What I determine the point is that you are making is attempting to guess what and how I think.

For instance - you claim that I say all Catholics are not Christains, so rather than you misrepresenting what I think - I told you - so that in the future you could get it right.

Let's see how you do with that. You've failed miserably up until this point. If you don't understand what I'm saying - just ask and I'll clarify it for you.

I don't think stubborn is a requirement to denounce the bible if one is a believer. As a matter of fact - I would be suprised to learn that a believer does not support the bible. What exactly would they be a believer of were this the case? Just curious as to what your post is about.

I think I understand perfectly well what you're trying to say.

You're trying to say that you believe your version of Protestantism.

Whatever version that might be.

And I don't know why you insist on 'dumbing things' down for people. Do you think your so smart that we can't understand what you're trying to say?


I understand precisely what you are trying to say. I simply disagree with you. That's all.

You say:



But that's my WHOLE POINT Eljay.

I'm arguing along PRECISELY THE SAME LINES as you!

Jesus and the God of Abraham were supposed to be the SAME GOD.

Do they both seem like the SAME GOD TO YOU?

They most certainly don't seem like the same God to me!

The God of Abraham had mortal men judging each other and he had them carrying out the excutions.

But Jesus said not to judge and don't throw stones.

Does that sounds like the SAME GOD to you?

It doesn't sound like the same God to me!

The God of Abraham had everyone seeking vengence via an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Jesus said, no. Don't seek revenge! Turn the other cheek and FORGIVE.

That's my WHOLE POINT Eljay. Jesus and the God of Abraham were as different as Mother Teresa and Stalin (to use your example).

Jesus COULD NOT have been the Son of the God of Abraham.

And that's my only point.

But that's the very BASIS of Christianity!

You look at JESUS and say, "That's Christianity!"

But it CAN'T work like that Eljay. Because the idea behind CHristianity is that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb of the God of Abraham.

It's makes absolutely no sense to believe in Jesus and reject the God of Abraham.

In fact, believing that the OLD TESTAMENT is the "Word or God" is precisely what Christinaity DEMANDS! That's there they get all the crap about homosexuality, a six-day creation, the fall of man, and even the very idea that Jesus is the "messiah" born of a virgin and sent by the God of Abraham as a sacrifical lamb to pay for the sins of man.

It makes ABSOLUTLEY NO SENSE, to believe that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of God if you don't also believe in the GOD!

What you seem to be doing is simply sweeping the God of Abraham under the carpet and trying to worship Jesus as a BRAND NEW GOD.

And that'd be GREAT if Christianity could be made to work like that.

But it CAN'T work like that!

As soon as you sweep the God of Abraham under the carpet you loose the divinity of Jesus.

It's all one continuous package.

The very thing that Jesus is supposedly saving you from is the WRATH of the God of Abraham!

But if Jesus and the God of Abraham are one in the SAME then Jesus is attempting to save you from HIS OWN WRATH.

It just can't work. Also the idea that Jesus would sit at the Right-Hand of God is ludicous. That implies that he's something OTHER THAN GOD.

Who's idea was it for Jesus to save mankind? Was it Jesus' IDEA?
Or was it GOD'S ORIGINAL PLAN!

This is like the THREE FACES OF EVE. God would need to be schizophrenic for this to work.

We denounced Greek Mythology mainly because it's absurd. But how is this Biblical picture and LESS ABSURD?

It's not less asburd at all. It has God betting with fallen angels and letting them beat up on his most devoted servents. It has God telling people to judge each other and stone each other to death. It requires that we believe in angels with wings. It has God's Son lusting to be the King of Kings and Lord of Lords over all humans.

And where's God in all of this? Christians aren't waiting for the God of Abraham to come back, they're waiting for JESUS to come back!

But why would anyone worship the sacrificial lamb of a God. If Jesus was the sacrificial lamb of God then he's NOT GOD.

The story just doens't work and my point is that the Jesus and the God of Abraham truly were as different as Mother Teresa and Stalin.

So it's not that I don't undestands what you are trying to say. I understand COMPLETELY. You view Christianity solely thought the picture of JESUS and you totally refute the God of Abraham.

But that's not what Christianity is based on.

Jesus stands on the shoulder of the divinity of the God of Abraham. Jesus cannot be any more divine than the God of Abraham.

They are supposedly one in the same God.

I've told you my historical interpretation many times. Jesus did NOT teach the teachings of the God of Abraham. In fact, he REJECTED THEM!

What did he teach?

He taught the very same things that Buddha taught!

Jesus wasn't the Son of the God of Abraham. And therefore he's not the sacrifical lamb of that God. Jesus did NOT die to pay for anyone's sins. Jesus was a rebel HE WAS THE FIRST PROTESTANT!

He protested against the GOD OF ABRAHAM!

And he was crucified for it and then used as a dead marionette doll to prop up that Old Time religion and give it a brand new shot in the arm.

Jesus was NOT the son of the God of Abraham.

But that's the CORNERSTONE of "Christianity".

If you want to following the teachings of Jesus just do what Buddha taught. That's where Jesus got his material anyway. He most certainly didn't get it from the God of Abraham. That's crystal clear.

Dear Eljay,

You are showing serious signs of '... intellectual bankcrupty...'

The degree of twisting, misinterpretations, ignoring other people's simple points, and spinning a web of lies and deceit, is clearly pointing to someone 'spendng more intellectually than one is worth'.

And that my friend is the point you are missing, ignoring, by-passing, or simply incapable of 'getting'!!!

Your comments and observations lately are tainted with a degree of pompous 'self-importance' that is ridding your posts of any and all credibility.

To come back with :

'... What I determine the point is that you are making is attempting to guess what and how I think...'

... besides the fact that the formulation itself is most confused, is the clearest indication that you haven't a clue about the point being made.

I truly couldn't be less interested in '... what and how you think...' !!!
I simply read some posts on these forums, and address as respectfully as can be, some points of agreement, or points of incoherence, confusion and inconsistency as I see them.

My 'pro' or 'con' 2 cents worth against yours!!!
No more! No less!

Inside that 2 cents worth of ours, you do not have what it takes to lay or imply most of the 'claims' (very different than a personal opinion) that you make.

i.e.: let's say that : '... to you personally, that you have no doubt that the bible is the word of (YOUR) god, and therefore represents the foundation of your own personal faith...'
That experience of faith (dealing with that which IS NOT!!!) makes whatever you elevate your mind to believe 'as true', to be true FOR YOU, BUT NOT TRUE IN THE MATERIAL AND FACT-BASED WORLD.

The bible 'is the word of god' FOR YOU, as a personal belief, but it isn't true in fact. In fact, the bible is a book period. To imply anything else is being guilty of 'intellectual bankcrupty'.

'evolution is a religion', might be elevated as true to you, as a matter of personal belief TO YOU, but in fact, and in the real world, this claim is nothing other than a delusion. It has no foundation whatsoever. To imply anyting else as you do, is being guilty of 'intellectual bankcrupty'.

(your words) '... While there may be numerous Catholics who are christains - claiming to be a Catholic does not make one a christain. Ditto for Protestantism!!!...'

Again, elevate your mind to believe whatever you wish, but in fact, a catholic claiming he is a catholic, IS A CHRISTIAN.
Again, your own personal standards, viewpoint, moral judgment, based on your interpretation of the book on this matter, change nothing with the fact that catholics whom claim to be catholics, ARE CHRISTIANS!!! Again, to imply anyting else as you do, is being guilty of 'intellectual bankcrupty'.

We could go on endlessly picking statements and claims of yours which are oblivious to the 'FAITH - FACT' distinction, creating confusion, deceit, mischaracterizations, etc.
It wouldn't change the fact that they are all given by the syndrome of 'intellectual bankrupty', or insisting unintentionally in giving oneself a 'larger than can be supported' degree of self-importance.

That is the point you have been missing for the longest time. However YOU might value your faith, beliefs and convictions, which is your HUMAN privilege, the universe ISN'T a faith based orgamism, and couldn't care less.

Is it me? Or does anyone else get the impression that the need to accept Creationism has more to do with the lack of actually spirituality in some people, ie- if any part of the Bible is false then the whole thing is false and comes tumbling down versus yes of course some things are not right, what did they know 2000 years ago, but the teachings and hope it gives is what I believe in?

I won't speak for anyone on this board, but that is the exact stance the Creation museum has taken.(You can see the owner say just that in Bill Maher's Religulous)

Interesting, then just what is Xian spirituality?

Will the real Christian please stand up.



I remember this from a book I once read in English class in high school. It was all about religious people and how judgmental and mean they were to their fellow man. But this one guy who didn't believe in god (obviously an atheists), was generous to everyone and forgiving and never judged anyone. The book was used in part to teach us the concept of irony.

I fully understand your point of view Eljay. However, to carry it to the ulimately level you'd need to recognize that by your definition of Christian then many atheists, Wiccans, Buddists, and anyone else who just happens to be a good person would technically be a "Christian" even if they didn't believe in the Bible or that Jesus was God.

All you are claiming is that 'works' or 'behavior' is what makes a good "Christian". But most Christians (especially clergy) would disagree with you on that point. They would claim that the only way to be a Christians is to confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of the God of Abraham and that the Bible is the word of this God of Abraham.

I do believe that there are man people who believe like you. They believe that to be a "Christian" has to do with behavior moreso than what you believe. But most will also claim that you must accept Jesus as your savior. But that would eliminate anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible.

You're stuck between a rock and a hard place.

In fact, you're precisely where I was many years ago!

I tried to do precisely the same thing. I tried to claim that being a "Christian" had to do with being a Good Person. But the hardcore fundamentalist have PROVEN to me that the Bible will NOT permit that interpretation.

It's simply doesn't fit with what the book claims. At least not if you're going to hold that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb of the God of Abraham.

They only way you can truly make your version of Christianity truly work is to do away with that concept. You must forfeit the divinity of Jesus and view him as nothing more than a Buddha who rejected the God of Abraham.

The view that you would LIKE to call "Christianity" would NOT FLY in the "Christian world", you would be labeled a HERETIC and denounced by Christian Clergy.

Because they refuse to accept your view that works or behavior trump a confession that Jesus Christ is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords AND the SON of the God of Abraham!

That's their highest trump card. Anything less will be trodden out of existence and proclaimed to be heresy.

Even Bishop Carlton Pearson was metaphorically crucified by the Christians for believing that God had given him an epiphany that hell does not exist.

The "Christians" will simply not allow for anything less than a very rigid interpretation that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of the God of Abraham and that the entire Bible is the word of the God of Abraham.

To pretent that "Christianity" can be something other than this is to truly kid yourself. You'd be far better off inventing your own religion because MAINSTREAM Christianity would never recognize your interpretations on this matter.

In short, you don't speak for "Christianity", you speak for Eljay. Period.

Heck I would have become a "Christian Preacher" if I could preach love and acceptance. The reason I reject the religion is because that's NOT ALLOWED! If you don't preach hatred against heathens you can't be a Christian Preacher. And by that I simply mean to say that you MUST preach that the ONLY way to become a Christian is to accept Jesus as the Sacrificial Lamb of the God of Abraham and in DOING SO you MUST also accept the the Bible is indeed the WORD of this GOD!

Anything LESS than that cannot be condone by any Christian clergy as being representative of a TRUE Christian.

So I feel for you, becuase you would LIKE Christianity to be something other than what it IS!

As would most "Designer Christians". Then want to save Jesus and toss the God of Abraham in a lake of FIRE!

But that's just not possible. That's NOT what the religion called "Christianity" is all about.

If you want to call yourself a "Christian" you better get with the program. Otherwise you're just making up your own ideologies and calling that "Christianity".

But that's NOT "Christiainity". Christianity is a HISTORIC RELIGION. It's not something you can just re-define yourself.

You're truly living in a dream world if you think you can just denounce Catholicism as "Christianity".

What would that leave?

The myriad of Protestant demoninations? I'm sure you're not going to agree with all of those either. So you just pick and choose which ones YOU LIKE and call those, "True Christianity".

You have nothing more than a Salad Bar religion. You just pick an choose what YOU would like Christianity to be!

But the orthodoxed religions don't agree with you. You're just STEALING THEIR LABEL and redefininging it. Good luck with that.

This is precisely why the religion became meaningless as soon as the protestant protested against it. Clearly it can't be from God if you need to PROTEST against it in order to make it WORK.



You're in the same boat I was in, you're just refusing to give up the label and you've decided to just redifine it to SAVE JESUS.

That's what I tried to do. But you can't Save Jesus! He's been nailed more firmly to the OLD TESTAMENT than he was to the cross.

It's truly an all-or-nothing religion. You either need to accept the Old Testament as the word of God, or recognize that Jesus was not the Son of that God.

That's the cold hard TRUTH.

There really is no way to save Jesus from the Old Testament whilst simultaneously clinging to the notion that he's the sacarifical lamb of the God of Abraham.

Something's got to give. It just can't work the way it is.

I denounce the connection to the God of Abraham. I think it's crystal clear that Jesus did too. He clearly taught the teachings of Buddha (not the God of Abraham!).

But I'm not going to pretend that this view is "Christianity" because it's not. Christianity is based solely on the idea that the Jesus is the SON of the God of Abraham and was indeed his sacarificial lamb to pay for the sins of man.

That's the notion I reject Eljay.

All the rest is moot.

Well that really does need to be the stance.

Either the Bible is the word of God or not.

And since it must be that way I've concluded that it can't possibly be the word of God.

Arguements about the Bible really aren't arguement about "God" at all. They are arguments about whether or not the Israelites were inspired by God to write these specific things.

I personally don't believe they were. And I think the proof is overwhelming. Not the least of which is the fact that stories almost identical to the story of Jesus existed long before the time when Jesus was said to have lived.

The "official explanation" for that is that Satan KNEW what God was going to do and had those stories created to discredit Jesus.

But the Bible doesn't make any such claims. And why would that be? If this implies that Satan knows what God is up to, but God doesn't even know what Satans up to even AFTER the fact!

Otherwise God would have mentioned this crap in the Bible!

Clearly the "official explanation" doens't hold water. It's not supported by the Bible, and it demands the Satan KNOWS what God is going to do BEFORE he does it! That's one savvy fallen angel!

Moreover, the whole idea that God would be so DESPERATE as to have to sacrifice his only begotten Son implies that God is, well, DESPERATE!

You can't have a God doing a DESPERATE act unless that God is indeed DEPSERATE.

But that suggests that God isn't in control of anything. A God who has everything under control shouldn't need to be sacrificing his only begotten Son to win a war against a fallen angel.

The whole story makes no sense in light of the fact that "With God all things are possible". Clearly that can't be true of a God who would need to do such a desperate thing as send his own son as a sacrifcial lamb.

The story just isn't consistent with what God is supposed to be (i.e. all-wise, all-knowing, all-compassionate, not to mention all-powerful).

The story just isn't a consistent story. It demands that God is neither all-wise nor all-powerful.

Pehaps if it started out allowing that God was neither all-wise nor all-powerful it might have had a story. But it grossly conflicts with these basic premises.

Yes, often times I think we are discussing the same ojections, as is the case with Voile as well. We all seem to abhor the trappings of Religiousity.

I've never been the one to say that all that we read in scripture makes sense to me - just that when I read what I read, I get the opint to what's being said. I don't try to argue for the reasons I think Leviticus is justifable, or makes sense - or that one should live their life by taking every jot and tittle of it literally. My point as an overall generality - is that I've read the bible - more than just once, and I'm familiar with what it says. A lot of it is mis-interpreted because rather than read it - people take the interpretation of others to get their information. I often time see references that the bible says "This" or it says "that" - when it really doesn't. Perhaps it's close, but it non the less is wrong.

For instance. You said earlier in this post that Jesus says not to judge, and not to throw stones. He doesn't say that. What he says is "As you judge - you will be judged, so judge yourself rightly before judgng anyone else." And "He who is without sin - cast the first stone". So - you're sort of right, yet that really isn't what is being said.

Most of my posts center around this type of interpretation of what the bible says.

The Bible is not the 'word of God.'

Light and sound is the 'word of God.'

"The Word" is the vibration of the universe.

The Vibrations are what cause the light and the sound.

This holographic reality is mind created and all things within it consist of frequency and vibration, which manifest as light and sound. All things you perceive are reflections of thought generated from thinking centers of the conscious universe. It is a dream world existing in the unconscious mind of the universal awareness which is 'God.'

And this - my "intellectually bankrupt" friend - is how you see reality, which does not make your world any more real than mine. As you are merely deluding yourself if you think you can demonstrate how the bible is not the word of God outside of your subjective observation. But that is a side-show as to th posts we've been exchanging, because while you keep bring up the bible - I have not refreenced it once in any of my posts on this thread other than to you and Abra - because you keep bringing it up in reference to what I'm posting.



And this is your reality. Merely claiming that your semantical understanding of how to quatfy the definition of words - does not make you right, and me wrong. It just comes down to you thinking a Catholic is a Christain because he says he's a Catholic - and I think a Christain involves something more than that, as I get my definition of christainity from the bible. I really don't know where you get yours from, as when I askyou to either demonstrate how my definition is wrong and yours is right - all i get from you is rhetoric. I asked you to explain to me how Evolution is a science, and your response is that I'm intellectually bankrupt for not knowing this clear fact. Meanwhile - you don't demonstrate how this is true - it just is because - well - of your intellectual superiority. I mean - let's not cloud this issue by stating any facts. Just the mere mention of them is enough.

That's the thing with you Fundies - no explination is required.

I have always been under the impression that a Catholic was a Christian.

If you say they are not, then you might want to take that up with the Pope.

I have also been told that some Christians are not "true Christians" so I think there are opinions attached to statements like that.

Okay - so I'm not sure where any of this comes from. First of all - you're quoting from Voile - but that aside...

Nothing anyone ever "does" as far as works oriented - I.E. - doing good deeds, participating in all of the "sacraments", knocking on doors to invite people to study the bible with you - makes one a Christain. It isn't what one does - but what one believes.

A christian (as is infered to in the bible where the idea originated)
would believe a few basic tennets.

One would be that Jesus dies on a cross, and on the third day was resurrected. If one thinks this is a fairy-tale - I would doubt their claim of being a Christain. Not because I set the rules, because the bible specifically states that to think otherwise - one is decieving themsleves and the truth is not in them.

No where in the New Testament does Jesus - or anyone give indication that the "Law" (Old testament) is a collection of Fables. Jesus refers to God creating Adam and Eve - Jonah being inside a big fish for 3 days, and that Satan is the father of lies.

Thinking that Evolution is the truth - and Creation is a metephor, or Myth; That there's no way Jonah was ever inside a fish for a moment - let alone three days, and that there is no such thing as Satan, or Hell - would be equivalent to calling Jesus a liar. Hardly qualification for being a christain - you think?

So - when I hear the claim to being a christain, and then beliefs that are clearly in conflict with what is written in the bible come out of the claimants mouth, it causes me to doubt the claim of christainity - not what's written in the bible.

Bottom line is that it isn't what one does on a daily basis that makes one a christain - for no amount of doing good is going to qualify "membership" of the church as established by christ according to what's in the bible - but by contrast, the lack of any demonstratable desire to do good (other than for personal gain) - is a clear indication that one is NOT a christian. And that isn't "religion according to Eljay" - that is something that is written in scripture. One could easily reason this out for themselves without my having to point this out.

I am a very strong protestant who is converting to Catholicism. I understand what you are talking about Eljay. In many points I agree.

Well, I would totally differ with you there. Christianity is all about personal gain!

It's all about getting on the 'good side' of God for the purpose of being "saved" from eternal damnation and being rewarded with the prize of eternal life!

It's all about being SAVED Eljay!

Only an athiest who does good things without any belief that they will be "saved" or anything like that could claim not to have motives of personal gain.

Christianity is all about personal gain.

That's what it's based on.

"If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and
take up his cross, and follow me"

Christianity means losing everything if need be, but "broad is the road that leads to destruction"


G.K. Chesterton once said "the problem with Christianity is not that it has been tried and found wanting, but that its been found difficult and left untried."



"Yea, all that would live godly in Christ Jesus shall
suffer persecution" (2 Timothy 3:13)





Was Christ telling the truth?

A christian is someone who has been BORN AGAIN......or BORN OF GOD.


A christian is NOT someone who is just joins a catholic church, or baptist church, or ANY church for that matter.....

but yet never asked Jesus into his/her heart as his/her personal Saviour and Lord.

Although YES..... a person CAN become member of a catholic church, or a baptist church ,or any church for that matter,

and TRULY be a CHRISTIAN ALSO(because that person who is a member of a church,

ALSO MADE JESUS CHRIST HIS PERSONAL LORD AND SAVIOUR.....AND MEANT IT IN HIS HEART..AND NOT JUST IN HIS HEAD !!!

And as EVIDENCE that a TRUE BORN AGAIN experience took place( which again is what a christian is).....

there ALWAYS will be FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT eventually SHOWIN UP in that christian's life.

Again....When a person has TRULY made Jesus the Saviour and Lord of his life..and meant it.....

the fruits of the spirit WILL become evident as a result.

AND ALSO.... when a person is truly born again, that person's spiritual eyes will be opened ALSO.....

meaning..... he WILL NOW BE ABLE TO SEE and UNDERSTAND the TRUTH of GOD'S WORD NOW....

and will BELIEVE on God's word....and will NOT be calling ANY of God's word a MYTH.....

as do some catholics will do,for instance , about some parts of God word .

(UN-born again catholics think adam and eve is a Myth......and those are the catholics who are NOT christians..they are just catholics..that's all!!!).

But then again, you have folks who are catholics, baptists, or members of any church....

but who ALSO have had a true BORN AGAIN experience!!!!

THOSE are the ones WHO ARE CHRISTIANS!!

And there are christians in every denomination...

who have truly been born again(which again , is what a christian really is).

A christian is NOT just someone who is a member of a church somewhere !!!


So..point being...Not all catholics are christians.

And not all baptists are christians....

and not all people who attend any church, are christians.


BUT, there ARE catholics who ARE aLSO christians.......just as there are baptists who are ALSO christians..etc etc etc......

sIMPLY Because they also have made Jesus Christ their Personal Saviour and Lord .

In fact, there are people who attend our spirit filled nondenominational church....

but who also are not yet christians.

They just attend...but one day they might get to the point where they too,

will make Jesus the Saviour and Lord of their lives.....

and MEAN IT WITH THEIR HEARTS...

and when they do.......

they too, WILL be Christians also.

Just those who made Jesus their Savior and Lord and meant it, ARE CHRISTIANS......

NOT just people who join some church.

And when a true born again experience takes place(which again , is what a CHRISTIAN is ....and not just someone who attends or joins a church ).....

then there will ALSO BE FRUITS EVIDENT in that CHRISTIAN'S life... as proof positive that he is truly born again ( a christian now).

Some of the most wonderful people I know are catholics, and also christians.


But I also know people who are good catholics, but never made Jesus the Saviour and Lord of their lives at all.

And this also applies to people in every denomination and non-denomination , alike.

Hope this helps clear up any misunderstanding of what a CHRISTIAN is now .

And this - my "intellectually bankrupt" friend - is how you see reality, which does not make your world any more real than mine. As you are merely deluding yourself if you think you can demonstrate how the bible is not the word of God outside of your subjective observation. But that is a side-show as to th posts we've been exchanging, because while you keep bring up the bible - I have not refreenced it once in any of my posts on this thread other than to you and Abra - because you keep bringing it up in reference to what I'm posting.




Eljay, you have this very frustrating habit of twisting and confusing everything of late. Please, slow down on the reading, and raise the bar on the understanding factor.

It would come across as evidence to anyone that I couldn't care less what a christian is or is not!!!

My definition of what is or is not a christian is profoundly impertinent. Why you should trip over that is beyound me.

I have no authority in declaring who is or isn't a christian (by the way pay attention to your spelling of the word).

You're the one going around suggesting that you are a christian, and you claim to be a christian because of the book that you read, and the interpretation of the 'good' chrisitian you get out of it. You got that part Eljay?!?!

Now, follow me here! I speak to catholics, and they tell me THEY are christians because of THEIR understanding of the SAME book THEY read.

Still with me Eljay??? You on the side claiming that you're a christian based on your interpretation of the book, and catholics claiming they are christians based on their understanding and interpretation of the same book.

Who do you think YOU are to claim that YOU get to decide, based on YOUR interpreation of the book, who is and who is not a 'good little' christian?!?!?!

NO SEMANTICS!
NO PERSONAL DEFINITION OF WORDS!
NOT WHAT I THINK!
NO NEED TO DEMONSTRATE A SINGLE THING!

It's what YOU claim! And what you claim, is way above your legitimate right to claim it.

You're a christian because you say so, based on whatever interpretation you make of your book, and catholics whom claim to be christians, based on whatever interpretation they make of the book, are good little christians just as much as you Eljay.

Should you still have an understanding issue with this point, I would suggest, as JB pointed out earlier, don't bring it back to this forum, but rather, take it up with the pope, or the individual 1,3 billion CHRISTIAN CATHOLICS out there.


Hate to brake it to you Eljay, but this is the same order of delusion you are applying to 'evolution'.

As you need to take it up with the Pope and the 1,3 billion catholic christians out there, you need to take this personal dogmatic fundamentalist batlle of the 'origins of the species' to the scientific 'body'.

'Write-up' your case, based on your exahustive research, and present it to the scientific community. If what you claim has any validity whatsoever, we will all wake-up in the post darwinian, ELJAYIAN reality of the origin of the species.

How's that!!!

Fair enough?!?!?

But until then Eljay, until you make your point where it matters, stop waging fundamentalist-creationism 'lost battles' on religious forums of datng sites. Not credible.




There you go with your personal interpretations again!!!

Look-up fundamentalism. It will clarify it all up for you. And if you don't find the pertinent definition, I'll help you track it down.