(February 4, 2013 at 12:54 pm)catfish Wrote: Seems pretty fucking dogmatic to me.
What you call "dogma" I call "reading what's there".
Speaking of being consistent with how we operate in every other area of life. If I wrote business contracts and then decided that they meant something completely different than what's written in the contract, I'd get sued. The same whimsical liberal Christian "interpretation" (which usually boils down to making stuff up based on how it sounds good to the individual) they apply to the Bible wouldn't work in any other area of life.
Quote:As for your understanding of "coherent", I don't think I can use smaller words or make it any simpler than I already have, shall I type more slowly next time?
Maybe you should try making sense in what you type. A non-Christian Christian belief is an oxy-moron.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
