Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Argyle

The Pope...

Recommended Posts

What I claim is that the observational evidence given to us by God, in His creation itself shows the YEC understanding of a literal Genesis is not correct. (Psalms 19:1) "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands."

 

Why do you even bother trying to draw from scripture? You've made it clear you believe that your interpretation of the creation is infallible and trumps anything written in the Bible. If Psalms 19:1 conflicted with your beliefs, then you'd chuck that biblical verse by the wayside in an instant as well.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why do you even bother trying to draw from scripture? You've made it clear you believe that your interpretation of the creation is infallible and trumps anything written in the Bible. If Psalms 19:1 conflicted with your beliefs, then you'd chuck that biblical verse by the wayside in an instant as well.

 

The truth is that because he rejects the authority of scripture he cannot therefore rightfully judge us as 'bibliolators' because then he has to fall back on the charge of idolatry...................the sin that has its origin found where(?)..........in the same scriptures he doesn't believe in.

 

He is in a mental catch-22, for if he says that this 'bibliolatry' is founded purely upon his own opinion...then he can claim no divine authority for such a judgment; BUT..........if he says his charge is based on scripture the fact is he has already made it plain that he doesn't accept its divine authority. Either way, he's a cooked goose as far as being right before the Lord on this matter.

 

So he wants to have his cake and eat it too and he's completely oblivious to the gross inconsistency in his own thinking. It's like shouting, "I don't believe that book, but on the basis of that book I declare you idolators!" But if his idea is NOT based upon scripture then from what authority does he derive any substantive meaning to the charge?

 

To charge us with 'bibliolatry' is ludicrous. We don't worship the Bible, we worship the Lord who gave us the Bible (His Word).

 

It is what Christians are supposed to do, so says the Word itself:

 

Concerning the law that God commanded Moses to write beginning on Mt. Sinai:

 

 

And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished...Deut. 31:24

 

That book became the pentateuch, the law of God.

 

¶ Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: Isaiah 30:8

 

This writing as commanded by God became the book of Isaiah.

 

Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. Jeremiah 30:2

 

This writing became the book of Jeremiah...as commanded by God.

 

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book Revelation 1:8a

 

That book written became the book of Revelation: God's Word.

 

These things mean much to us who believe the Lord but they mean nothing to true heretics who are offended at the plain language of His written word (i.e. the six day creation) and they think that their own opinions and/or imagination is superior to that which is inspired of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you even bother trying to draw from scripture? You've made it clear you believe that your interpretation of the creation is infallible and trumps anything written in the Bible. If Psalms 19:1 conflicted with your beliefs, then you'd chuck that biblical verse by the wayside in an instant as well.

Why is it necessary to remind you again that YEC believe their interpretation of the creation is infallible? YEC ministries take this to the point that they declare ANY evidence in conflict with their (literal) reading is invalid .... BY DEFINITION. The difference is that I hold God's creation also speaks to us.... and is MUCH less subject to errors of human fallibility.

 

But if his idea is NOT based upon scripture then from what authority does he derive any substantive meaning to the charge?

It is based on the God-given LAWS of physics. Funny how this physics teacher goes on about a"LAW" of science with regard to biogenesis, but completely ignores much better established physical laws when dealing with matters he should understand well.

 

To charge us with 'bibliolatry' is ludicrous. We don't worship the Bible, we worship the Lord who gave us the Bible (His Word).

Really???? I remind the list of this from Calypsis in post #16:

 

You can't tell that arrogant man anything, young friend. I put him on ignore months ago. He made it clear that his personal opinions are superior to that of the WORD of God. The only scriptures he accepts are those that he just happens to agree with. As far as he is concerned the rest of them are useless rubbish from an age gone by.

 

(I capitalized that on purpose)yes.gif

 

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1.

 

John capitalized 'Word'. I guess he is guilty of 'bibliolatry'.............right?

 

"and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us" John 1:14.

and my response in post #21

Try this..... compare "in the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God." with this "In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God."

 

Or this: "and the Bible was made flesh and dwelt among us." compared to this: "and Jesus was made flesh and dwelt among us."

 

So, was John talking about the Bible as "the Word?" What Calypsis has done is confirm exactly what I was talking about.... he's equating the Bible with Jesus.

It is clear in John 1:1, the "Word" is Jesus Christ, not the Bible as Calypsis seems to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

To charge us with 'bibliolatry' is ludicrous. We don't worship the Bible, we worship the Lord who gave us the Bible (His Word).

 

...

While there maybe some people that worship the bible. I find the charge quite rich coming from the Roman Catholic Church.

 

catholic_idolaters.jpg

 

preghiera_eucaritica.jpg

 

queen1.jpginsess.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While there maybe some people that worship the bible. I find the charge quite rich coming from the Roman Catholic Church.

 

catholic_idolaters.jpg

 

preghiera_eucaritica.jpg

 

queen1.jpginsess.jpg

 

Quite right, Mark. Let the Catholic defenders show us even one verse in the Bible in which Mary was worshipped by anyone or even commanded by God to be worshipped. This has been called, 'Maryolatry' by some but I think the biblical word 'idolatry' is the most accurate.

 

In the ten commandments we read (Exodus 20:4-5):

 

4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the apocrypha is not theópneustos. I also find it funny that the RCC didn't add the apocryphal books until a few centuries later, and only in an attempt to prop up things like indulgences, prayers for the dead, and purgatory.

 

*addendum* in point of fact, many popes throughout history rejected the apocryphal books because they were not inspired.

*second addendum*

The Great Debate IX: Is The Apocrypha Scripture? :

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Who told you that? Peter was never a 'pope' and in fact, there was no pope office mentioned in the Bible. Peter wrote two books but never referred to himself as 'the holy father' nor called himself 'pope'. Neither did any of the other writers of scripture.

 

Most of us here on EFF don't follow the 'pope' nor Catholic teaching to begin with. We follow God's written Word.

Yep, you can count me in as one who doesn't follow the pope.

 

Damn those pics of idol worshiping taking it to a whole new level lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

Our Terms