Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: jfd1776
Where does one start with this explanation? If Scripture will offend the non-Christian and the objective is to convince:

to anyone who might be open to the Founders’ message of limited government.

(a worthy effort)you would be better to leave it out lest you try and change God's Word that has bigger consequences than unlimited government would.

I’m a Christian with no reason to doubt the account.

I won't doubt your profession, however, by expressing doubt over the three days from persecutor to being baptized you cast doubt on the veracity of the Biblical account whether you want to or not.

However literal the description may have been, I still think he had been nursing doubts for some time beforehand.

Again, before Saul hit the road, the last thing he did before leaving was to go and get authorization to jail any Christians he found. No indication of second thoughts, no second guessing himself, nothing to indicate that mindset. By all indications, your analogy was stillborn.

Better to have kept the message secular. A 'Road to Damascus' experience is well enough known by itself without re-writing Scripture to fit an analogy. The re-write is offensive to 'fundamentalists' whoever they are. You engaged in a historical revision to make a point that could stand on its own merits. And outside of the 'merits of an argument', that's what libs do, since lib arguments have no merit.

10 posted on 09/08/2013 1:26:15 PM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: xone

You’re right, Xone. No argument here.


13 posted on 09/08/2013 3:16:21 PM PDT by jfd1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson