Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmer G. White
Dotty dear,
I have some trouble following your volatile logic. Please, bear with me. I'm going to try to form a synthesis of your last two messages.
What I get is as follows:
Are you sure that this is not a non sequitur? You claim that because the Bible mentions real places, it is not real but it is incorrect. If we extrapolate from this assertion and look at some of the authors that you probably revere, we get some quite interesting results.
Mr. Darwin (the heretic) wrote The Voyage of the Beagle in the 1830's. The observations he made eventually caused the terrible debacle of The Origin of Species, but that is irrelevant right now. What is pivotal is that Mr. Darwin references several real places in his book.
As we can see, he mentions among others Rio, Chile, Peru, Austria, New Zealand, Tahiti, and Godless England. Let us look at your argument one more time and apply it to Mr Darwin's oeuvre.
You're thus claiming that Mr. Darwin's works are incorrect if they mention real places. What does this mean for the evolutionary theory? Let us examine The Origin of Species! Are there any real places referenced in that book? Actually, the first sentence contains a real place called South America (Mexico).
You've just proven evolution wrong!
Incidentally, witchcraft is bad because Jesus has explicitly classified it as evil.
1 Samuel 15:23
For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
Yours in Christ,
Elmer  |
No I meant
your argument for the Bible being real is incorrect as many other made up stories have used real world places.
Also if magic is used for good e.g healing, building then why is it bad? In Harry Potter magic is used in both good and bad ways