what do creationists believe? (robert true creation)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert:
Yes, Peter, muslims do believe that Mohammed was the "seal of the prophets" but they are wrong. since they "revere" the Christian Holy bible as God's Word they should read it more closely ...

---

And how do you know they are wrong? Do you have evidence you can present - or do you just "know" it in your bones? [b] [QUOTE]Insofar as the accusation that God is a "trickster" such is not the case. Darwinists are basing their views of the universe on their interpretations of the world around them.[/b][/QUOTE]You yourself base your views on your interpretation of the world around you. Your very belief that there is such a book as the Bible, your belief that it represents anything at all, your belief that it is not merely a pointless mish-mash of history and law and poetry is nothing more than interpretation and inference. Your very belief that there ever walked a man named Jesus on earth is an interpretation and inference of that which you can not directly observe. Your decision to believe in the teaching of one as opposed to another is an interpretation.[b] [QUOTE]If you deceive yourselves into thinking that the world is something that God specifically says it is not, then how can you blame God for your delusions?[/b][/QUOTE]And how do you know that you are not deluded in thinking that your god says what you think she says?You cannot accuse others of misintepretation if you have nothing to offer but interpretation yourself.

quote:

---

You will probably say that the Bible is subject to interpretation, and, it is true that people have distorted phrases in the Bible in order to prove some arcane point. However, and I will quote the Westminister Confession of Faith again:

​

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not many but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.

---

It is, of course, a matter of interpretation that this is the infallible rule of interpretation! It is a matter of interpretation as to whether another passage speaks more clearly to the sense of another passage. It is a matter of interpretation whether the Westminster Confession represents a valid Christian Confession of Faith.It seems, Robert, that all you have to offer is bigotry: reason and logic appear to have abandoned you in the last week or so.Remember your Confession - it is quite clear that while the confession does say the internal evidence of the Bible is abundant evidence that it is the Word of God, it goes on to say "our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts."This was drummed into me effectively as a child - one can provide as much evidence as you want that the Bible is true, but to really know it is true requires the touch of the Holy Spirit. SO don't be too hard on people here when they attack the evidence - they don't have your advantages!