keiths
Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
| Quote (Chris Hyland @ June 26 2006,00:53) | | Was it just me or when avocationist was over here didn't she claim to believe in some abstract version of God and not the literal biblical version. If so she seems to have changed her tune a bit. |
I think she's still the same old avocationist. Here's something she posted on the Weinberg thread yesterday:
| Quote | | Do you really suppose that whole chunks of humanity have no access to the highest truths? Do you think the real teacher, the Holy Spirit, does not permeate all things? Does the Holy Spirit simply not bother to teach people unless they are in possession of a particular document made of ink and paper? Can we really suppose that the genome must deteriorate (Sanford) but not a book written over many centuries at different times and places? Can anyone suppose that spiritual truths are contained within matter and matter alone? Has anyone studied the corruption and terrible infighting that went on with the bishops who by vote decided upon the creed and the canon of the Bible? Did the scriptures prevent the pharisees from being spiritually blind? Wasn’t it the people most immersed in the scriptures that Jesus had the hardest time reachings with his living truth? |
--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G
Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF
|
