This is what quickly becomes boring with these types, when one has to spill never-ending font in unraveling the twisted knot this triumph of tedium consider to be "discussion". Of course, at any point if you decline to continue to play his straight man, he pounds his chest in victory. Sad.<quoted text> Yep, I said that.
<quoted text> Yep, I said that.
<quoted text> Nope. I didn't say that.
Those "other words" are not my words. They're your words.
I said "all Abrahamic faiths accepted the flood, the seven day creation etc..., as definitely real. Christians, too."
Can you identify what the word is that makes a difference?
<quoted text> Yep, that's true too. But I wasn't speaking about individuals that may have had variances with the doctrines.
Individuals that followed the - faiths - doubted the biblical story as representing any sort of actual reality, but the faiths - proper - adhered to the strict biblical story.
Some faiths still do take the biblical account as literal.
Within that literal category, there are individuals that do not believe it to be literal, but still are members of the faith(denominations/doctrine etc...).
All the lonely people,
where do they all come from.....