One?..really? And what about the gifted men of God (Can they not count?) based on the words of a pagan? You think this is the only article I have read. Would you like me to show you the many liberal Christian scholars who write rebuttals- tooth and nail that Jesus isn’t God.
1 Corinthians 12:7-11 ESV
To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another PROPHECY, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
Ad hominem attacks? LOL…I did no such thing. It is a pagan website (interfaith) I am under no illusion why I believe that theistic evolutionists would find it compelling. It fits your presupposition. The sad part, is that you are using a pagan source. Article on their homepage, “How The Bible Can Be Damaging to People with Depression”
Well, I for one find it compelling because the author is right. Which is, of course, the same reason why Paul quoted pagan philosophers in the text of Scripture. (And, mind you, those were actual pagan philosophers, not just people you feel like calling “pagan” because they don’t fit your definition of acceptable Christian.)
It used to be that men inspired by the Holy Spirit would argue with Jehovah’s Witnesses about John 1:1 based on Greek grammar. Now, apparently, it’s sufficient to say, “Well they’re pagans — duh, they’re wrong!”
I guess that kind of debate works for some people… but it doesn’t work for the rest of the world outside the bubble.
No, the author isn’t. Paul didn’t take pagan philosophers over Peter, John etc…, “In the spirit” No, I would say that putting pagan’s understanding of scripture over gifted men of God’s understanding of scripture is not a wise move. I really do not expect the world to understand the things of the spirit.
(1 Corinthians 2:14) “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.”
Okay, well then, it seems you must have some substantive arguments (not just arguments from authority), then, if you’re saying this. So show your cards: Where are the factual inaccuracies in the article?
No offense, but I would rather not take you up on that challenge. I have read the words of Christ, and off hand, if I can remember. I recollect about 6 or 7 times Jesus reiterated the book of Genesis.
Where did Jesus say that Genesis is a literal historical account?
If you call someone a pagan and refuse to even address their argument because they are a pagan, then that is a classic ad hominem attack. You attack the person instead of addressing their argument.
I started to do this when I listed the article, but if you go to the articles it references, you will see the same info written by professed Christian bloggers, though I quite frankly do not know the beliefs of the article listed, nor does it matter on something so mundane. On the other hand, if a non-believer, it is a powerful witness to the fact that we should be very careful with what we say as fact, as those things can be a strong blow to the gospel when shown false, and can be a real stumbling block to those that do not know Christ. That is really the take away thing here, and is actually a good example if the author is not a Christian as to what a careless Christian witness produces.
I never said that. I said that Jesus talked about Genesis as if it were true. i.e. "Those who draw the sword will die by the sword.”
Huffington Post
Patheos is an interfaith media platform that hosts hundreds of blogs on different faith channels. I have been writing on the Pagan channel of Patheos for about four years now, that is, until this past Monday.
It’s not an attack when you are stating a fact.
If I said that someone was as big as Paul Bunyan, would you also think that I believed in the literal existence of a historical Paul Bunyan?
Mentioning Genesis in no way indicates that Jesus thought that Genesis was a literal historical account.
It is still an ad hominem fallacy whether it is a fact or not.
“Ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argumentative strategy whereby an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.”
A powerful witness to what? What AIG has said has been studied by many smarter, talented and more gifted than AIG. Your default is that Genesis is allegory therefore you will take the word of a person who clearly is not in the spirit over a person who is, because their presupposition is line with your presupposition. You may not accept what AIG says, but to say that AIG is clearly in the wrong when a great deal of theologians back AIG on this very subject is just kind of…sorry to say, bias.
So what do you want me to say? She is wrong, because I actually have studied the bible and seen Jesus reiterate Genesis more than once therefore by mine own eyes. I know she is wrong
Reiterating Genesis in no way indicates that Jesus thought it was a literal historical account. People “reiterate” myths and legends all of the time, and no one thinks they believe those myths to be actual literal historical accounts.
Note that what you’ve quoted (Why Did Over A Dozen Bloggers Leave Patheos? | HuffPost Religion) was written by an actual pagan, not by the author whose blog was linked to, who does not self-identify as a pagan.
The irony here is that that pagan writer was leaving Patheos because it had been purchased by an Evangelical parent company.
Patheos has authors on it from a number of different perspectives, anywhere from conservative Christian to progressive Christian to pagan and atheist. It’s a tool used by people from different faith backgrounds. That makes it about as “interfaith” as the IRS’s 501(c)(3) code.
A witness to the unreliability of Christians and Christianity. (when obviously false statements are made in the name of the Christ)
I beg to differ since I was going off of what the freelance writer stated, and the fact that the article in question was in 2015 whereas the purchase took place a year later. Furthermore. Her blog was entitled love, joy, FEMINISM. That said it all.
It’s not a false statement. Jesus reiterated the book of Genesis more than once.