nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 576:
Line 576: +
→Intentions: Oh dear
: I've never said that "my view is the only legitimate view" in so many words. That's your spin. I have said that the young-Earth view is the only legitimate way to understand the Bible, but I never said that the colophon explanation of how Genesis was written was the only legitimate view. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:06, 20 December 2007 (EST)
: I've never said that "my view is the only legitimate view" in so many words. That's your spin. I have said that the young-Earth view is the only legitimate way to understand the Bible, but I never said that the colophon explanation of how Genesis was written was the only legitimate view. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:06, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Your way is only one way to understand the bible, since it may be translated in different ways, understood in different ways, and interpreted in different ways, different theories how the bible came about. And saying that your interpretation might be logical possible, that is not exactly much. There are other interpretations that are logically possible, too. It seem like you are arguing with the desired outcome in mind, namely that the scripture must be correct on a fairly literal level, and with that in mind there indeed only a few possible interpretations. And yours might be one of them. [[User:Order|Order]] 18:06, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Your way is only one way to understand the bible, since it may be translated in different ways, understood in different ways, and interpreted in different ways, different theories how the bible came about. And saying that your interpretation might be logical possible, that is not exactly much. There are other interpretations that are logically possible, too. It seem like you are arguing with the desired outcome in mind, namely that the scripture must be correct on a fairly literal level, and with that in mind there indeed only a few possible interpretations. And yours might be one of them. [[User:Order|Order]] 18:06, 20 December 2007 (EST)
:Oh dear, we've been over this already. There's so many unsubstantiated generalisations in that paragraph that I'm not going to repeat myself going over them all again. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:49, 21 December 2007 (EST)
===Scientific Claims===
===Scientific Claims===