'Progressive' church claims: Parts of Bible wrong because it isn't the 'Word of God'

[DGUtley]

This destroys your argument, you imbecile! What they're telling you is that they're using the World Christian Encyclopedia definition which the articles I linked to just explored! So most of these Christians aren't "arguing" because in most cases there is no difference in doctrine. Good Lord...no pun intended.

Notice

NOTICE @Mister D THREADBANNED for insults and bad faith posting

If you have questions or concerns about this moderation action, please use the Report button to let us know.

[Standing Wolf]

I agree with Mr. D. It is amusing to see atheists in these sorts of discussions.

Useless, but amusing.

When it comes to discussions about church history, demographics or anything not specifically Faith-oriented, believers have no special advantage over atheists. Objectivity in such matters might actually be an advantage. Too frequently the adherents of the Faith come across as hypersensitive - interpreting simple, factual observations as criticism or even condemnation. Christians in America are divided by matters both theological and social; that fact isn't even in question. Pretending otherwise doesn't make you more pious or a better Christian.

[gamewell45]

https://thepoliticalforums.com/threa...05#post3191105

Notice

Captdon has been thread banned for violation of rule No. 9

If you have questions or concerns about this moderation action, please use the Report button to let us know.

[pjohns]

We also know that God did not write the Bible personally. Others were enlisted to write it for him.

Evidence of this--the fact that the "Dictation Theory" of inspiration is incorrect--is seen in the fact that Paul and Peter, for instance, write in vastly different styles.

If the Bible were simply dictated, word for word, this would surely be inexplicable.

[Peter1469]

I agree about history. I was referring to the faith oriented part.

When it comes to discussions about church history, demographics or anything not specifically Faith-oriented, believers have no special advantage over atheists. Objectivity in such matters might actually be an advantage. Too frequently the adherents of the Faith come across as hypersensitive - interpreting simple, factual observations as criticism or even condemnation. Christians in America are divided by matters both theological and social; that fact isn't even in question. Pretending otherwise doesn't make you more pious or a better Christian.

[roadmaster]

It's like I said a few years ago. When someone claims Christ on forms like this, they sound more like atheist. I believe every word of the Bible KJV. I believe Him when He said He would preserve His Word, they don't. They don't believe most of the Bible. So I don't think they believe , In the Beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and was God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.So they don't believe Him, why do you think I believe you?

[pjohns]

I believe every word of the Bible KJV.

You might want to be careful about showing so much fealty to the King James Version of the Bible. (It represented truly a remarkable effort when it was done in 1611--actually, it was begun in 1604--but it was based upon the Textus Receptus, or Received Text. And at that time, such uncial manuscripts as Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus--the oldest ones now extant, from the mid-fourth century--were still undiscovered; so was Codex Alexandrinus, from the fifth century. And the important papyrus fragments, including those from the Chester Beatty collection--which are even older--were also still undiscovered.)

[rcfieldz]

Does GOD Damn anyone anymore?

[roadmaster]

You might want to be careful about showing so much fealty to the King James Version of the Bible. (It represented truly a remarkable effort when it was done in 1611--actually, it was begun in 1604--but it was based upon the Textus Receptus, or Received Text. And at that time, such uncial manuscripts as Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus--the oldest ones now extant, from the mid-fourth century--were still undiscovered; so was Codex Alexandrinus, from the fifth century. And the important papyrus fragments, including those from the Chester Beatty collection--which are even older--were also still undiscovered.)

So you thought I was talking about you. Good, I was.

[jet57]

The ark was found in eastern Turkey.

No it wasn’t. Credible science debunked the evangelical Christian “find”.