Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Interesting serious starting on PT

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
    I just read something that I think readers of this thread, especially the posters, should read
    http://deeperwaters.wordpress.com/20...as-literature/
    It bears on how the Bible should be read and interpreted. Might save a lot of posts and hours of "arguing."
    There are lots of opinions on "how the Bible should be read". Are you claiming this source is the best?

    FYI, the Bible is a collection of texts written at various times for various purposes. Without considering the culture of the people to whom it was written as well as the purpose, you're just whistling Dixie.

    Modern Evangelicalism is not the only Christian tradition either.

    K54

    P.S. BTW, I stopped reading this dreck after the author mentioned "fairy tales" -- since I know that's a pejorative used by fundies/evangelicals for any interpretation other than "literal" or "historical".
    Last edited by klaus54; 06-16-2014, 02:18 PM. Reason: p.s.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by klaus54 View Post

      P.S. BTW, I stopped reading this dreck after the author mentioned "fairy tales" -- since I know that's a pejorative used by fundies/evangelicals for any interpretation other than "literal" or "historical".
      Which proves that you're an blustering idiot. Read the whole article. I dare you. You'll feel embarrassed after accusing ApologiaPhoenix of being a fundy.

      ETA: You know what, that came out wrong, and I apologize. You should however reconsider reading the article. Your assumptions and misconceptions about it couldn't be more wrong, even if you tried. Just because our resident conspiracy nut linked to it doesn't mean that it's a bad article.
      Last edited by JonathanL; 06-16-2014, 02:28 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
        I'll answer that : Rabid denials to the contrary notwithstanding, the reason why O-Mudd and those like-minded reject even the possibility of the Bible's literal Creation account is simply that THEIR version of how things happened cannot co-exist with the Bible's version - one of them has to go. And so, Truthseeker, guess which one O-Mudd et al. have freely chosen to toss out?

        Jorge
        Just can't stand to let a contrary view have its own voice can you? When you must try try to pre-empt or shout down the other fellows arguments, you've already lost the side of reason.

        Jim
        My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

        If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

        This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

        Comment


        • You know what, Klaus? I read the article again, and I realized that you probably didn't even try to read the article and that you barely skimmed it. Because if you really had read the article (as opposed to whatever it was that you were doing when looking at it) up until Nick mentioned fairy tales it would have been impossible for you to come up with the conclusion that it was written by a fundy that tried to argue for a woodenly literal interpretation of the Bible.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
            Oxymixmudd, why do you reject the possibility that the Creation story was handed down from Noah's family? As time went on, the story became distorted into many creation stories, two of which are Babylonian and Egyptian, what you cited. Moses needed to get the real God-approved version from the Lord God.
            I don't reject it as a possibility. But neither is there any evidence to support it. The biggest problem with the notion of a global flood is that the evidence for flooding points to multiple floods across eons of time. No body of global evidence correlates to a single event. This was tried long ago and failed. Early gelogists went looking for a flood and found many. And they found evidence of deep time far beyond the scope of any Biblically derivable date given a historical/concordist interpretation.

            I wish it were different. But that's just yhe way it is.

            Jim
            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

            Comment


            • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
              I don't reject it as a possibility. But neither is there any evidence to support it. The biggest problem with the notion of a global flood is that the evidence for flooding points to multiple floods across eons of time. No body of global evidence correlates to a single event. This was tried long ago and failed. Early gelogists went looking for a flood and found many. And they found evidence of deep time far beyond the scope of any Biblically derivable date given a historical/concordist interpretation.
              That makes you seem to have rejected Glenn's notion of a flood that involved only the Mediterranean region and neighboring areas.
              The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

              [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

              Comment


              • Jorge, have anyone ever started a thread to examine why all the various Genesis dates calculated close to 10k years should not be treated as minimums?
                The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                  Jorge, have anyone ever started a thread to examine why all the various Genesis dates calculated close to 10k years should not be treated as minimums?
                  No, and I wouldn't start one. I mean, why? The chronologies clearly stated in Scripture have allowed many people to calculate the age of the Earth/universe. 10K years is regarded by most as an UPPER limit. But there's really no powerful reason to reject the ~6,000 years.

                  BTW, the Israeli year today is 5,774 Anno Mundi (Latin for "in the year of the world";
                  Hebrew is: לבריאת העולם = "from the creation of the world"). Funny how that kind'a works ...

                  Jorge

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                    The chronologies clearly stated in Scripture have 6allowed many people to calculate the age of the Earth/universe. 10K years is regarded by most as an UPPER limit. But there's really no powerful reason to reject the ~6,000 years.
                    You ask why, but the point is, I see no reason to take 10,000 years ago as the upper limit. But see the next response, below.


                    BTW, the Israeli year today is 5,774 Anno Mundi (Latin for "in the year of the world";
                    Hebrew is: לבריאת העולם = "from the creation of the world").
                    I admit that's an impressive reason. But you said most people take 10,000 years ago as the upper limit. How come 10,000 -5774 = 4226 years somehow that the Bible does not cover?? What else might it not cover?
                    The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                    [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                      No, and I wouldn't start one. I mean, why? The chronologies clearly stated in Scripture have allowed many people to calculate the age of the Earth/universe. 10K years is regarded by most as an UPPER limit. But there's really no powerful reason to reject the ~6,000 years.

                      BTW, the Israeli year today is 5,774 Anno Mundi (Latin for "in the year of the world";
                      Hebrew is: לבריאת העולם = "from the creation of the world"). Funny how that kind'a works ...

                      Jorge
                      Did you ask a rabbi about that?

                      K54

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                        No, and I wouldn't start one. I mean, why?
                        Yeah, why? Jorge just knows his unsupported opinion is right and no amount of physical evidence can ever change his mind. Just like Ken Ham opined in his Bill Nye debate.

                        Jorge does blustering religious fanaticism, not science.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                          That makes you seem to have rejected Glenn's notion of a flood that involved only the Mediterranean region and neighboring areas.
                          Not sure what you mean. The mediterranean infilling is a well known event. If it were not 5,000,000 years in the past I wpuld think it would be the perfect candidate flood. My personal opinion is we have yet to discover that event. I expect it to be massive, like a tsunami from a small asteroid impact int the mediterranean. But not global as the YECs interpret it.


                          Jim
                          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                            Which proves that you're an blustering idiot. Read the whole article. I dare you. You'll feel embarrassed after accusing ApologiaPhoenix of being a fundy.

                            ETA: You know what, that came out wrong, and I apologize. You should however reconsider reading the article. Your assumptions and misconceptions about it couldn't be more wrong, even if you tried. Just because our resident conspiracy nut linked to it doesn't mean that it's a bad article.
                            Ok, I'll try. Conspiracy Nut's recommendation was a red flag in addition to the "fairy tale" YEC pejorative.

                            I'll read the whole thing. But it's not like I'm unfamiliar with the history of the compilation of the Bible nor its various interpretation paradigms.

                            K54

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                              Ok, I'll try. Conspiracy Nut's recommendation was a red flag in addition to the "fairy tale" YEC pejorative.
                              Describing the Bible as a bunch of fairy tales isn't really a YEC pejorative, it's a (fundy) atheist pejorative.

                              Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                              I'll read the whole thing. But it's not like I'm unfamiliar with the history of the compilation of the Bible nor its various interpretation paradigms.

                              K54
                              I think you'll find that you're in agreement with most if not all points in the article.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by grmorton View Post
                                Gee, I don't know what to say. I consider it the worst possible insult to say that all I am interested in is winning. That means, that no matter what I say, you will interpret it as nothing to actually listen to, but merely some flotsam in an amoral attempt to win the argument. I have defined what I consider truth, and I consider that the only methodology to arrive at truth is an experimental/testing method. Nothing else will lead us to truth. It is the methodology upon which science is based.
                                Glenn, I think you have taken this issue to its most extreme form, and as a result taken it to mean something far more negative than was intended. You interpretation of my statement includes the additional word 'ALL'.

                                Glenn: "...to say that ALL I am interested in is winning".

                                That is not what was said. I said:

                                Jim: "Yes, I recognize that the goal from your perspective is to 'win'."

                                and it was a response to you saying this

                                "I am a chess player. I always try to anticipate what the other guy is going to respond with. One guy that worked for me told another fellow that "Glenn's questions would seem off the wall but that he was about 10 steps down the road and he would be laying traps for you." That guy captured me well.

                                So I would ask if perhaps you might consider the possibility that portraying yourself as "laying traps" "10 steps down the road" is not a particularly good metaphor for 'an interest in open, honest discussion'.

                                However, you have seem to have taken offense at this, and ended the conversation and so that is that I guess. I am sorry it turned out that way. I thought we might have been onto something with looking at the axioms for measuring truth, but we never got there.


                                Jim
                                Last edited by oxmixmudd; 06-17-2014, 10:13 AM.
                                My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                                If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                                This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X