Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

Original poster

YEC part Trois

406 replies

PedroYoniLikesCrisps · 12/05/2013 09:15

So we're still going, perhaps not as YEC as originally, but there's some good debate still occurring! Can we link from previous again?

OP posts:
daftdame · 16/05/2013 14:42

January As I have said before, you have to take the Bible in its entirety. Some things are still a mystery to me, those things I take in faith.

At salvation even though we do not know him consciously our spirit does. It is the spirit part of man that is saved. Thus we grow in our faith and as more is revealed to us, we understand more.

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 14:42

I have made it quite clear on here that I am a liberal theist (possibly with leanings towards the deist) but that organised religion is a barrier to freedom of thought and more often than not a means of manipulation

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/05/2013 14:44

According to Christianity, going to Heaven is a choice, you either want to be with God or not.

I love that - such a positive spin on sending vast swathes of the population to hell!

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 14:44

or you dont take the bible as the word of God...in its entirety or otherwise....

Snorbs · 16/05/2013 14:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

daftdame · 16/05/2013 14:45

January Sorry I have not read everything you have written so didn't know that.

I'm not a liberal theist / deist but would agree with you regarding some (aspects) of organised religion.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/05/2013 14:47

And I don't understand what best and daftdame preach about 'taking the bible in it's entirety' either. How? Parts of it are so completely contradictory.

Plus, are you taking the bible in it's entirety when you've quoted verses at us here?

daftdame · 16/05/2013 14:48

January I do take the Bible as the word of God, I just have not read all of it or fully, consciously, understood all of it.

Christianity is my faith as I have said.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/05/2013 14:49

If you've not read all of the bible, how are you taking it in it's entirety?

daftdame · 16/05/2013 14:51

Sabrina In spirit.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/05/2013 14:53

In spirit? What does that mean?

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 14:55

fair enough. But I would like to point out I have said things directly to you that would suggest my Theist leanings Grin Like I found God but presumably not yours. That the thread had given me greater understanding of what I believe about the God I do believe in.....

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 14:58

Isn't it hard to have faith in something when you don't actually know what that something is (my primary argument against Scientology as it goes)

daftdame · 16/05/2013 14:59

Sabrina Do you really want me to go through all this again? Or are you teasing?

I really think I'm not up to this particular job. See my previous posts re. spiritual understanding. We really are going round in circles.

Basically we are made of spirit (part that is saved ), soul (thinking part) and flesh (physical body). The things that are known in the spirit are subconscious until revealed to you by the Holy Spirit when you seek God through Jesus Christ.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/05/2013 15:02

No I'm not teasing - but I think you are. Are you in the UK out of interest? Because it's pretty unusual for even the most devout christian here to believe that the bible can or should be taken literally.

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 15:08

my last comment was a genuine question. I don't mean it to look like I am picking on you. I genuinely don't understand how bible literalists reach their conclusions but I respect that we are all entitled to believe what we want to

daftdame · 16/05/2013 15:13

Sorry just my frustration at trying to communicate well coming out.

I believe I have mentioned before about my feelings using the term 'literally' with the Bible. I believe the Bible works on many levels concurrently, literally, symbolically, thematically...To say it is merely literal is inadequate.

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 15:40

The problem is that I read that to say "There is too much I don't agree with or understand in the bible for a wholly literal translation but I find it too uncomfortable to say that some bits may not actually be what God meant because then I have to question the bits I do agree with"

daftdame · 16/05/2013 15:57

January But that would not be what I wrote / meant to convey...What I wrote is what I meant.

You are just jumping to your own conclusions about me based on your own understanding / world view, 'projecting' if you get my point.

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 16:01

well you either believe that the bible is word for word what God meant it to be (and I dont see how it can be as there are different translations) or it isn't. It is ok to think that it is thematically correct while still not being verbatim. Though that does prevent you identifying as a literallist because you wouldn't be.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/05/2013 16:07

No, I agree with January. I'm afraid it all sounds like you can just interpret the bible how you please, and gloss over all the horrible stuff in there.

daftdame · 16/05/2013 16:12

January I've told you what I am.

I am a literalist in that I believe the Bible is true in faith (I may not comprehend all of it and wait for deeper revelation). You have to know all of the Bible to fully comprehend its truth.

I am not a literalist in that I believe the Bible is also symbolic.

The term is inadequate. Like God being objective and subjective, see previous post.

daftdame · 16/05/2013 16:13

Sabrina sorry. My words fail me Sad.

Januarymadness · 16/05/2013 16:14

Which brings us nicely back round to YEC. Even if the bible is thematically correct but not literally Genesis can be interpreted to be God saying "well first I did this, then I did this and that and then I had a rest" Which knocks the bottom out of the YEC interpretation that the time period must have been earth days.

daftdame · 16/05/2013 16:21

January But you have already said you have had no spiritual revelation re the Bible. How can you claim to comprehend it's truth?

Why would you pick the days as the bit that is symbolic. How do you know what God can do in a day?

Swipe left for the next trending thread