The post that was quoted here has been removed<<By the way, I believe that an atheist could be more objective than a theist in attempting to
interpret religious texts because the atheist lacks a preconceived belief about their meanings.>>
This is nonsense (no offense.)
First, one does not have to be an atheist to not hold a preconceived belief about the interpretation of a religious text. One can believe in God and be open to various interpretations of passages in the Old and New Testament.
Second, so much of the Bible is understood (or understood properly) on a spiritual level. Paul said as much when he wrote, “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
The Bible is the inerrant Word of God and was written by men under the guidance and power of God’s Holy Spirit. To expect an atheist who does not believe God exists to be able to properly understand it is silly.
1 edit
The post that was quoted here has been removedAnd there we have it, the agenda writ large.
Do you think this is the place for it?
If you want to have a fight, we need only continue the ones you've already started in Debates.
If you only want to run me down without facts, then, by all means, stay here. This seems to be the place for that kind of thing.
It won't magically make your condemnations of me any more true, but at least you'll be among those of similar morals.
Originally posted by @romans1009Yep .. thats the Holy Spirit working in you.
The only way to settle this disagreement between you gals is a wrestling match - no holds barred!
2 edits
divegeester: Mispost.I don't think being "unprincipled" is the issue ~ at least not on divegeester's part. I think, instead, the issue is whether the word "mispost" can be legitimately used as a noun. I think it's a verb, but that's not what he meant exactly ~ otherwise, he would have said something like "I have misposted". If he wanted to describe his error with a noun in a one-word retraction of whatever he had typed before thinking better of it, he might have been better off using the word "Misposting" ~ a gerund, I suppose. I don't see his choice/use of the word as being "unprincipled", and I have a feeling you didn't either ~ but decided to pretend that you did.
Originally posted by @suzianne
How unprincipled is this? To merely label another's post that you seem to disagree with as a "mispost"?
Originally posted by @fmfGood grief, Kiddo. You’re really desperate to argue - with anyone and about anything.
I don't think being "unprincipled" is the issue ~ at least not on divegeester's part. I think, instead, the issue is whether the word "mispost" can be legitimately used as a noun. I think it's a verb, but that's not what he meant exactly ~ otherwise, he would have said something like "I have misposted". If he wanted to describe his error with a noun in a one-wo ...[text shortened]... ng "unprincipled", and I have a feeling you didn't either ~ but decided to pretend that you did.
Originally posted by @suziannetiger hasn’t been himself lately. I think he saw Miss Alawat with her fiancée and has been in a funk ever since. Puppy love is rough and Miss Alawat is tiger’s first crush.
How unprincipled is this? To merely label another's post that you seem to disagree with as a "mispost"?
1 edit
Originally posted by @suziannegotquestions.org has interesting info on this.
And how much of the scripture do you disagree with?
Be honest.
What do you think that verse is saying? and then reconcile it to the question asked.
I’ll spare people from a couple of lengthy copy-and-pastes because the website covers this question from a couple of different angles. Those interested can find them by going to the website and using the Bible verse in the search field.