nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 135:
Line 135: + +
Talk:Roman Catholicism (view source)
Revision as of 11:24, October 27, 2008
, 11:24, October 27, 2008→Catholics not as Christians?: Not all literal, but...
::Your arguments, on the other hand (and I really hope I am not mis-representing them), assert that all the details of the Bible are Truth, because it is the sacred word of God. If I have summarized the arguments accurately, then further debate would entail debates over our individual religious foundations, which I wish to avoid. With that in mind, and given that this debate probably doesn't belong on the Roman Catholicism talk page, I think it may be better if I at least moved on. I don't want to "give up," but I'd rather not step on too many toes. --[[User:Thinker|Thinker]] 11:25, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
::Your arguments, on the other hand (and I really hope I am not mis-representing them), assert that all the details of the Bible are Truth, because it is the sacred word of God. If I have summarized the arguments accurately, then further debate would entail debates over our individual religious foundations, which I wish to avoid. With that in mind, and given that this debate probably doesn't belong on the Roman Catholicism talk page, I think it may be better if I at least moved on. I don't want to "give up," but I'd rather not step on too many toes. --[[User:Thinker|Thinker]] 11:25, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
::: My beliefs about the Bible are that everything is true, but allowing for it truthfully recording the lies of people, allowing for metaphor and figures of speech, parables, and so forth. As per evidence such as that in [[creation week]], I am totally convinced that the creation account does not fall into any of those categories, but is literal history. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:24, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
== Roman Catholicism ==
== Roman Catholicism ==