tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post6073246620649816265..comments2023-11-02T22:17:59.419+11:00Comments on Sydney Anglican Heretics: 2 books: forked tongueErichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04827951993182450846noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post-78885728868952301632011-11-30T00:27:05.237+11:002011-11-30T00:27:05.237+11:00I respond to your blog upon May 2nd 2011 pertainin...I respond to your blog upon May 2nd 2011 pertaining to the "TWO BOOK APPROACH" to this topic of origins. In such an approach the Biblical record is presented as God's written revelation whereas the other book is somewhat metaphorical and is a reference to the world around us and thus God's revelation of himself via this world. <br /><br />Now, a cynic might take a view that an advantage of the two book approach is that if one book is mistaken or lying or is simply to hard to read if not incomprehendible then there remains the possibility of 'the other book'. When I stopped laughing it occurred to me that towards the end of the Book of Revelation a curse was pronounced against anyone who would either add or take words away from that book. And given that that warning occurs towards the end of that book which is the last book within the bible people have tended to apply such a warning to any that might consider 'tampering' with any of the other scriptures. It then occurred to me that with this TWO BOOK APPROACH instead of adding or subtracting a few words what is conceivably occurring is that an entire new book or 'Volume of Volumes' is being added (indeed, one thicker than the original !). <br /><br />Having said this I wish to discretely remark upon someones description of a certain person as a 'fool of fools'. I am assuming that such a description was presented as hyperbole for I do not remember him as a person who could be so described. I am unaware of the immediate background and precise circumstances that have precipitated such a 'response'/ description, however, it would seem unlikely that it would be appreciated by the one so described nor by his family and children who might read such things.Lloyd Geldardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13039614811850603173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post-34608384700209831512011-05-07T23:23:57.928+10:002011-05-07T23:23:57.928+10:00Yes, a few good things have from out of Trent ... ...Yes, a few good things have from out of Trent ... like ... Council of Trent!!!<br /><br />Sam Druckersam druckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10410050665216630349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post-29950296529096769622011-05-05T19:31:12.377+10:002011-05-05T19:31:12.377+10:00I wonder what Trent had to say: he deleted his com...I wonder what Trent had to say: he deleted his comment (and then I deleted the 'deleted' message); but I'll bet it was good. Someone called Trent would have to give pretty good theology.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04827951993182450846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post-41772998942009625632011-05-03T21:49:26.875+10:002011-05-03T21:49:26.875+10:00Hey, now we know the company they keep: TdeC? I so...Hey, now we know the company they keep: TdeC? I sort of aren't surprised; but to have this dill being seriously taken in an evangelical diocese is galling: actually, that should be in any christian church!<br /><br />What gets me is that the teachers of the diocese can't see the materialism in 'theistic' evolution, or the rejection of the word of God in slipping in interpretations that make the word other than it is.Critiashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16237963162637891378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post-50627620683444563452011-05-03T13:36:23.261+10:002011-05-03T13:36:23.261+10:00We can all recall that giant of the theological an...We can all recall that giant of the theological and scientific world Gordon Cheng's comment that the koala's pouch is poorly designed. This is a tacit admission that God is not the creator but evolution. For even that fool of fools Cheng wouldn't blaspheme God by saying HE, Jesus, designed the pouch so poorly. So it must be evolution. That is, evolution created and not God. <br /><br />Fools like Stenning and co can't have it both ways: either God created by His Wisdom, directly and rapidly, or it was a process removed and, for all intents and purposes, acting independently from God.<br /><br />BTW, as I recall Stenning and his ISCAST group, a favourite of Moore and Jensen, are pagan followers of that heretic Teilhard de Chardin.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17496161581317710863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7649826198961930411.post-33647771407560410262011-05-03T00:56:05.233+10:002011-05-03T00:56:05.233+10:00It confounds me that people say that there can be ...It confounds me that people say that there can be an inconsistency in the Creation and the Word of God. <br /><br />It is the same God behind both so how can he be inconsistent in his revelation of what he has done and what he says he has done?<br /><br />Compromise to appease the world gives birth to a grotesque child.<br /><br />Sam Druckersam druckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10410050665216630349noreply@blogger.com