Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK? And? So what? It's not an essential of the faith. What we believe regarding the Nephilim does not define us as being orthodox believers in Chrisitanity or not.
Maybe it's because the story is not an essential aspect of the faith. I have no problem disagreeing with someone and still calling them a Christian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude
Unless, of course, they're Mormons, right?
I mean, a fundie has to draw a line in the sand somewhere, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
I've never suggested I disagree with a Mormon based on the story of the Nephilim and Noah. Perhaps you're misunderstanding me. There are some things that are essential. Katzpur would happily tell you that I'm not a mormon--because there are esseential beliefs one must hold to be called a mormon. Why in the world would it not work the other way?
You simply refuse to get that YOUR idea of what is essential to be a Christian is NOT the standard. The differences between you and Katz are INTERNAL ones because you both claim to follow Christ which is the ONLY definition of Christian that matters. All others are human vanity and hubris.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,930,909 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
OK? And? So what? It's not an essential of the faith. What we believe regarding the Nephilim does not define us as being orthodox believers in Chrisitanity or not.
So, does that mean the bible is not to be taken literally in all cases?
So, does that mean the bible is not to be taken literally in all cases?
Define "literal", please.
Oftentimes "literal" is taken to mean that we can read it and understand it the way we think it reads. But the proper understanding would be to take it as the way the author intended it. In the context of Genesis 6, it does not indicate that demons/angels were having babies with human women.
But if a fellow Christian disagrees with me regarding what the original author meant in that passage, there is room for discussion.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,930,909 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Define "literal", please.
Oftentimes "literal" is taken to mean that we can read it and understand it the way we think it reads. But the proper understanding would be to take it as the way the author intended it.
Who determines the "way the author intended it"? How could one know?
Quote:
In the context of Genesis 6, it does not indicate that demons/angels were having babies with human women.
Yes, actually it does. Here is a Christian persepective and dissection, showing a couple of different views.
Neither one dismiss what I stated originally... beings from up high came down and got down right frisky with female humans, and then produced the 'giants'. Apparently these beings from up high only picked the good looking ones.
The question is, Ginger or Mary-Ann? Red head or blonde? Which do you think they came down and had 'carnal knowledge' of?
I've never suggested I disagree with a Mormon based on the story of the Nephilim and Noah. Perhaps you're misunderstanding me.
There are some things that are essential. Katzpur would happily tell you that I'm not a mormon--because there are esseential beliefs one must hold to be called a mormon. Why in the world would it not work the other way?
The issue is not whether you're a Mormon; it's whether I'm a Christian. And what makes you think your list of "essential beliefs" is the official one?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.