Science, Creation & EvolutionCan God be proven scientifically?I did quote you. It was a post you made in this topic on Fri Mar 12. "The mentioning of Plato and Homer was not to justify their writings, but to show that their writings were their writings. Atleast we do not have to go through the claim of the Bible being corrupted. This is the point." In other words, if you will accept the writings of Homer and Plato as their writings, then it does not make sense to say(for those who do say) "the Holy Bible we have today has been altered and changed", because their is more evidence to support the Holy Bible than secular historic writings.
There are many things in the Bible which are literal and figurative. Most of them you can obviously tell from the context. In the case of Christ, He makes it pretty easy to tell what He says is literal or figurative, because He gives you the interpretation after, and tells you whether or not He is using figurative language. I'm not saying a person can understand everything in the Holy Bible, but there are certain fundamentals, which God lets readers know through the context. First you say "Faith grounded in what you believe is evidence." Then you say, "But the evidence is not the same." Finally, you say, "Or maybe in some cases the evidence is but the interpretation isn't." Which one is it? So what you should have initially said (correct me if I'm wrong) was, "Faith grounded in your interpretation of the evidence." May I ask, what is wrong with the Christian interpretation of its evidences? |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame