Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 260:
Line 260: +
Talk:Conservative Bible Project/Archive 1 (view source)
Revision as of 04:29, October 16, 2009
, 04:29, October 16, 2009→Names of God
:: JacobB, you are correct, I was not appropriate in making my point in a constructive manner, and I would like to apologize to Mr. Schlafly for my uncalled-for remarks. I did not mean any ill will by them. However, I do believe we could all take steps here to be more civil and understanding in our discussion of the issue -myself included. That being said, I would like to respond to Mr. Schlafly's claim that evolutionists by default do not read the bible. I myself am an evolutionist; I am also a devout catholic. The two beliefs are not irreconcilable; in fact, JPII actually recognized evolution as a possible theory, so long as it incorporated the idea of God as a prime mover. This does not mean I am saying you are definitively wrong; Evolution and Intelligent Design are both theories, and the truth of the matter is that we have no definite way of knowing either way. So, we can agree to disagree. This being said, we run into the danger this project truly presents. In editing and revising the bible in a selective manner, you run the risk of straying further and further from the source material, and thus distorting the meaning. I think the bible is a text that really is beyond partisanship here, and we might want to take a moment to step back and think about the scope of what this project would entail. I have my personal qualms about the idea, but I am obviously not the one in charge of the project; this is just my personal input. [[User:Pnino|Pnino]] 00:08, 16 October 2009 (EDT)
:: JacobB, you are correct, I was not appropriate in making my point in a constructive manner, and I would like to apologize to Mr. Schlafly for my uncalled-for remarks. I did not mean any ill will by them. However, I do believe we could all take steps here to be more civil and understanding in our discussion of the issue -myself included. That being said, I would like to respond to Mr. Schlafly's claim that evolutionists by default do not read the bible. I myself am an evolutionist; I am also a devout catholic. The two beliefs are not irreconcilable; in fact, JPII actually recognized evolution as a possible theory, so long as it incorporated the idea of God as a prime mover. This does not mean I am saying you are definitively wrong; Evolution and Intelligent Design are both theories, and the truth of the matter is that we have no definite way of knowing either way. So, we can agree to disagree. This being said, we run into the danger this project truly presents. In editing and revising the bible in a selective manner, you run the risk of straying further and further from the source material, and thus distorting the meaning. I think the bible is a text that really is beyond partisanship here, and we might want to take a moment to step back and think about the scope of what this project would entail. I have my personal qualms about the idea, but I am obviously not the one in charge of the project; this is just my personal input. [[User:Pnino|Pnino]] 00:08, 16 October 2009 (EDT)
:::Two things, Prino. First we're NOT going to stray from the source material; that part is already set in stone. Second, if there is a case in which we do, the best thing you or anyone could do is to ''state the objection and the reasons why you object, offer a solution, provide evidence which supports that solution on the appropriate talk page ("I found this line here in the Textus Receptus; what do you think?"), and step back.'' I think in this project we're going to make some happy discoveries here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:29, 16 October 2009 (EDT)
== I don't get the criticisms of this project ==
== I don't get the criticisms of this project ==