Subject: Sola Scriptura supported by bible? |
Bible Note: "If Adam is an allegory, then we can safely conclude that Jesus is as well. Your comparison to Hercules doesn't fit at all with Paul's arguments. " Not at all. You are real aren't you? Yet Hercules isn't. Jesus can in fact be real even if Adam is a parable. Sorry, you have proven nothing here except that you wish Adam to be a real person. Please, don't get me wrong here, I am not saying that I believe he wasn't a real person. But I find no problem with the idea that it is a parable. And I find no real evidence that it isn't. I do see that it was in the character of Jesus Christ to speak in parables and it wouldn't be a surprise to me if the Garden story is a parable. What I do find problematic is people's religous devotion to it being literally true. It seems that they can't have faith if it isn't. This causes me to wonder what their faith is in. Is it in Jesus Christ, or the idea that evolution is wrong. If I were to take a sample of evengelical mass media, and divided it into topics, I would be willingto bet that there is more about things like evolution and Israel and the land then there is about God's Grace through Jesus Christ. I am just wondering what the "church" is turning into. Let me ask you this; When you found out that George Washington didn't really cut down the cherry tree, did it cause you to think that telling the truth is no longer a good thing? When you found out that Santa Clause is not real, did it cause you to no longer think that giving is a good thing? I think this obsession with the "literal truth" stuff is clouding people's view of what is really true. The Garden story isn't there so that we believe it is a real story and can argue against evolution. It is there to show how man strives to have the knowledge of good and evil (to judge), and there by become like God. Yet God, though just, is merciful, and seeks reconciliation with his people. I'll ignore the stuff about the comforter for now since you obviously can't keep up with an argument that is beyond tit for tat contradiction. You totally missed what I was saying there. "Just out of curiosity, you have claimed that you let the church determine truth for you. Since you have said that you are not Roman Catholic, exactly WHICH church are you referring to as the arbiter of "your truth"? " This is a great question. I have studied for some time now the idea of authority. How do we know what we know and why do we believe what we believe. In other words, what is hype and what is not. When two Christians disagree, how do you know who is right? Or are they both wrong, or both right? I resent it when people assume that I, or others, are some how less Christian because we see something a little different than they do. This idea to me totally misses the point of Grace and who Jesus Christ is. Not to mention it shows a rose colored view of church history. Sometimes the facts just stare you right in the face and you can choose to ignore them, or accept them. Accepting them doesn't always leave you with a pat answer though. When we ignore them, we can make our answers fit nice and neat. |