Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 18 hours ago, Scott Free said: A liberal interpretation means interpretation agreeing to what the reader believes the author reasonably intended. But, a liberal interpretation does not necessarily mean an interpretation that would accomplish a change in former practice. No, liberal interpretation is a subjective approach to the Bible that attempts to avoid the author's intended purpose. Liberals always treat the Bible as smorgasbord where they can pick and choose according to taste and reject what the author was actually trying to communicate. Liberals try it mold the Bible around Evolution in order to avoid the issue of sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 18 hours ago, PepperS said: I was with you until your last sentence. This post had nothing to do with evolution. Just core Christian beliefs. But what 1sheep says is true and most Atheists will agree. The Bible doesn't teach Evolution. They have more integrity than "Christians" who try to modify the Bible to accommodate Evolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 21 hours ago, one.opinion said: Essentially, you cannot dispute any of the central theology I have presented and instead, dispute issues of lesser importance. Your perception of evolution may very well be antichrist, but I have demonstrated that mine is not. If you are indeed worried about my feelings, I can assure you that your stance does not offend me at all. I can absolutely agree to disagree and still accept our kinship in Jesus Christ. Can you? Any attempt to mold the Bible around evolution. No one who perverts Scripture to accommodate Evolution is being true the Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 19 hours ago, one.opinion said: That's an interesting opinion since the requirements for salvation are clearly stated in the New Testament in numerous places, none of which include a belief in 144-hour creation. Actually, the Gospel and a literal interpretation of Genesis are inseparable and the Gospel is predicated on that. You try to disconnect them, but that is an assault on God's integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.11 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 15 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Actually, the Gospel and a literal interpretation of Genesis are inseparable and the Gospel is predicated on that. You try to disconnect them, but that is an assault on God's integrity. Why not let God be the judge of that instead of appointing yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Free Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 88 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,274 Content Per Day: 0.62 Reputation: 287 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/15/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 15 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: No, liberal interpretation is a subjective approach to the Bible that attempts to avoid the author's intended purpose. Liberals always treat the Bible as smorgasbord where they can pick and choose according to taste and reject what the author was actually trying to communicate. Liberals try it mold the Bible around Evolution in order to avoid the issue of sin. The term "they" clearly demonstrating a lack of understanding of the complexity of the issue at hand and fails to see the great diversity of perspectives that unite under the umbrella of faith, repentance and hope in Jesus Christ. The current ultra-literal interpretations that lead to young earth creationism are not required by the text and has no impact or relevance to our Christian practices. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Free Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 88 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,274 Content Per Day: 0.62 Reputation: 287 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/15/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 21 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Actually, the Gospel and a literal interpretation of Genesis are inseparable and the Gospel is predicated on that. You try to disconnect them, but that is an assault on God's integrity. In Genesis 1-2, there is not just one but two stories of the creation of humanity, and those stories do not quite agree with each other. That alone ought to be reason enough to argue that the literal interpretation of every verse, in isolation from the rest of the Bible, can’t really be correct. Otherwise, the Bible is contradicting itself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 8 minutes ago, Scott Free said: The term "they" clearly demonstrating a lack of understanding of the complexity of the issue at hand and fails to see the great diversity of perspectives that unite under the umbrella of faith, repentance and hope in Jesus Christ. The current ultra-literal interpretations that lead to young earth creationism are not required by the text and has no impact or relevance to our Christian practices. The account in Genesis 1 absolutely requires a literal interpretation of the text. There is no such thing a non-literal interpretation. Why do you interpret any text? To get at the author's meaning. Unfortunately, that bit of commonsense is thrown out the window when the Bible is the text being interpreted and suddenly people invent all kinds of "interpretations" to get around believing what the Bible says. If you don't believe in a young earth creation, you don't believe the Bible. 3 minutes ago, Scott Free said: In Genesis 1-2, there is not just one but two stories of the creation of humanity, and those stories do not quite agree with each other. That alone ought to be reason enough to argue that the literal interpretation of every verse, in isolation from the rest of the Bible, can’t really be correct. Otherwise, the Bible is contradicting itself. No, they are ONE single account divided by a chapter break. Chapter 1 is the creation account and chapter two is a summarization of what was previously presented. If you were a student of Scripture you would know that. The literal interpretation is the only correct and the only truly Christ honoring approach to the text. If you love Jesus, you will interpret the text literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 14 minutes ago, one.opinion said: Why not let God be the judge of that instead of appointing yourself? Because what I said is true and factual. It is not something that you can refute. To make God's word out to say something it doesn't say and add to it as you do, is tantamount to calling God a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.11 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 1 minute ago, shiloh357 said: To make God's word out to say something it doesn't say and add to it as you do, is tantamount to calling God a liar. This is... again... false. I believe God is saying something different from what you believe He is saying. You and I disagree on interpretation. We both agree on the fact that God does not lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts