Nineveh said:
No, I said you said it because there is a whole thread there for you to read where you did. Or have you changed your beliefs and now think God really does mean what He says about homos?
How did we get back on homos again? Leave it alone Nin. That''s another thread.
You keep bugging me to stay on topic.
You're brand of Christianity seems awfully focused on sex. It comes up all the time. It's kinda scary.
"It" conveys neutrality. S/he conveys hermaphroditism.
So now you're an expert on English usage as well. Funny. Can you please state your credentials and expertise in world literature and English usage?
Sure if makes you happy I'll use the word "it" instead of s/he and if it makes you happy I'll go tell my English lit professors that Nin says that using the letters s/he to convery gender- neutrailty is wrong.
I didn't say what you want me to say, sorry. And please don't plan on it any time soon
It boils down to God telling a "story" or God having the Authority and Power to record the actual events.
I know you wouldn't get this.
You really can't understand the problem with communicating with people in this manner. Can you.
Sneetches are a children's bedtime story, not a Book claimed By God to tell us things that are important, like how we got here, and why things are like they are. Sneetches in context are in a story. The fall in context is history.
:doh:
And the point flies right over the head again. I'm really thinking this whole conversation is futile.
Do you really want to have a conversation or do you just want to keep telling me how right you are?
Amazing. You will take a children's book at face value, but you won't take God's Word at face value.
:doh:
Nin. Please read my words and try to get it. This is not what I said AT ALL.
It was a comment about how we percieve and udnertsand story!!!
I am used to being ignorant in your eyes. Which underscores my point about your esoteric understanding being exactly as it is defined.
I have never once said you are ignorant.
And even if I did how would that underscore your point.
You are really not making much sense here.
I've already answered you. Your stand on sexual immorality is not Biblical. Which underscores my point about your need to use esoteric spiritualization to make like God really can't tell us what happened in the beginning accurately. It gives you the freedom you need to undermine the Law. Thanks for making my points
Actually I have not made any of your points. You're points are wavering around all over the place because you're misconstruing and reading into most of what I say with preconcieved understanding and assumptions.
YOu keep saying that I am undermining the Law. Can you please give me a rundown on exactly what the Law is so we can get to the bottom of it once and for all.
(Don't bother about the homo part. You've told me that part enough.) What's the rest of the Law that we need to follow as Christians?"
I'm not shocked you don't believe the God of that Book can honor His promises. He can't get people to write an accurate account of history either.
Nice try at discrediting my witness. But it was the Holy Spirit guiding me as I read His Word that lead me first to understand I was a sinner in need of Him and then to Salvation. Your and my witnesses are far far apart.
How is this discrediting your witness? You're human are you not? Do you not live, breath and have brain functions like other humans? It's called cognition. Do some research on something on how people learn and understand things. It might be really enlightening.
And it's pretty damn nervy to talk to me about discrediting witnesses. You're whole line of thought and accusations are one big discrediting attempt. You're whole goal is to discredit my witness.
Right, the Body of Christ.
I let the weight of Scripture determine if a man is telling the Truth, not the other way around. Instead of distancing yourself from the Bereans, you might want to find out what made them "more noble".
I know what Bereans are. And truthfully I wouldn't place what I've been hearing here anywhere in that neighborhood.
True, unless it undermines the Gospel or starts appearing as if God is saying something different (read: unholy or wicked).
And again this is up to an individuals interpretaion. Sorry but this still does nothing to prove anythign one way or the other.
Because a Mighty Creator God Who claims to be the Truth shouldn't be telling "stories" when the Truth suffices.
Stories are truth. And in every truth there is a story. A story is a sacred way of communicating truth. Has been since we could talk to each other.
It's not just something you read to kids at bedtime.
Read that again:
there is no need to spiritualize historical accounts when that is the way they should be taken in context.
Then you do read different meaning into what the words literally say. Cool
I asked you why we were expelled. The Bible tells us the exact event that lead to Adam and Eve being ousted from the garden. You still haven't explained what it was that promted God to that action.
[/QUOTE]
Ah alright, but that parts pretty obvious. Literally- We ate the fruit from the tree of knowledge. We turned our back on what God had to say about the whole thing and onto the reason why God expelled us. Which I have already explained. Twice now.
Question is what does that mean to us.
Explain the meaning of the story? What is the moral?
What is the 'truth' that the story gives us?
And why are you still continuing to refuse to answer my question? That's three times now.
It's troubling. You say you want to understand and when I try to ask something so that perhaps I could begin to explain it an you refuse. This makes me think that you really don't want to try. Is this true?
Refresh just in case: It's the one about left field.
