|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Message to all Creationists | |||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member  Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Buzsaw writes: 1. If the methodology is different than the reading of the record, it makes God out a liar, impostor and deceiver. Nobody thinks that it is important that the story of the "Good Samaritin" needs to be literally true to give us truth. The Genesis account tells us that God created all that there is and that we are fallen creatures. The Genesis story does not have to be literally true to be true.
Buzsaw writes: 2. If God had no hands on role in the design of what is observed, it immensely diminishes the glory due to God which is being attributed to natural and random operatives I think that we should let God create in the way He thinks is best. He doesn't need us to tell him how He should do it.
Buzsaw writes: 3. It works to make God in the minds of his intelligent creatures nothing but a bystander relative to creation. It seems to me that the creation of the universe is a pretty impressive feat no matter how He went about it. I don't understand how you think that the design of an evolutionary process for creation makes God any more of a bystander than any other form of creation.
Buzsaw writes: 4. Imo the Buzsaw IDist creationist ideology is more compatible to the LOT in that all energy existing has eternally existed in, by and through eternal God. As well it calls for eternal management/work relative to all existing energy. Any form of creation requires energy.
Buzsaw writes: 5. The message of Christ, the gospel stands or falls on the Genesis record. If it be myth, it calls the claims of Jesus to be the son of God and his references to the Genesis record into question. What applies to God (the 4 above points) all apply also to the credibility of his messianic son whom God sent to earth on his mission of salvation and eventual establishment of God's millennial kingdom on earth. God can speak to people through myth. Truth can come out of myth. I absolutely believe that Jesus is the Messiah. I absolutely believe in a resurrected Jesus. How many times do you hear a sermon that talks about the parables of Jesus as being literally true? That would be the same way in which Jesus spoke of the stories in Genesis.
Buzsaw writes: 6. If ID creationists had been more proactive in the origins debate likely they would be more knowledgeable as to how to support the IDist POV. Not likely. I believe in intelligent design. I don't believe in the Intelligent Design movement. I believe in creation but I am not a Creationist. Everybody is entitled to my opinion. 
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Buzsaw writes: When parables were told by Jesus he so designated. That isn't actually correct. Jesus just started into the story. Look at the "Good Samaritin". Jesus just starts off - "A man was going from Jerusalem to Jericho". He doesn't say here is a metaphorical story. Likewise the story of the "Prodigal Son". He starts by saying "There was a man who had two sons." It is common sense that tells you that He is speaking metaphorically. Why can't you use that same common sense in reading the creation stories? I'd suggest that the reason is that you insist on reading it with the cultural conditioning of the 21st century. Jesus' audience were 1st century Jews and the OT was for even earlier generations. Look at the long list of parables that Jesus told. That was the way that they passed along a truth. Something can be true without being factually true.
Buzsaw writes: 6. I'm not as gullible as you. If Genesis were thought to be a myth, I'd have no reason to think the gospels were as well. I've noticed when people have a weak argument they resort trying to denigrate those who disagree with them by labeling them with words like gullible. If I am gullible so are people like St. Augustine, C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright. I know I've quoted this more than once before but here is a quote from the 15th Chap. of Miracles by C.S. Lewis.
quote: Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Buzzsaw writes: That's not how it works. When parable was used the text so indicated. For example: "Baalam took up his parable and said"... Numbers 23:7, 24:3"Job continued his parable..." Job 27:1 ".....my mouth in a parable I will utter..." Psalms 49:4 ".....speak a parable to the house...." Ezekiel 17:2...." ".....one shall take up a parable...." Micah 2:4 ".....the parable of the sower......" Matthew 13:18..." ".....the parable of the tares...." Matthew 13:36 ".....learn a parable of the fig tree...." Mark 13:28 There are more but that should suffice to make my point. I have never questioned that it often points out that a parable is being used. So then following your logic the 2 that I picked out at random, (Good Samaritin and Prodigal Son) have to be literally true, as the text does not indicate that these stories are parables. By your logic it can only be a parable when it is literally pointed out and therefore, also by your logic then if you don't believe that those 2 stories are literally true then they have no value in themselves, and furthermore, none of the rest of the Bible is of any use either.
Buzzsaw writes: This reasoning leads one to pick and choose what is parable and what is not. I suppose John 14:6 would be to you a parable since you likely are one who has a problem of the literacy of that one. Jesus's claim there is that he is the only way to God and eternal life and that no man comes to God but through him. I have no trouble reading that literally but at the same time I don't see it as excluding non-Christians. (I do agree however that there will be some very surprised Atheists. )
Buzzsaw writes: An objective reading of the Genesis record is that it is history and certainly there is no indication in the text whatsoever that it is myth, metaphor or parable. I think that there is every indication that it is 100% truthful but much less than 100% historically true. Exactly the same as the 2 previously mentioned parables.
Buzzsaw writes: Imo gullibility is associated with dogedly adhering to a weak argument. I've substantiated that your argument is weak and unfounded. Ya right  Edited by GDR, : No reason given. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Buzsaw writes: You're apply some stawmen regarding my position. My position/argument/point has not been that metaphor cannot be useful and good. My position is that the Genesis record and other texts which have no indication textually as being parable, metaphor or myth are meant to be certain places, people, things and events etc. In scripture they do have value in themselves to the contexts in which they exist. All you have done is come up with rationalizations for not reading the texts literally. In other words you ar picking and choosing which parts to read literally and which parts you don't read literally. I do the same thing. We just don't agree about which parts are literal and which parts aren't. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
