Tenek

Quoting the Bible to support using Bible quotes. Yeah, sure.

Ideas in the book also appear to have been taken from the experience of someone who knew a guy whose brother was around when that stuff happened. Ideas in the Bible as a whole appear to have been taken from someone who had no idea what was going on.

Because the validity of the book has nothing to do with the author. Darwin is not claiming to be the creator of finches, here. Just an observer and collector. If you're going to avoid trusting it based on the slightest chance of error, then you're going to have a hard time getting anywhere without moving the goalposts for other things.

Magus55

Because from our perspective in the U.S, murder is unlawful. In a country where killing other people isn't illegal, its unlawful by our standards, but not by theres. We still call what they are doing murder.

Gospelog2

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread....637#post1640637

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showpost.ph...7&postcount=147

If noone here will be respectful enough to listen to these words, then I will not stay. If in your spirit, that is, your inner man, you can not find an excuse but experience the depth of this message then I will stay.

I must be able to at least find one here who has an ear to hear besides Magus. I won't reply unless there is someone who has read to understand and has a seeking heart of the truth, instead of mindless responses.

This is your chance to have an intelligent loving conversation instead of further banter. All it takes is one person to show he has read this link with consideration and a spirit of discernment in the depths of all its parts.

Last chance or I will go. If there is one, just one, I will stay.

Nasreddin

On the other hand, killing people who work on the Sabbath is clearly divine, sublime, inspired and all those good things.

Magus55

And this is different than quoting Darwin citing his own name in his own book how?

Ad Astra

The definition of a word doesn't change because someone has a different "prespective."

That's sort of the point I was trying to make. But since the killing wasn't committed in the United States, our laws don't apply.

No, because a crime committed in a certain country is subject to the laws of that nation. If the killing of another person is legal in some country, it can then not be called murder because murder is, by definition, the unlawful killing of another person.

Tenek

So the law was still in effect, just not enforced.

Say, that reminds me. Would you admit to hiding Jews in your attic in Nazi Germany? Watch the absolute laws here.

Dt 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, 'Let us go and worship other gods' (...), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death..."

Then there's the part about wiping out an entire town if enough of them deconvert. Awfully bloody, that. Or am I supposed to love these people as I cleave their heads from their necks?

But these laws are in the Bible, and the Bible is the source of the laws. Why should I trust your interpretation?

Dt 13:16"Gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering the Lord your God..."

As a bit of advice here, basic human morals are not the sorts of things I would recommend bringing up. It's a bit too vindictive for my tastes. Particularly Hell. That's just cruel.

Darwin isn't saying that he's right because he says he's right. Scripture that says 'all Scripture is right' is literally doing that.

Nasreddin

We'll all be heartbroken, I'm sure.

Respect usually has to be earned, Gospelog2. How much respect would you give to an atheist who showed up on a Christian messageboard with an argument that went like this?

Post 1: Can you give me a reason for your mass delusion?

Post 2: No, really. C'mon.

Post 3: (cut & paste from an O'Hair speech)

Post 4: Two links to post 3, presumably for those who want to read it twice, plus a claim that post 3 proves his original "mass delusion" claim.

Post 5: Well, if no one loves me here and doesn't want to understand the deep truth of post 3, then I'm not going to stay and read your mindless drivel. But wait! If just one person says they love me and accepts the truth of what I'm saying, I'm going to stay here! Won't that be grand?

Queen of Swords

Darwin is mentioned as the author of the book by other people of the time.

Tenek

Well we did have one guy (Dayton) reconvert, as I recall. So I suppose you've got a shot. However, you'll probably need a bit more experience. I suspect Magus has developed concrete skin by this point.

BTW, as far as the whole 'ear to hear' business goes ... this is a very, very busy thread. I'd say a lot of people are listening. Although from your perspective, Magus listening would be something like preaching to the choir. What would be the point of that?