Holding their feet to the fire ...

[Jorge]

Explain why yom in the context of Genesis 1 must mean the 24 hour cycle (sunlit part followed by night or the other way around), despite evidence in the Bible that sometimes yom means the sunlit part of the 24-hour cycle ("day and night," where day is understood to be the sun-lit 12 hours) and other times it means an indefinite period of time if not preceded by a number as in, "40 yoms and 40 nights." Want to see more evidence? If so, I will have to buy Whitefield's book and read it. I believe I will be loaded for bear by the time I finish.

At least do some basic research before asking such ill-posed questions.
As resource assistance (all you'll need) I suggest the ICR, AiG and CMI websites.

Jorge

[Kbertsche]

But the "distraction" he tossed in was, you know, actual names of specialists. And you counter with "many many", naming none of them. And this is too bad, because I would really like to find a YEC expert in the ancient languages. Hopefully, they would use their knowledge of these languages and the cultures that spoke them, to do more than call everyone else idiots in them.

This may be a first, but I agree with BOTH Jorge and Jim on this.

An old friend of mine is a Hebrew scholar and a YEC. He knows the Hebrew language extremely well, and has studied the other pertinent ANE (ancient near eastern) cognate languages. But his expertise is restricted to language, and does not extend to ANE culture or archaeology. He discounts and rejects non-linguistic arguments such as those raised by John Walton or Paul Seely.

[lilpixieofterror]

"Ignore"??? "Error"???
My last reply to you was clear as a church bell.
I'm sorry about your reading comprehension handicap.
You may also want to lay off the 'hard' stuff'.

I can actually read at a college level Jorge, so my reading comprehension skills are quite good, which is too bad for you. Now how do you explain claiming that you need to believing in a 6,000 year old earth to be a 'true Christian' vs your own source that says that Augustine didn't believe the earth would be around 6,000 years old today? Is Augustine not a 'true Christian', using your own arguments and source against you?

[jordanriver]

Of course they did! There just isn't proof of it to be found by trying to use the Bible to construct scientific theories. That is not its purpose.


Jim

I think I agree.
The Bible's 'HOW TO' refers to salvation.

It's not there to 'scientifically' deduce what happened or how things happen.

It mostly tells us WHAT HAPPENED.

It's History makes a good TEST, though, to test other scientific "theories".

My position is, if somebody comes up with some interesting theory,
My response would be:
"Saay, that's an interesting theory...
....I wonder if that really happened. ..
....I know! I'll go check MY BIBLE"

Usually I probably wouldn't find any conflict
Like, not with Faraday
Not with Newton
Not with Kepler OR Galileo

....mostly not with Darwin
....just a problem with Adam and Eve' creation
.....that's all....

[phank]

Of course they did! There just isn't proof of it to be found by trying to use the Bible to construct scientific theories. That is not its purpose.


Jim

There might be a difference between people writing what they thought they knew about, and people writing externally-inspired material entirely consistent with what they thought they knew, but the distinction between the indetectible and the nonexistent is probably too subtle for me. Instead, I wonder: If they got all the science dead wrong, why should we place full confidence in their theology? After all, they had the same inspiration for both, did they not?

[oxmixmudd]

An excellent point. The authors of scripture wrote what they knew. It's not like they had a source of inspiration for something outside their cultural conventions.

Of course they did! There just isn't proof of it to be found by trying to use the Bible to construct scientific theories. That is not its purpose.


Jim

[phank]

SINCE we KNOW the scriptures speak according to cultural convention as it describes the physical world, it is FOOLHARDY to adopt an interpretation that relies on the text NOT speaking according to cultural convention!


Jim

An excellent point. The authors of scripture wrote what they knew. It's not like they had a source of inspiration for something outside their cultural conventions.

[phank]

I had ALREADY named two of them, Phankestein, thus proving once again your handicap in reading for comprehension. After you've reached a 5th-grade level of reading feel free to post again. Until then I suggest you remain quiet.

Jorge

Did that reply make you happier than just repeating the names?

[oxmixmudd]

Be Augustine's position "instantaneous", "6 seconds", "12 minutes" or "6 thousand years" - the point remains clear that he was NO friend to Theistic Evolutionists or Old Earth Creationists yet YOU PEOPLE time and time again quote him out of context / without exposing the TRUE picture. You yourself have done this many, many times over the years here at TWeb. Are you FINALLY repenting and correcting? That would be a good step.

Jorge, them implications of Augustine's treatment of Genesis and his words on the subject stand in opposition to the YEC approach, and lend support to any approach that recognizes those words are NOT directed and producing a scientific/literal understanding of the mechanism for creation. Augustine accepted the non-literal nature of the days, he understood the implications of spouting what would amount to nonsense derived from an overly literal reading relative to confirmed natural knowledge.

And his words on these issues you would do well to heed.

Don't trying to toss in a distraction. The point was that many, many Biblical Creationists are experts in Hebrew, Greek, Latin ... etc. And it is by drawing upon that expertise combined with decades of study that their conclusions validate the Biblical Creationist position. What my own studies have revealed is that ONLY by distorting the Bible in some way (as I have defined the term "distort") can a person retain megayears/gigayears in their "Christian" theology. Tap dance all you want, you cannot escape that reality.

Jorge

Jorge, you are ignoring the fact that there are many elements of Biblical interpretation which can only be properly realized by accommodating knowledge outside the text itself. The extremely metaphorical nature of Jesus promise to return 'soon' being one of them. But also, and more directly, the real STRUCTURE of the cosmos and the relationship of the Earth to the sun over and against the LITERAL meaning of the OT text as it describes elements of the same.

SINCE we KNOW the scriptures speak according to cultural convention as it describes the physical world, it is FOOLHARDY to adopt an interpretation that relies on the text NOT speaking according to cultural convention!


Jim

[klaus54]

Been away for a few days.

I can't believe we're still discussing YEC.

This is bizzaro world.

Pure and simple.

K54

P.S. Jorge, since YEC has been thoroughly falsified, and since according to the Jorgian/Cerebrian123/JorganRiverine/Herr Schwarzian Bible-God Interpretation it's conditio sine qua non for True Christianity(tm), is it time for me to convert to Dawkinsian Atheism?

[Jorge]

Looks like Jorge is just going to ignore me and hope his error disappears into a puff of smoke. When you can't answer, closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears, and screaming, "Lalalala! I can't hear you!" is a nice alternative.

"Ignore"??? "Error"???
My last reply to you was clear as a church bell.
I'm sorry about your reading comprehension handicap.
• Edited by a Moderator •

Jorge

Moderated By: Littlejoe

Jorge, we have repeatedly asked you to stop accusing others of "being under the influence". This needs to stop immediately. Also do not complain in this thread about moderation, take it to the Psychotherapy Room or PM a Mod

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

[Jorge]

But the "distraction" he tossed in was, you know, actual names of specialists. And you counter with "many many", naming none of them. And this is too bad, because I would really like to find a YEC expert in the ancient languages. Hopefully, they would use their knowledge of these languages and the cultures that spoke them, to do more than call everyone else idiots in them.

I had ALREADY named two of them, Phankestein, thus proving once again your handicap in reading for comprehension. After you've reached a 5th-grade level of reading feel free to post again. Until then I suggest you remain quiet.

Jorge

[lilpixieofterror]

Looks like Jorge is just going to ignore me and hope his error disappears into a puff of smoke. When you can't answer, closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears, and screaming, "Lalalala! I can't hear you!" is a nice alternative.

[phank]

Don't trying to toss in a distraction. The point was that many, many Biblical Creationists are experts in Hebrew, Greek, Latin ... etc. And it is by drawing upon that expertise combined with decades of study that their conclusions validate the Biblical Creationist position. What my own studies have revealed is that ONLY by distorting the Bible in some way (as I have defined the term "distort") can a person retain megayears/gigayears in their "Christian" theology. Tap dance all you want, you cannot escape that reality.

Jorge

But the "distraction" he tossed in was, you know, actual names of specialists. And you counter with "many many", naming none of them. And this is too bad, because I would really like to find a YEC expert in the ancient languages. Hopefully, they would use their knowledge of these languages and the cultures that spoke them, to do more than call everyone else idiots in them.

[Truthseeker]

The point was that many, many Biblical Creationists are experts in Hebrew, Greek, Latin ... etc. And it is by drawing upon that expertise combined with decades of study that their conclusions validate the Biblical Creationist position. What my own studies have revealed is that ONLY by distorting the Bible in some way (as I have defined the term "distort") can a person retain megayears/gigayears in their "Christian" theology. Tap dance all you want, you cannot escape that reality.

Explain why yom in the context of Genesis 1 must mean the 24 hour cycle (sunlit part followed by night or the other way around), despite evidence in the Bible that sometimes yom means the sunlit part of the 24-hour cycle ("day and night," where day is understood to be the sun-lit 12 hours) and other times it means an indefinite period of time if not preceded by a number as in, "40 yoms and 40 nights." Want to see more evidence? If so, I will have to buy Whitefield's book and read it. I believe I will be loaded for bear by the time I finish.