alt.education

Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>On Aug 26, 2:42 pm, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
>> >> That makes the assumption that God by His nature must be bound by the
>> >> laws that He imposes on man, and in a manner understandable by man.
>> >> That assumption is unnecessary and peculiar to your theology.
>>
>> >Yes. My interpretation is
>>
>> Nobody CARES what your interpretation is.
>
>Apparently YOU do...see below.

^Then you have misunderstood.

>> >I believe God's word to be true.
>>
>> Meaningless. I've already raised the question of what "true" means
>> (literal or otherwise), as well as what "God's word" is and whether
>> the Bible is a work of man or of God.
>
>For someone that says my opinion is of no value, you spend a lot of
>time trying to destroy it.

No, I spend a lot of time showing WHY it is of no value. I don't need
to "destroy it". It is worthless and no threat. But if you are going
to post nonsense to an educational newsgroup, I intend to answer it.

>If truth is relative, I cannot be wrong.

Of course you can. You might think you can jump off that tall
building safely, since you are a "Christian superhero", and you can
believe that up to the moment when you become a pancake. Then you
will clearly be wrong.

>..only wrong to you.

And everyone else. You might be "right" to you, but so does any
nutcase who thinks that he is Napoleon (or Superman, or maybe some
sort of "Christian superhero").

>If truth is objective,

There is a concept of 'objective truth' but we have no access to that
truth.

>your opinion is not truth

Of course not. It is my opinion.

lojbab