Which Would You Personally Prefer...

[element771]

Yes, I am. So? Your claim about those particular teachings was false regardless of what I happen to believe.

If you look at the quote he's saying he takes the all of the Bible literally because he is "not ashamed of the Gospel". He applies the same principle that that Romans 1 speaks of to the whole of scripture. Remember, you stated that "literalism" is both new, and limited mostly to the USA, but as I've shown, it is old, and knows no geography. I did so especially with respect to the issues you explicitly claimed to be "literalism".

Augustine Confessions (Confessions Book V Chapter 14):

"First of all it struck me that it was, after all, possible to vindicate his arguments. I began to believe that the Catholic faith which I had thought impossible to defend against the objections of the Manichees, might be fairly maintained, especially since I had heard one passage after another in the Old Testament figuratively explained. These passages had been death to me when I took them literally, but once I heard them explained in their spiritual meaning I began to blame myself for my despair."

[element771]

No, we are not created, we begin to exist, as opposed to a god, who would not have begun to exist. So what is the purpose for gods existence?

[Cerebrum123]

Augustine Confessions (Confessions Book V Chapter 14):

"First of all it struck me that it was, after all, possible to vindicate his arguments. I began to believe that the Catholic faith which I had thought impossible to defend against the objections of the Manichees, might be fairly maintained, especially since I had heard one passage after another in the Old Testament figuratively explained. These passages had been death to me when I took them literally, but once I heard them explained in their spiritual meaning I began to blame myself for my despair."

Does not seem very honest to cut out the part of my post that showed even Augustine taking things literally in his works after "Confessions". I'm guessing his work "On the Necessity of Taking Genesis Literally" was written later too. Even without the example of Augustine your earlier statement was false. Irenaeus and Basil the Great are both earlier and more consistent on their literal readings.

[element771]

I'm guessing his work "On the Necessity of Taking Genesis Literally" was written later too.

I only found your translation on YEC websites.

Everywhere else that I have looked it is translated to "The Literal Meaning of Genesis" or "Literal Commentary on Genesis".

Huge difference...

I believe that this is the original title...De genesi ad litteram

Where do you get Necessity?

[Cerebrum123]

I only found your translation on YEC websites.

Everywhere else that I have looked it is translated to "The Literal Meaning of Genesis" or "Literal Commentary on Genesis".

Huge difference...

I believe that this is the original title...De genesi ad litteram

Where do you get Necessity?

Okay, so maybe I got the wrong translation on that title. I'll admit to that. I linked to non-YEC sources on all of the other quotes. You on the other hand have not admitted yet that "literalism" is not some new thing limited to the USA.

Edit: Even with the versions of the title you gave, the majority of my point still stands.

[JimL]

What is the purpose for gods existence?

[element771]

What is the purpose for gods existence?

Purpose only makes sense when it is in talked about in relation to God. God is the fullness of existence (i.e. not created)...I am who I am. Therefore the question is essentially meaningless because purpose, goodness, being are all exemplified fully in God...he is the yardstick for all of these qualities.

[Sparko]

What is the purpose for gods existence?

God is self-sufficient. He needs nothing, not even a purpose or meaning. He creates purpose and meaning. So I guess you could say his "purpose" is to exist.

[JimL]

Purpose only makes sense when it is in talked about in relation to God. God is the fullness of existence (i.e. not created)...I am who I am. Therefore the question is essentially meaningless because purpose, goodness, being are all exemplified fully in God...he is the yardstick for all of these qualities.

Which is just another way of saying that god exists just because, that he has no purpose, no reason for being.

[Sparko]

Which is just another way of saying that god exists just because, that he has no purpose, no reason for being.

If he has always existed there is no cause by definition.

[element771]

Okay, so maybe I got the wrong translation on that title. I'll admit to that. I linked to non-YEC sources on all of the other quotes. You on the other hand have not admitted yet that "literalism" is not some new thing limited to the USA.

Edit: Even with the versions of the title you gave, the majority of my point still stands.

Let us take them one at a time...

I was right about Augustine.

Who is next?

[Cerebrum123]

Let us take them one at a time...

I was right about Augustine.

Who is next?

You were right about the title of Augustine's book, not about Augustine.

[element771]

You were right about the title of Augustine's book, not about Augustine.

I quoted Augustine where he said that literal interpretations actually stopped him from adopting the faith...it was only when he realized their spiritual interpretation that he came to the faith.

[Cerebrum123]

I quoted Augustine where he said that literal interpretations actually stopped him from adopting the faith...it was only when he realized their spiritual interpretation that he came to the faith.

I also pointed out that that was his earlier work. City of God, and "De Genesi ad litteruam" were later with Confessions at 400 AD, City of God begun in 413 AD, and with books 20-22 finished in 426AD. "De Genesi ad litteram" starts in around 401 AD, and finished in 415 AD. Even if I were entirely wrong about Augustine, you still have Irenaus of Lyons, and Basil the Great who were more consistently, and explicitly "literalist". They are also earlier than Augustine.

Remember, I'm not arguing for YEC here, just that "literalism" isn't a new and mostly USA thing. Given the way you've responded to that simple fact I'm done here, this will be my last post. I'll be unsuscribing to make sure I don't wander back in.

[element771]

Remember, I'm not arguing for YEC here, just that "literalism" isn't a new and mostly USA thing. Given the way you've responded to that simple fact I'm done here, this will be my last post. I'll be unsuscribing to make sure I don't wander back in.

Where is literalism adopted elsewhere in the world?

Augustine gave credence to theistic evolution in 415 AD.

I responded to the Paul quote and showed your error in translating Augustine's title...I am pretty sure I can clear up the other two. But you don't want to go over the others, that is cool.

Have fun and Godspeed.