Ron Cusano

I tell you what then, when the Taliban and Osama come for a visit, you be the first one to greet them with a kiss!

Well, I guess that shows what you're all about, doesn't it! Yeah God has a sense of humor and gave us sex for enjoyment as well as procreation, but everything has it's place, and crude jokes in a public forum certainly does not glorify the Lord. At least not the Lord I serve!

I nominate you!

You have absolutely no grasp of the use of context, theology or Bible interpertation, view the Bible as allogorical, so how could you possible understand.

For the same reason you claim to know otherwise!

I was not talking about all Muslim, I was talking about the Muslim extremists who saw off peoples heads!!

First of all, Catholic and Geeek Orthodox students of scripture are not Conservative , are very liberal, and do not accept the literal understand of the Bible. They interpret it allogorically, meaning it is all symbolic and open to mean whatever you want it to mean. Secondly, Conservative students of scripture, meaning those from non-liberal foundations, all agree of the major doctrines of the faith concerning salvation, which is the backbone of true Christianity. Everything else takes second place. If yolu understood theology, you would understand this.

I think it is a little off-color for a Christian. Don't you?

So I guess you are volenteering then!!

Except the the Word of God says that "the scriptures are not open to any private interpertation", and that the one (the Professor) that teaches us is the Holy Spirit of God. That is another good argument against "private interpertation" in the form of a non-literal understqanding of scripture. Virtually all Conservative students of the scriptures are in complete agreement with the major and most important doctrines and beliefs, especially regarding salvation. It is onle when you get into liberal, non-literal interpretation that you see all the disagreement of the foundational issues of the faith.

I get the impression that you are genuinely confused and I can understand that. I was trying to simplify it, and not being a wiseguy about it. Let me leave you with this for what it's worth . . . If there is a God, which I believe there is, and if God were to communicate with His creation, which I believe He does, then an infallible, all knowing, all loving God would do so in a perfect, infallible manner. Can you conceive of God giving us information about Him and what He wants from us that was not literal, understandable, that was open to private interpetion and something that could not be comprehended? To provide us with a Bible that cannot be taken at face value is against the very nature of a perfect God.

She certainly has a way with words, http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/03/01/ann-coulter-let-the-libs-eat-tofu/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.humanevents.com%2Farticle.php%3Fid%3D19625&frame=true

That is why God, in his wisdom, called some to be Pastors, teachers and evangelists so that others could also learn, just like colleges provide professors to teach the rest of us. It's when you don't pay attention to the professor that you fail to grasp the course! Should we abandon all sore of learning because everyone understand according to their intelligence or it may mean something different depending ofd where they are in life? There is no difference here!

No, I don't! I believe the Bible is 100% true, accurate and literal in the proper context. If I can't believe and rely on the whole book, I might just as well throw it away, because it's worth then becomes what I choose to make it. That is the difference. You either take the whole package, or leave it. There are ho half measures with scripture.

I disagree! Understanding the Bible is a growing and learning process. If you were studying and trying to learn biology, you could open the books, pull out a few sentences or paragraphs and they would make little sense to you. After a certain amount of study and learning, you can understand those sentences and paragraphs. You could also say, every human being will interpert the biology books differently, therefore they can't be taken literally. That makes no sense at all. I have been studying scripture for over 30 years, so I would not expect someone with only a passing understanding to know what I have learned. The Bible is a book(s) of literal fact, and understanding the whole of scripture takes time and effort. It is not like reading comic books! uote=marjon9;403669]The part that you don't get Ron is that it is human beings who are the ones reading and interpreting the Bible. Let's assume that the Bible is the word of God and it means exactly what it says and it should be taken literally. Even with that assumption each human being will understand the Bible to mean something different. That's because a) humans are different, have different backgrounds and different levels of experience and intelligence, and words have different meanings, can be ambiguous and are subject to interpretation. This is true even if each person intends to read the words literally and give them a literal interpretation. That's why it is totally meaningless to argue that the Bible should be taken literally. That argument means nothing when it is humans -- fallable, varied humans -- who are doing the reading.

Here is an example of what the context makes it clear that the meaning is not literal. Jesus said. "I am the bread of life"! Taken literally, that would mean that Jesus was actually a piece of bread. The rule of thumb in interpreting is what the contect clearly indicates that the meaning can not be literal, you look for another clear meaning. We know that Jesus was a human and not a loaf of Wonder breat, so we look at what was said, to whom, under what circumstances, etc. to determine what He was speaking about. We do this all the time with everything we say, read and do, but people have a hard time grasping this when it comes to the Bible. That is where context comes into play. According to so many here, if we take the Bible literally, then Jesus would actually be bread! Does this make any sense to you?

It's not confusing!! My question is an honest and legitimate question! If you are basing your faith on what is in the book, how do you know what to believe if you can't take it to mean what it actually says? Let me give you an example! Jesus said "no man comes to the Father except through the Son"! Do you believe that literally? Jesus also spoke of "the days of Noah", referring to the Old Testament account. Do you believe Jesus there? Many here who profess to believe the Bible, but not literally, say they don't believe the Noah account. How do you pick and choose what to believe. It's a real question, and we are not talking about context here.

OK, so you can't explain it or don't understand why you believe what you say you believe! I am not asking you to prove anything to me. For the last 2+ months we have discussed religion and the Bible here, and I have given you a reason for everything I said I believed, You may not agree, but I at least have a reason for my beliefs and tried to make my case. I was just asking you to tell me the logic for yours. Apparently you just don't know!

Give me a break! Since there have only been 2 or 3 impeachments in the history of our country, it's hard to make a case that this is a habit of Republicians. How off the wall is that logic. He, didn't they try to assinate Regan?? Wasn't he a Republican?? Duh! Monica was a "little intern vixen" so that makes it all her fault?? Hello! It takes two! Clinton was PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and publically and repeatedly lied to the whole country, and it's all Monica's fault? How blind are you!

Exactly! So you agree with that then??

So help me to understand then! If the Bible is not literal and does not mean what it actually says, than how do you know what to believe and have faith in??? Can you explain it??

Well the Tired-Old-Man for one!!

That is the Liberal party line of course, but the fact is there is absolutely no proof of any of it. Just because the WMD's were not found does not mean they did not exist and were transported to Syria or some other country, which was speculated. The impeachment process is for grevious offence in office, and if this rubbish were fact, the process would be under way. The fact of the matter is, the Democrats have been trying for 2-years to find impeachable offences with no results. Saying, "We don't impeach" and "we try to work with the government and elected officials we have" is so laughable that I don't think even you could believe it. The Democrats would LOVE to be able to impeach this president.

If you took the time to read my question you would notice that I didn't say you didn't base you faith on the Bible, I addressed my question to those who said they are Christian but DO NOT base their faith on the Bible! If that is not you, then it's was not directed at you, was it? And you talk about me not understanding.

If it isn't literal that how can it be accurate? Do you just pick and choose what you want to believe as literal, and the rest discard because you don't like it? No, this was never dealth with before, just evaded!!