(October 18, 2018 at 6:19 pm)Dragonfly Wrote:(October 17, 2018 at 5:02 pm)SteveII Wrote: You have been thoroughly saturated in fundamentalist Christian doctrine. Even that, I doubt. I know your story, I had a similar one. I was even a pastor's kid. While I did know the basic doctrines, I did not know the underlying systematic theology. Without that foundation, you get all kinds of inconsistencies because of careless thinking and careless teaching by well-intentioned people. Where our paths diverge is that I went and found answers. You didn't. Don't think for a second that every one of your questions and problems have not been discussed in a 1000 books. There ARE NO NEW QUESTIONS about Christianity in hundreds of years.
When you say "Everything falls apart if you lose the literal translation", you must mean Gen 1-3 (you said it was because of evolution). Which is what, 1/400 of the Bible. Written by who knows, and when. At most, you have a weak argument against the inerrantcy of Genesis. You do not need one word of Genesis to believe every word of the NT and certainly don't need the OT (or the NT for that matter) to be inerrant to be a Christian. Your argument is based in ignorance and an inch-deep understanding of doctrine. Go ahead, tell me where I am wrong.
Yes, I have studied how the NT became canonized. Your characterization of it show me that you probably do not. You might want to get your facts straight if you want to come back to this topic.
I don't have time for this shit. Did you not notice the title of the thread? You haven't deconverted, and you're certainly not helping. My facts are straight. You have so many errors and misassumptions in your post above that I'm not even going to try to address them. Again, I don't have time for your nonsense. I've been steeped in theology and doctrine my entire life, so who are you to tell me what I do and do not know and what I have and haven't done? Your arrogance is amazing. Just go away.
(October 17, 2018 at 1:36 am)Whateverist Wrote: I agree that criticism of Christianity based on the worst interpretation of just a few passages of the bible is not a good basis for deciding much of anything. On the other hand, just how other passages are selected to be interpreted literally and as providing clear direction for all Christendom is quite mysterious to me.
Why are you assuming that I am criticizing Christianity "based on the worst interpretation of just a few passages?" I've read the entire Bible numerous times, and there are more than a "few" passages that have issues that make the Bible an unreliable source.
I'm not assuming anything about your position. I was addressing Steve.