Cont:
The prophets identified natural events as being in the timing of only one God. However earlier Job a grandson of Abraham through Esau worshipped God by the name Aloahh, and he contended that she would be revealed in the Earth to confirm his vindication of being guiltless before the only one God. Aloahh was worshipped as God by the Temanites in Edom, and by Jacob while he spent time there. As I have previously said, the windstorm his Gnostic counsellors attributed to the god of the Earth found in Job chapter 1: 19 that had taken Job's children, he maintains Eloahh had revealed herself in the desert storm 38: 1. In reference to his children he said, "God has given and God has taken away". The text of Job has had updates throughout its history as it was recited drama, so the Post Exile Jews revealed YHWH as appearing to Job and excelled over any action attributed to El the god of the Earth. Compare the Gnostic Elihu speech in defence of El in Ch 34 - 37 with YHWH speech in chapter 38 - 41 and the epilogue.

For Christians we make no great deal about specific names, but we emphasise character and behaviour to identify God. Morality only applies to man and his relationship to character. It is our claim that the historical Jesus fully revealed the grace and forgiveness of God by his moral character and behaviour. For us he expressed God incarnate in character and behaviour - not because he was immaculately conceived as a human god that some uphold. God is revealed today in character and the life of those reborn of His spirit.

Oliver Pericles quickly go over to Morgo K's blog for a creationist troll feeding frenzy http://webdiary.smh.com.au/index.html.
Now we will have a plague of creationist fundie trolls thinking they know something other than being sophists.

Should have had that don't feed the fundie trolls sign out.

Some people will never learn talking with them only encourages them Aslan is proof of that.

Yet another difference of opinion here, Aslan.

>>As far as putting your position forward goes, you have certainly made lots of assertions, and those assertions are contrary to my position. However, I have offered supporting arguments for my position. You have not.<<

You assert that you have put forward arguments for your position, but you don't back this up with evidence, I notice. Could that be because when you did put forward your "supporting arguments", they didn't actually hold water? Like your infamous double-syllogism, for example?

As for the contention that I didn't provide evidence of your distortion of history, you only need to review your own posts on the meaning you ascribed to the word "belief". At one point you insisted that a belief could be a fact - "Do you tentatively believe your phone number?", which was entirely at odds with the meaning ascribed by the writer of the original post. In other words, you had deliberately distorted the meaning, in order to make your point. Which I did point out to you at the time, and which Oliver later confirmed.

The only reason these exchanges descend into ad hominem is because you adopt tactics like these.

But one thing puzzles me. In a Forum such as this, the idea is that people offer opinions. If you believe that there are in fact no such things as opinions, and that all issues can be resolved by reference to divine absolutes, why on earth do you post here? It must be very frustrating for you.

Aslan said "What planet are you living on? The progress made in the past 300 years is the result of Christianity. Relativism has only caused regression. The massive increase in STDs and the HIV/AIDS pandemic is a good example of the destruction caused by relativism."

What a funny world you live in Aslan you really need to seek a mental health care. Why do you believe you have all the answers? Your self delusion about your knowledge of even the bible is at odds with the facts. But then again the mentally ill never let reality get in the way of their delusions. Seek some help Aslan.

Pericles, Kenny and Oliver cases like Aslan and those P.hD's and the the one with the sci Hon's on Margo's Ev vs SC debate should be studied by psychologists on how intelligent individuals who can be proficient in individual academic fields, can be under such extreme confirmation bias and denial that they will seriously argue ludicrous positions like a 6-10000 year old Earth, that humans walked with dinosaurs and that we had basically all remaining animal life on Earth on a wooden ark durring a world flood that their is no evidence for.

Like alcoholics, addicts and compulsive gamblers in denial, these people have lost what rationality/free will they had left on any subject that doesn't conform to their christian schema.

For Aslan and his ilk operate within the constraint of a Christian schema and cognitive dissonance where all information is rationalized to conform to a literalist Christian schema regardless of facts or contradictions. They have no choice but to think this way.

Aslan,

THIS FORUM

Pericles makes a good point when he highlights the real purpose of this Forum and similar forums. Herein, we exchange ideas and hopefully grow understanding through synthesis. Having too entrenched positions makes our cyber environment highly adversoral.

Thus,

Hypothetically, IF it is closer to reality, is it not better for say a person, who previously did not believe that Jesus did not at all to tentatively accept that person into history. Relatedly, is it not better to tentatively accept the geophysical univserse is billions of years old, when most evidence suggests this dating to be the case. What I am saying is that we (especially you need to be more flexible).

The affixed position of extreme religionism has one restrained and unable to evolve. If your shoes are glued to the floor, try undoing are shoe laces and walking freely.

LIBERAL RELIGIONISM

Maybe the gap between a fundamenalist Christians and freethinkers/athiests & agnostics is too big for your to accomodate into your value sets. Herein, Aslan, I ask you, what is your take on "Christians" who don't believe the World was created in 4004 BCE and the OT is allegorical?

These folk probably believe in the concept of "substitutionary ransom" and might debate "faith" verses "deeds" but do acknowledge the enlightenmight as the ENLIGHTENMENT and accept the Bible as an ancient "religious" but highly unscientific set of books. These people believe aircraft fly because of the applied application of physics.

ENDARKENMENT

What is wrong and/or frightening about progress? Why would you prefer the Dark Ages over the Twenty-First Century? Is Science "automatically" wrong, when it challenges the creeds of early, superstitious tribal peoples?

BIBLE

How can one (tenatively) "prove" the religiosity of the Bible? No self reference, please.