Many times, not as often as before, I get into an argument with a liberal. Most of the time a liberal will affirm the existence of a god, but will live their life as if that god has no law, no justice and no care for what man does at all. Their god is nonchalant and really has no standard which he (or she, to fit their politically correct agenda) goes by. The liberal usually argues from outdated, popular and contradicting information they they’ve heard from wimpy humanist God haters, television and possibly well produced movies like Zeitgeist (compliment exaggerated). All of their arguments can be easily refuted and used as a weapon against them.
If that weren’t enough to make you chuckle, let’s examine their argumentation for a fallible Bible.
“Many Christians today believe that the Bible must be without error or it can no longer be our standard of truth. This belief is completely illogical because it was written by humans and all humans make mistakes.”
Talk about an understanding of logic and reasoning, far beyond what I will ever be able to grasp. Man physically wrote something down, therefore God was not in control. Man did something, God was not a part of it. Man is in control of himself, God is not in control of him. The presupposition is that man has free will or that man can do something perfectly apart from God, and even possibly that God is limited to using man, because man isn’t prefect and therefore if it has anything to do with man it will always be flawed. Simply put, this liberal didn’t do his research.
” There is a wealth of knowlledge and much can be learned just as you can learn from history, archeology, theology and all doctrines are profitable for correction if needed and instruction if worthy but the paper and ink is not God. God is a spirit and those that worship God must do it in spirit and in truth, not in tradition or popular belief.”
So which doctrine are profitable, and which ones are worthy? Who decides this and what is the standard? This particular liberal accepts bits and pieces from various religions, then applies them to his own system of theology. The problem is that the liberal cannot justify which teachings are infallible and trustworthy and which ones are not. “Well Jesus said to love one another, and He also claimed to be God but I don’t believe that part”. Why not? Why do you believe that Jesus actually said to love one another, yet He was wrong when he claimed deity? Why pick one over the other, and more importantly how do you know which one He said and it’s accuracy?
By: Evan Wheeler