Forum theists: when you have a moment, please...

[Neo-Scholastic]

So what ? Yes there are many opinions. Some are better than others and demonstrably more supported than others. The quantity of opinions about any subject neither confirms nor denies the veracity of those opinions. Your comment is a non seqitor (sp).

[Ravenshire]

Am I only one who thinks it would be great to see more threads started by some of the established theists on these forums? 

---

I'm not trying to be snooty or discourage theists that have recently joined from participating, but there has been a massive influx of new members starting threads that are just insane.

It would be nice to see more conversations started by theists who know what they're talking about and happen to be familiar with the rules of engagement. 

Just a thought.

---

Yes, you are the only one who thinks that such a thing would be great.

Don't presume to speak for the rest of us.

Especially considering how often you're shown to be demonstrably incorrect.

[Ravenshire]

Why should anyone be above the law? Are you not making the case for some form of divine Magna Carta right here?

How I see it is that a fair God would not put himself above the law. We don't expect any human leader of our civilized countries to do so. Otherwise, they would be dictators. Why not the same expectation for God?

Because it's expected that gawd would act like a dictator.

[Minimalist]

Typical apologetic excuse for why your silly "scriptures" are written like dog shit, Chad.

Wake up and smell the coffee, huh.

[sinnerdaniel94]

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”
‭‭John‬ ‭3:36‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Decide whether or not you have a common ancestor with bananas or that you have a soul which God loves

[Athene]

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”
‭‭John‬ ‭3:36‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Decide whether or not you have a common ancestor with bananas or that you have a soul which God loves

No one here has ever claimed to have a common ancestor with bananas, Daniel. Are you feeling okay?

[Angrboda]

[Angrboda]

Properly understood, the terms of inerrancy and infallibility refer to the Holy Scriptures as the necessary and sufficient guide to saving faith when approached with humility and earnest desire to know the Lord and be led by Him.  For the simple, the literal meanings of the stories and lessons serve as a sufficient guide for life and saving faith. For the more learned, careful study and deep reading of the whole text allows them to resolve the more challenging passages to the satisfaction of Man’s higher rational faculties. In other words, God meets up where we are and provides exactly what we need if only we are willing to listen.

Everybody has got an opinion.  Problem is, there's no way to show one opinion is superior to another.  All you've got is a bunch of divergent opinions resting on sand.

So what ? Yes there are many opinions. Some are better than others and demonstrably more supported than others. The quantity of opinions about any subject neither confirms nor denies the veracity of those opinions. Your comment is a non seqitor (sp).

The sand at the bottom of the pile of opinions are hermeneutic assumptions. Some assume the bible inerrant throughout, others that different parts need to be interpreted differently, all believing that their chosen assumptions yield a reading experience imbued in some sense with truth. But the problem with assumptions is they are completely unsupported. Thus your belief that some opinions are better supported than others rests on ignoring the crucial role played by those initial assumptions. So no, no opinions are demonstrably superior to others and thus all opinions are of equal value when it comes to deriving truth from the bible. You cannot demonstrate your assumptions, you can only look for agreement among the assumptions you do make. But since there are a multitude of incompatible assumptions undergirding those opinions, agreement is nothing but sheer accident. That's not a non sequitur. It follows from the basics of hermeneutics.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Abraham Lincoln is the object of historical study. Anyone can have an opinion about him. Some opinions about him, his motivations and regrets, are better than others because they better match the data which consist of historical accounts, letters, artifacts, and official documents. In that way, the bible is another data set. Your objection, were it valid, would undermine all study in the humanities.

[Angrboda]

Abraham Lincoln is the object of historical study. Anyone can have an opinion about him. Some opinions about him, his motivations and regrets, are better than others because they better match the data which consist of historical accounts, letters, artifacts, and official documents. In that way, the bible is another data set. Your objection, were it valid, would undermine all study in the humanities.

The humanities don't declare that a specific book contains divine truth. Your objection is mooted.