Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | wak | 35678 | ||
Sorry I didn't answer your questions from your first post. But I didn't say a SINGLE word about " wishing what I could know about God that is not in the Bible". Your questions in your second post are EVEN more confusing, examples:: Q)"What part of truth is dangerous"? A)I didn't say the truth was dangerous. I said YOUR postulate " strikes me has dangerous". Big big difference. Did you intend to be that presumptuous to say that YOUR postulate was truth ? (rhetorical) Q "Please give specifics as to what limiting factor Genesis binds on God". A)Please, please tell me where I said Genesis limits or binds God??? I said virtually the opposite. Why are you putting words in my mouth and then creating questions from them. Is that a not-so subtle debate technique??? Sorry I don't have time to debate for debate sake. PS: Actually , now, I do see a single question (0f six) that honestly reflects something I said. Wow Q:"In fact wouldn't it be fair to say He has chosen to select truth as reliable? He surely doesn't select untruth" A: I'm saying he MAY have selected literal historical truth or he may have used other means to express his Truths.... because it's not verbatim history does not mean it's "untruth". Historical truth is only a tiny fraction of Truth( and it's expression!). If Genesis is verbatim dictated history, great. If not, that great too (He's God!). Just as long as we understand his message. I go back to your postulate that; the Bible is not reliable, if Genesisis 1-4 is not literally, historically true. I challenge that. Let me know if I summarized your postulate incorrectly or if your other 5 questions pertain to what I actually said. Please use quotation marks. Thanks |
||||||
2 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | RElderCascade | 35683 | ||
So, what are you asking? It appeared to me that you didn't like (to limit ourselves to) the Bible as the only self-revelation of God. You can easily surmize from what I postulated that Genesis must be true to have value and that really the Bible stands or falls on the "Thy Word is truth" concept. Don't be so thin skinned about mere question-asking, you are the one who has taken honest questions and turned them around into intentions that were not there. I have just now clearly illustrated that you, not me have turned things around. I was merely asking questions. As I recall, you indicated that you were not to keen on the idea that God should limit Himself in ways we humans don't even limit ourselves. The idea that God MAY have done something one way or another is a line of defense you have available to you only because of the historical record of God at your disposal. You must be more consistent than that. You see, you would have no authority of God or who God is if you don't rely on the Bible for that authority. Your test for truth claims must be based on something greater than accepting God and submitting to Him without knowing who He is and what He expects of man and what He has done for man. Why do you find the word choice 'verbatim history' so compelling? |
||||||