Posted on 06/17/2009 8:19:30 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Religious dissent is not a one-way street. Those of us who disagree with you and your interprtations of the poetry of the Bible are, labeled as liberals, or not conservative, or not Christian. Where you do you get that kind of authority to judge others and their beliefs?
The absolutism of Creationists such as yourself, have only highlighted and confirmed the perception of those who believe conservatives are all nut-cases.
“You find Creation irrational, but contend that you believe in the Creator nonetheless.”
The tactical misquote: a dangerous and effective tool of the leftist.
The literal account of creation is allegorical. That does not mean that there was no creation. I choose to please God by using the brain that he gave me to understand and connect the clues left behind.
To disagree is human, and it's entirely possible to be Christians and have divergent opinions on Biblical topics. However, you're talking about the wholesale dismissal of entire swathes of the Bible as not factual, when in fact what is being rejected was clearly accepted as fact by Jesus Christ himself. By definition, no Christian calls Jesus Christ a liar.
Biblical literalists, and I assume you are one of those, label anyone disagreeing with them of not being Christians
I label people who snidely dismiss the key voting bloc of conservatism in this country as not being conservative. Their Christianity is a separate matter. The two rarely diverge, but it's possible.
Religious dissent is not a one-way street.
Nice to see you admit this, after your bizarre comparisons earlier in this thread.
Those of us who disagree with you and your interprtations of the poetry of the Bible are, labeled as liberals, or not conservative, or not Christian.
The disagreement and response to it varies by degree. "Liberalism" is a difficult word in this context. Do you mean it more as "libertine," more like "individual liberty" or the Orwellian reality of outright collectivism? As far as Christianity, it's a separate matter, though the two rarely diverge, as I've noted previously.
Where you do you get that kind of authority to judge others and their beliefs?
Here comes the "judge not lest ye be judged" cudgel again, speaking of context, or rather the lack of it. Deny the clear Word and you deny God. The Word is God. All of it. If you knew your Bible, you'd know that. What you term "authority" is discernment, and not exactly a fine point of discernment at that.
The absolutism of Creationists such as yourself, have only highlighted and confirmed the perception of those who believe conservatives are all nut-cases.
Well, you can continue to advocate moral squishiness instead of moral absolutes, and accomodate the opinion of the world instead of the Word. I've done what is asked of me. You'll continue on your way, or you'll stop and think about what I've said. But, your handwringing over my making you appear somehow a "nut case" is predictive of your response. Oops, was I being judgmental?
Maybe Santa Claus would be more appealing. But, even beneficient old Santa would leave a lump of coal for a bad little boy, lol. So, maybe not.
Just make something up. A little of this, a little of that. Run with it. See where it leads.
Nowhere.
It's your call, and you're free to make it.
“To disagree is human, and it’s entirely possible to be Christians and have divergent opinions on Biblical topics. However, you’re talking about the wholesale dismissal of entire swathes of the Bible as not factual, when in fact what is being rejected was clearly accepted as fact by Jesus Christ himself. By definition, no Christian calls Jesus Christ a liar.”
Here we have a fine example of a typical leftist rhetorical construction: offer proposition “A”, then conclude that “not A” follows naturally.
Here, our friend RC says that disagreement is fine, then he says that if you disagree with HIM, it’s not fine. So it’s OK to disagree, as long as you agree with RC.
Got it?
Buck, the logical thread of the double standard itself requires a near act of faith.
What a strange sentence. You acknowledge "the literal account of creation" on the one hand, and then proceed to negate it.
I note you still avoid providing an answer to my questions, asked twice now. The Creation is present throughout the Bible, and is no way presented as allegory. Jesus Christ spoke upon it as fact.
So, please answer: how do you accomodate this?
It’s not a strange sentence at all, if you consider that “the literal account of creation” is synonymous with “the account of creation as described in the bible”.
And I have no intention of taking your litmus test. If you want to fill out a Christian score card on me, you’ll have to gather your intelligence elsewhere.
The difference that is lost upon you is that “disagreement” does not always equate with rejection. Reduce to allegory all you want, the fact remains that what you term allegory is clearly not regarded as such within the Bible itself. That’s clearly not just *me* talking, Bucky.
You and your buds could use a good logic course, too. Say “hi” to Junior for me, and ask him if a rectangle is still a square.
I wonder if he would be teaching planetary physics if he were here today. Or evolutionary theory as a pathway to finding God.
Fortunately, I use my brain, which in His divine wisdom, he developed in all of us. Some of us use it for critical thinking.
“...the fact remains that what you term allegory is clearly not regarded as such within the Bible itself.”
I see—the bible does not explicitly state that it is itself allegory, so it is not.
What if the bible did state that it is allegory? Would that statement itself then be allegorical? If so, would the bible’s explicit statement of its own allegorical nature definitively prove that it is not allegorical, but literally true?
I’d invoke the Cretan paradox, but some here might take it the wrong way...
No, it’s because you have a scorecard, and I’m not going to let you use it.
Life predicated upon and improved by death and suffering, from the beginning? No, He would not teach that.
“You have no answer.”
If memory serves me correctly, this is the third time that you have repeated this phrase. You are employing a tried-and-true leftist technique of mind control: if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.
It’s a certainty, folks. The creation rationalizers are leftists.
You haven't answered, and resort again and again to a fey little game of tit-for-tat, because you can't answer. You can't answer because there is no answer, short of reducing nearly the entire Bible to allegory ... like some fairy tale or Santa, basically.
And you persist in calling me the leftist, lol. Whose rhetoric is heard and read regarding Christianity in the MSM constantly? Yours. Not mine.
I'd say nice try, but it's actually lame.
It seems that your leftism derives from a weakness of faith.
Why not just explain how Darwinism and (from # 56)” Jesus Christ is described as the second Adam in the Bible. Jesus Himself spoke of Creation in purely Biblical terms and dealt with Creation, the garden and the flood as fact.” fit together in your mind.
They fit together perfectly, thank you for asking.
Yep, I’m showing weakness going round after round with you, trying in vain to get you to see the logical fallacies and internal inconsistencies of your particular desire to put evolutionary speciation before God, despite multiple, clear Biblical passages that negate your contention.
I guess I should be “strong” and cave in, just stop resisting, lol. It would be so much easier to be strong like you. And popular, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.