Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese
In post #196 you responded to my quote...
Originally Posted by Cheese 
of course many of todays "Liberal Christians" have changed the dogma to suit their own standards vs what is actually written in the tomes that they supposedly espouse.
You said...
This I have a problem with... language evolves as does knowledge. For God to use modern day terms when speaking with the Jews 2000+ years ago, no one would have understood what he was saying. Instead he used words that had meaning then and have meaning now. The jist of it is the same, the specifics change. Why weren't dinosaurs in the Bible? (As an example...) Well, they'd never seen dinosaur bones. Why confuse them?
Is it changing the dogma, or is it using the things we now KNOW (that'd be where science comes in!) that we didn't know before to help explain what is written? You've apparently already decided it's changing the dogma, but perhaps that's too narrow a view of the Word.
Hence my comment regarding Liberal Christianity. I know you support Christianity, I understand where you come from and I dont hold it against you. I do think you are what can be termed in todays vernacular...a "Liberal Christian". Not? |
I asked if it necessarily has to be 'changing' the dogma... Rewriting it to suit their own beliefs. Certainly some people do that. It can just be a different interpretation though, it doesn't have to 'change' anything. Instead of responding to that, you quote some guy who talked with a few people and decided that every 'liberal Christian' changes the word from the fundamentalist perspective. That's simply not true.
And no, I wouldn't consider myself to be a liberal Christian. I'm actually fairly conservative when it comes to my beliefs. I don't know what I'd consider myself... perhaps a thinking Christian.