Tweet
Yep. Unfortunately, the blizzard did not come through and stop the whole thing.
http://deeperwaters.wordpress.com/20...y-i-dont-care/
http://deeperwaters.wordpress.com/20...y-i-dont-care/
-
-
Good writ man.Ladino, Guatemalan, Hispanic, and Latin, but foremostly, Christian.
As of the 1st of December, 2020, officially anointed as this:
"Seinfeld had its Soup Nazi. Tweb has its Taco Nazi." - Rogue06 , https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...e3#post1210559
-
The nation should have watched Licona's lecture instead."I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard RavenhillComment
-
Now THAT would have been most fascinating.Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostLadino, Guatemalan, Hispanic, and Latin, but foremostly, Christian.
As of the 1st of December, 2020, officially anointed as this:
"Seinfeld had its Soup Nazi. Tweb has its Taco Nazi." - Rogue06 , https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...e3#post1210559Comment
-
BTW Nick loved your blog post.A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
George Bernard ShawComment
-
Thanks all and yes, Mike's talk should have been watched instead.Comment
-
I guess you're not a creationist?Comment
-
Did you read the linked blog post? He clearly states that he is an Old Earth Creationist.Originally posted by nico View Post"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard RavenhillComment
-
It also depends on what is meant by creationist. The problem is that's a loose term. I simply take it to mean I hold to a creator God. How did He create? Beats me. That's for science to figure out. Why and did He? Yes, and that's for those of us who study theology to figure out.Comment
-
No, can't say I did. I just read forum posts and generally ignore links.Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostComment
-
Do you feel that way about Biblical history too? Theology depends on certain presuppositions - a point that Ham was trying very hard to make. There's no such thing as theology divorced from history, in this case creation, especially when it's inextricably interwoven with the text. The Bible does actually address creation very specifically, so you most certainly have a view that you believe in and really can't say "beats me" as if it doesn't matter. It sounds like you're only a theologian (or a Christian for that matter) insofar as the Scriptures address metaphysical ideas, and basically view the rest of the text as unauthoritative.Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostComment
-
NO. I don't feel anyway. I think a certain way. History is a more straightforward term used regularly but creationist has been hijacked so that it can refer to a YEC or a TE with no differentiation often. I have also never said that theology is divorced from history. Our theology is shaped by history to a strong extent thanks to the incarnation. The best way to know what God is like is to look at Jesus.
The Bible does address creation specifically, I agree, but not in the way that moderns think it does. It addresses creation as a functional account rather than a material account. You might have known my sources if you'd read what I said.
And no, the whole of the text is authoritative. Genesis 1-2 is indeed authoritative and I take the passages quite seriously and have done much thinking on them. I just don't make them answer questions they were never meant to answer.Comment
-
Why do you see the debate as evolution vs Christianity? I saw it as evolution vs young Earth creationism. Is the problem that you equate Christianity with creationism?Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostMy Blog: http://oncreationism.blogspot.co.uk/Comment
-
Originally posted by The Pixie View PostI'm having doubts about your reading comprehension skills.So when I see the Ham/Nye debate, I see the perpetuating of a stereotype that I do not want perpetuated. I see it being made as again, science vs. the Bible and if you hold to the Bible, well you have to hold to a young-earth.Comment
-
Fair enough.Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
I disagree, but OK. I'm not going to read your article. If you want to discuss something maybe your should summarize it instead of a pithy one-liner followed with a link? It's not wrong, it's just my opinion and like many others won't engage if I have to move outside the forum to participate.The Bible does address creation specifically, I agree, but not in the way that moderns think it does. It addresses creation as a functional account rather than a material account. You might have known my sources if you'd read what I said.
.And no, the whole of the text is authoritative. Genesis 1-2 is indeed authoritative and I take the passages quite seriously and have done much thinking on them. I just don't make them answer questions they were never meant to answer.
I think it becomes much harder to interpret and convolutes the text when viewing it that way.Comment
Comment