flood, all the animals on an ark. That's a stretch for me. It doesn't shake my faith in christ, but on the face of it it seems a bit far fetched. On the other hand, if we remove the fanciful, can we still draw a useful lesson from this story? Would there still be practical application of the principles espoused (if any) in the event that the narrative was completely devoid of actual miracles?
See, theres no need to post scripture unless directly challenged (say in the case of showing those principles you believe this story can establish)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
