alt.fan.uncle-daveyPrev. Next
Re: So few Jewish creationists ? why? http://groups.google.com
Jerzy Jakubowski (branchofjesse@hotmail.com) 2004/02/16 02:59
Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: branchofjesse@hotmail.com (Jerzy Jakubowski)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: So few Jewish creationists ? why?
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:59:58 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 45
Sender: root@darwin.ediacara.org
Approved: robomod@ediacara.org
Message-ID: <b9b3de8.0402160202.2c5f400c@posting.google.com>
References: <c0jjk0$k96$1@titan.btinternet.com> <402d794f$1_4@corp.newsgroups.com> <c0ksjh$7qe$0@pita.alt.net> <402e1cee$1_4@corp.newsgroups.com> <c0lhh3$mg9$0@pita.alt.net> <0001HW.BC5407C2003C34B1F02845B0@enews.newsguy.com> <fTxXb.20687$hR.581241@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> <c0mban$qt4$0@pita.alt.net> <402ebb08$1_4@corp.newsgroups.com> <c0mht6$fl3$0@pita.alt.net> <pan.2004.02.15.02.37.16.758330@terralink.net> <c0njb6$umb$0@pita.alt.net> <dv90309pi6c7ur5lf81m7fi8pv8tv1vrsv@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: darwin
X-Trace: darwin.ediacara.org 1076925598 35434 128.100.83.246 (16 Feb 2004 09:59:58 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@darwin.ediacara.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:59:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.171.48.161
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:2464

Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in message news:<dv90309pi6c7ur5lf81m7fi8pv8tv1vrsv@4ax.com>...
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 10:55:04 +0000 (UTC), "Uncle Davey"
> <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> So what's the scoop, Davey.  Are you God's Spokesman, or aren't you.
> >> >>
> >> > I'm not, the Bible is.
> >>
> >> And how should the Bible be best interpreted?
> >>
> >By other parts of the Bible.
>
> Have you ever noticed that the people who make that claim most
> vociferously never base their interpretation on the Bible?  Instead,
> they base it on current folklore about the Bible.  For example, many
> people claim the Bible as the basis for their idea that a marriage
> must be one man and one woman, even though the Bible flatly
> contradicts them.  They add land animals surviving outside the Ark to
> the Flood story.  They disagree with the Bible about why Adam and Eve
> were expelled from Eden.  I don't agree with your approach to begin
> with, Davey, but the fact that nobody ever uses it makes it doubly
> worthless.

But that's exactly why we get all these different religions each
claiming to be biblical.

If we stick to the approach I just said, there is less of a problem.

I don't believe that people from polygamous cultures cannot be
Christian. I don't believe any land animals not in the Ark survived
the Flood. I agree with the Bible about why Adam and Eve were expelled
from Eden.

I think the appraoch is right, and just the fact that others fail to
use it doesn't mean I shouldn't try to use it.

If a chief from an African tribe becomes a Christian, should he lose
three of his four wives? No. That's the answer I give, because that's
the answer the Bible gives. Can he become a bishop in the Church? No.
Probably if I remember right he can become a deacon, but not a bishop.
But that's no problem. We don't have to be bishops, and being a leader
in the Church can carry the greater condemnation if the leader fails.

Uncle Davey

Follow-ups:1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829
303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859
606162636465666768697071727374757677787980818283848586878889
90919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119
120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149
Next Prev. Article List         Favorite