Zone1 Really?

[BreezeWood]

We will never be truly Catholic unless we conform our entire lives to the two commandments

Who said I was "imposing" anything on anyone?

could that be, being truly catholic is not a heavenly requisite to free ones spirit for judgement and admission to the everlasting ...

can the repudiation of abraham's hereditary idolatry religion of apartheid not be the same as catholicism false pretenses, commandments be the same as the reason jesus taught self determination, liberation theology.

 

[Woodznutz]

You passed the test!

You didn't mention the bogus 6000 years old crap!

And that means that you choose evolution over the Adam and Eve lies!

That's what Ding believes too but he can't say because he's still afraid of the Firelake thing.

God restored the surface of an ancient earth in Genesis 1, the original creation happened long before that.

I don't believe in the ToE.

 

[BackAgain]

Not the same. Not even close. So if you want to use a specific quote to criticize a group; make sure you're criticizing the group from where the quote originates...

No no. Catholics are Christians.

It’s just a fact

 

[BreezeWood]

I don't believe in the ToE.

good for you ... and the desert bibles.

clearly the recordable heavenly roadmap for life's progression as taught by jesus.

 

[ding]

your problem is that you believe that it's not all literally true but you can't say that because you would be sent to Firelake.

Incorrect. It's an incorrect statement and that's why I am not saying. You totally dismiss, ignore or don't understand the point the authors are making. You are here to play games for your own amusement.

 

[ding]

I do, I do understand the points that are symbolic and I think that you understand the symbolic points as well!

And I understand the points that are literally true to be literally true.

I don't believe you do know that. Or did you forget all the opportunities I gave you to show that to me in the bull ring. You are quite the intellectual midget.

 

[ding]

And so you're forever condemned to having to pretend that stories such as Jonah and the big fish' story is literally true.
And a whole bunch of stories that are lies too! You smartened up for a while and we found common ground on the bibles being bullsh-t, and you can't unmake that now. We need to talk about it. Your church gave you permission to believe what I believe for a good reason. The problem with the big fish story is at the top of the list! I mean fuk my friend, day 1 comes before day 4 regardless of the squirming of the low intelligence christian rabble's dance routines![/B]

This is you showing your intellectual midgetry. You see it that way only because you don't understand what it is or its context. The reader is obliged to read the text as written, which includes literal and symbolic aspects that are properties belonging to the author’s descriptive portrayal of reality. Since you don't place these texts in context and don't understand the point of the accounts you have no chance of reading these texts as the author intended. Your explanation for each account is skewed by your belief that these accounts are idiotic, so you provide an explanation that is idiotic. My explanation for each account is based on reading the text as written, which includes literal and symbolic aspects that are properties belonging to the author’s descriptive portrayal of reality. So my explanation won't sound idiotic. My explanation will make a lot of sense. Which you will promptly dismiss because you are so certain you can't be wrong about anything. The problem is I'm going to ass fuck you with logic, common sense, facts and evidence until you run away.

 

[Woodznutz]

Adam and Eve or evolution?

Adam and Eve. Evolution makes no sense.

 

[Donald H]

This is you showing your intellectual midgetry. You see it that way only because you don't understand what it is or its context. The reader is obliged to read the text as written, which includes literal and symbolic aspects that are properties belonging to the author’s descriptive portrayal of reality. Since you don't place these texts in context and don't understand the point of the accounts you have no chance of reading these texts as the author intended. Your explanation for each account is skewed by your belief that these accounts are idiotic, so you provide an explanation that is idiotic. My explanation for each account is based on reading the text as written, which includes literal and symbolic aspects that are properties belonging to the author’s descriptive portrayal of reality. So my explanation won't sound idiotic. My explanation will make a lot of sense. Which you will promptly dismiss because you are so certain you can't be wrong about anything.

The problem is I'm going to ass fuck you with logic, common sense, facts and evidence until you run away.

What did I say to you Christian, that has brought out that kind of strong emotional outburst?

We've actually reached agreement on what can't be literally true, and what isn't. Do you have some examples of the symbolic? I think you'll find that I agree on that too if it's kept rational and believable.

 

[Donald H]

God restored the surface of an ancient earth in Genesis 1, the original creation happened long before that.

I don't believe in the ToE.

What's the Toe that you don't believe in?

 

[Woodznutz]

What's the Toe that you don't believe in?

Organisms changing themselves into other organisms.

 

[Donald H]

Organisms changing themselves into other organisms.

I don't believe the supernatural either.

So what is the ToE?

Do you believe that all living things have a common ancestor?

 

[Woodznutz]

So what is the ToE?

Theory of Evolution.

Do you believe that all living things have a common ancestor?

A common design maybe, a common ancestor no.

 

[Woodznutz]

I don't believe the supernatural either.

There's nothing 'natural' about life on planet earth, or the universe for that matter.

 

[Donald H]

Theory of Evolution.

A common design maybe, a common ancestor no.

Thank you! I'm good with a common design for now. That tells me that it's all negotiable.
CAn I interpret that as the commonality between humans and insects?

 

[Donald H]

There's nothing 'natural' about life on planet earth, or the universe for that matter.

You've given me 'common design'!

One small step at a time my friend. Do you agree on what separated the Catholic church?

It has to be the Pope allowing the flock to believe in Darwinian evolution.
It was an attempt at damage control as more and more of the flock couldn't rationalize the supernatural events portrayed in the bibles, as literally true. (your admission of a common design)

Now there are two camps that are divided by 'literal' belief in the bibles, and the more rational Christians who accept their bibles as symbolic at best. Ding's camp!
The two sides can never find common ground and so it's likely the CC will split once again. (common design vs. A and E)

The enlightenment to believing in evolution came too soon! The CC should have stayed with the bibles and took it's lumps with some of the flock walking away.

 

[Donald H]

The more rational and enlightened members of the Catholic church said, give us evolution or we're going to walk.

The literal believers saw the granting of that request as Satanic.

 

[Woodznutz]

Thank you! I'm good with a common design for now. That tells me that it's all negotiable.
CAn I interpret that as the commonality between humans and insects?

Many commonalities, yes.

 

[Woodznutz]

You've given me 'common design'!

One small step at a time my friend. Do you agree on what separated the Catholic church?

It has to be the Pope allowing the flock to believe in Darwinian evolution.
It was an attempt at damage control as more and more of the flock couldn't rationalize the supernatural events portrayed in the bibles, as literally true. (your admission of a common design)

Now there are two camps that are divided by 'literal' belief in the bibles, and the more rational Christians who accept their bibles as symbolic at best. Ding's camp!
The two sides can never find common ground and so it's likely the CC will split once again. (common design vs. A and E)

The enlightenment to believing in evolution came too soon! The CC should have stayed with the bibles and took it's lumps with some of the flock walking away.

Enlightenment means the light goes on in your own head, not passed to you by someone else. A simple perusal of "Gray's Anatomy" should disavow any intelligent person of the theory of evolution.

The Catholic Church has always relied on the ignorance of the flock concerning the Bible for their power over them. Once the Bible was widely published (thanks to the printing press) and read by the masses the Reformation and Protestantism freed the Christian world from that ignorance.

 

[Donald H]

Many commonalities, yes.

A common ancestor for all apes, including all of the human missing links!
Can we go that far yet?

Yes really!

And that is the Catholic church allowing their flock to accept Darwinian evolution.

And so that which can't be tolerated by the 'literal' believers of A and E and the bibles!