twohumble wrote:Aineo
In the last thread, you were very strongly negative on Ross's science, and you later apologized and said you may have been wrong. You have not, until your most recent post, admitted you may be wrong about your accusation of Ross's supposed "word of faith" doctrines.
You have posted a long post on exegesis on the day/age controversy, which is not what I asked you about, or what you accused Ross of, so I will take it that you formally retract your statements made about Ross on that score.
I now assume that you hold that a proper understanding of the day/age issue is vital to your ability to be a true Christian? The only thing your most recent post did, was rehash the issues over whether its proper exegesis to consider the earth old, or young. I must then gather that you believe this to be a salvational issue?
An arrogant and misleading assumption. My position is the Bible is the inerrant word of God and is literally true cover to cover except where the context shows the teaching to be a parable. What I see from your post is you pick and choose what to quote. Since you cannot seem to read an entire post let me emphasize the part you have chosen to ignore:
BTW, I have not given up trying to identify the man I heard on the radio. My medical condition and medications have affected some of the finer details of my memory, so the radio interview I remember hearing may have been 10 or 15 years ago, not a couple years ago. There was a period of time when I never turned on a TV and Christian radio stations were all I listened to and since that was while I was living in Houston the time period I will be researching is 1991 to 2001.
I submit that Ross' theology is questionable.
the·ol·o·gy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-l-j)
n. pl. the·ol·o·gies
1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
2. A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions: Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
3. A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary.
I also stated that if you want to discuss Ross'
theology we can do so on the Christian Debate Forum. How Ross
interprets Scripture is part of
his theology.
Can Genesis 1 be a salvation issue? You can bet your booties it can be. If anyone can prove any part of the Bible is in error then it leaves the whole Bible subject to criticism. How do you think cults and heretical doctrines come into being?
To drive my point home; if you can prove Genesis 1 is allagorical then gay theology can prove Leviticus 18 is also allegorical. And that twohumble is a
salvation issue.