What does a person mean when they say, "God made me," or, "God made you?"

[Ben Kenobi]

How do you know?

I've never seen you question the historicity of any book on Apolyton save the Bible. Are you saying you think Herodotus is wrong?

Yes there's probably a kernel of truth in all historical documents but as they say "the winner writes the history" so you must always be critical of what you read.
Yes, when there's multiple sources the credibility rises but that doesn't constitute PROOF.

I'm saying that if you accept any one ancient source based on the reliability of the copies we do have - that book is the bible.

People would be a lot nicer to you if you actually acted like a true Christian.

You just said that 'truth is whatever one percieves it to be'. Thus 'true Christian' is meaningless - according to YOU and YOUR own principles.

So, since you've decided to dispose of that nonsense, perhaps we can have a fruitful discussion of what actually constitutes 'Christianity', and how one would determine this?

[rah]

perhaps we can have a fruitful discussion

Are you saying you think Herodotus is wrong

Has nothing to do with the discussion. You can't know that I haven't so don't use it for proof of anything.

I'm saying that if you accept any one ancient source based on the reliability of the copies we do have - that book is the bible.

What part of 'I don't automatically belief any history.' did you not understand.

Thus 'true Christian' is meaningless - according to YOU and YOUR own principles.

Yes, true Christian by my own principles. What's your point?

There is no possibility of a fruitful discussion with you. Every man makes his own determination of what THEY consider Christianity. What you consider Christianity has 0 impact on what I consider it. So stop trying to tell us that you're an authority on it. You're only an authority on what you consider Christianity.

[Ben Kenobi]

Has nothing to do with the discussion. You can't know that I haven't so don't use it for proof of anything.

Yawn. So your argument is to flail about and say, "yeah, but you can't prove it, neener neener neener."

What part of 'I don't automatically belief any history.' did you not understand.

The part where "I think Herodotus is full of crap", is something that you've never posted about Herodotus, but you've been very vocal about the Bible?

Every man makes his own determination of what THEY consider Christianity.

Then the term is meaningless. "Christian" just means, "I think I'm a good person".

What you consider Christianity has 0 impact on what I consider it.

Then it's not Christianity at all that you believe in. You're the God of rah and have your own religion.

So stop trying to tell us that you're an authority on it.

Where have I stated that "Christianity is what Ben Kenobi defines as Christianity?"

I'm arguing that there's an objective standard as to what constitutes Christian doctrines.

You're only an authority on what you consider Christianity.

I wrote the bible? Cool.

[Ban Kenobi]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herodotus#Reliability

Herodotus is full of crap. And so is the Bible!

[rah]

You're impossible Ben.

I've never said a lot of things on Poly. It means nothing. Trying to use that as proof is just plain silly.

You've stated many times that I'm not a Catholic. (based on your judgement) So cut your crap

[Ben Kenobi]

You've stated many times that I'm not a Catholic. (based on your judgement) So cut your crap

You're someone who pretends to be a moral relativist and a subjectivist who actually believes in neither. You reject certain teachings of the Catholic church and find both subjectivism and relativism useful tools to express the idea that there's really no such thing as objective Catholic doctrine, and that what the Church teaches is not binding on you. Only what you believe is right and the Church is right when it agrees with what you believe and wrong when it disagrees with you.

I'm hard pressed to state the last time you taught authentic Catholic doctrine here.

[rah]

I'm hard pressed to state the last time you taught authentic Catholic doctrine here.

And that has what to do with whether I'm a Catholic or not.

And for the rest of your garbage, I'd be willing to bet that a majority of Catholics don't consider themselves bound by 100% of what the Church teaches. They pick and choose. How many catholic couple have ever used a rubber or the pill. The decision on how much you follow is a personal choice and in the end only God will determine if you were a good enough Catholic, Not BK.

[Imran Siddiqui]

How in the world did you dragged back into that, rah? Seriously, it's like you don't even learn .

[Ben Kenobi]

And that has what to do with whether I'm a Catholic or not.

The fact that you are in disagreement with the Catholic church and church teachings? I'm not sure why you want to be a Catholic if you aren't willing to follow the teachings.

And for the rest of your garbage, I'd be willing to bet that a majority of Catholics don't consider themselves bound by 100% of what the Church teaches.

And the Church is a democracy.

They pick and choose. How many catholic couple have ever used a rubber or the pill.

It still doesn't change the fact that the Catholic church teaches that contraception is wrong.

The decision on how much you follow is a personal choice

You're either Catholic or you're not. At your confirmation you stated that you believed in everything that the Catholic church teaches and that you promised to uphold those teachings. So, unless you skipped confirmation - you're in violation of the vows you made back then.

and in the end only God will determine if you were a good enough Catholic, Not BK.

So what's the catechism for, then?

[Berzerker]

Like I said, a novel way of reading Genesis. Most people either consider the 1st and 2nd Creation Narratives to be from separate sources cobbled together, or A&E being the 6th Day humans spoken in the 1st Creation narrative. I go for the latter - as the 1st Creation Narrative has the animals arising prior to humans, while the 2nd Creation Narrative as animals arising after humans (as a companion for Adam).

Animals already existed, Adam merely named them while looking for a companion - and that was just the Garden, not the world. Now why did God tell Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply and have dominion over the world and then take them to the Garden where they neither multiplied or had dominion over the world? And when they finally did multiply thanks to a fertility god (the Serpent) God kicked them out of the Garden.

Which is fine if you are a Deist, but not if you are a Christian (and believe Scripture has a lot of things to teach us).

Scriptures flesh out the logic on a variety of matters but the Golden Rule (and I include the 2 commandments given by Jesus) is all anyone needs, Christian or not. The good Samaritan shows that...

[rah]

How in the world did you dragged back into that, rah? Seriously, it's like you don't even learn .

Yeah I knew that would happen but did it anyway.
But sometime you just think that all evil needs to flourish is to do nothing and I get stupid.
I guess the older I get the more feeble minded I become.

I tell him not to judge and the whole next post is more judgement.

I will stop now and just go back to insulting him. It's just as productive.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Animals already existed, Adam merely named them while looking for a companion - and that was just the Garden, not the world. Now why did God tell Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply and have dominion over the world and then take them to the Garden where they neither multiplied or had dominion over the world? And when they finally did multiply thanks to a fertility god (the Serpent) God kicked them out of the Garden.

Animals already existed before Adam named them in the 2nd Creation narrative? That isn't what Genesis 2 says.

Gen 2:4b-9 (NRSV):

In the day that the Lord[a] God made the earth and the heavens, 5 when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no one to till the ground; 6 but a stream would rise from the earth, and water the whole face of the ground— 7 then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground,[b] and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. 8 And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 Out of the ground the Lord God made to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food, the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Gen 2:18-19 (NRSV)

18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.” 19 So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.

Now it is true, that some more conservative translations get a bit uncomfy with Gen 2:19 and add "the Lord God had formed", but that is not in the Greek at all - also makes no sense as to the reasoning God brings animals out of the ground.

Also the "be fruitful and multiply" applies to the Genesis 1 creation story, not in terms of Adam and Eve. Genesis 1 narrative doesn't even speak of Eden. Heck, the NRSV even starts off the Adam & Eve narrative with "Another Account of the Creation"

the Golden Rule (and I include the 2 commandments given by Jesus)

Um... the Golden Rule is actually the 2nd of the 2 Commandments, you realize? There is the 1st of the 2 - "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, mind, and soul". Loving the Lord requires a bit more than simply doing the 2nd Commandment - "love your neighbor as yourself". So obviously the Golden Rule isn't all everyone needs . There is an entire separate commandment.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I will stop now and just go back to insulting him. It's just as productive.

There you go!

[Berzerker]

Animals already existed before Adam named them in the 2nd Creation narrative? That isn't what Genesis 2 says.

Now it is true, that some more conservative translations get a bit uncomfy with Gen 2:19 and add "the Lord God had formed", but that is not in the Greek at all - also makes no sense as to the reasoning God brings animals out of the ground.

You're right, I'll have to look into various translations. But this creates a problem, Gen 1 clearly shows people arriving after the animals. So thats either a contradiction or the Garden story is about a particular plot of land - the Garden - where the animals of that field (plain) were formed after Adam. A separate and later creation from the 6 days...

Also the "be fruitful and multiply" applies to the Genesis 1 creation story, not in terms of Adam and Eve. Genesis 1 narrative doesn't even speak of Eden. Heck, the NRSV even starts off the Adam & Eve narrative with "Another Account of the Creation"

If Adam and Eve were the first people - 6th day people - then be fruitful and multiply was their instruction.

Um... the Golden Rule is actually the 2nd of the 2 Commandments, you realize? There is the 1st of the 2 - "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, mind, and soul". Loving the Lord requires a bit more than simply doing the 2nd Commandment - "love your neighbor as yourself". So obviously the Golden Rule isn't all everyone needs . There is an entire separate commandment.

If the author of the Golden Rule is God, then living by it is loving God and your neighbor

[Imran Siddiqui]

So thats either a contradiction or the Garden story is about a particular plot of land - the Garden - where the animals of that field (plain) were formed after Adam. A separate and later creation from the 6 days...

The bold part being my point (though it doesn't create all sorts of weird impulses to reconcile the two for me). The second part of the sentence is a way to attempt to reconcile it - but isn't necessarily based on readings of Scripture. They are two different narratives of Creation for me.

If the author of the Golden Rule is God, then living by it is loving God and your neighbor

Jesus, of course, never called it the "Golden Rule". And I'm not buying Jesus wanted to state a redundancy (1st and 2nd Commandments are exactly the same - why?) because you don't want to love God aside from being kind to others.