What are the Characteristics of a NT Christian?

[Pat Mustard]

He has me on ignore simply because I kept pointing out that he couldn't refute my arguments, the big wuss.

Occasionally, I read a point just to remind myself.

What, that you're a big baby who loves insulting others but blubbers and whines every time you get called out for constant stream of shitty behaviour? Yes, we all know what kind of person you are Wooters, except you.

---

There is something I was meaning to come back to for a while, but I've been busy and it slipped my mind.

This:

2. Pursues a biblically informed view of the world.

contradicts this:

1. A specific view on Genesis 1

Other thoughts?

And I'm thinking in relation to thoughts, either Steve is incapable of thought, otherwise he would think it out for himself, or he's a big fan of Big Brother.

The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies—all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

[SteveII]

2. Pursues a biblically informed view of the world.

contradicts this:

1. A specific view on Genesis 1

Other thoughts?

And I'm thinking in relation to thoughts, either Steve is incapable of thought, otherwise he would think it out for himself, or he's a big fan of Big Brother.

The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies—all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

I hesitate to respond, because quite frankly you behave like an ass. However, perhaps it will be helpful to someone else or start a real discussion with someone else.

The first three chapters of Genesis are linguistically different from the rest of Genesis both in style and come from a different time in history (use of older language). The context was that there were other creation accounts from other civilization (including the recent 400 years the Jews spent in Egypt) and it is likely that the Jews were passing this one down long before Genesis was written to teach their children the distinctions from other religions: that the world is a created entity (no endowed with its own spirituality) and done so by the monotheistic God they worshiped. The actual Hebrew is poetic and highly structured--which is easier to recite and teach from generation to generation (oral tradition) and clearly not meant to be a science text (since very few science text are written in poetic form). 

So, was it 6 days, 6 periods, 6 billion years? Who knows. As long as you believe that God is responsible for the creation of the cosmos and humans are in the image of God, there are a variety of ways you can assemble a systematic theology and still be internally consistent.

[Harry Nevis]

contradicts this:


And I'm thinking in relation to thoughts, either Steve is incapable of thought, otherwise he would think it out for himself, or he's a big fan of Big Brother.

I hesitate to respond, because quite frankly you behave like an ass. However, perhaps it will be helpful to someone else or start a real discussion with someone else.

The first three chapters of Genesis are linguistically different from the rest of Genesis both in style and come from a different time in history (use of older language). The context was that there were other creation accounts from other civilization (including the recent 400 years the Jews spent in Egypt) and it is likely that the Jews were passing this one down long before Genesis was written to teach their children the distinctions from other religions: that the world is a created entity (no endowed with its own spirituality) and done so by the monotheistic God they worshiped. The actual Hebrew is poetic and highly structured--which is easier to recite and teach from generation to generation (oral tradition) and clearly not meant to be a science text (since very few science text are written in poetic form). 

So, was it 6 days, 6 periods, 6 billion years? Who knows. As long as you believe that God is responsible for the creation of the cosmos and humans are in the image of God, there are a variety of ways you can assemble a systematic theology and still be internally consistent.

I guess living in a bubble makes you work for internal consistency.