To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 8948
8947  |  8949
Subject: 
Re: Why not Both?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:41:08 GMT
Viewed: 
326 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
And let me just say you did an excellent job of discussing the matter. It's
all interpretive. The point of course being that I think you're leaning
towards literalism, and hence saying that evolution does NOT mesh with the
Bible, because you're interpreting the Bible as literal. Yes?

If I interpret the Bible literally, evolution does not mesh with it. Correct.

-Jon



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Do you in fact interpret the Bible literally? All of it? So we *are* mustard seeds in fact and not in metaphor? What about the contradictions; do you interpret those literally, too? Dave! (23 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Cool! That's all I wanted, since that's what you said that's explicitly what you were after in this thread. (...) EXACTLY! And let me just say you did an excellent job of discussing the matter. It's all interpretive. The point of course being (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

88 Messages in This Thread:




























Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR