Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,352 Year: 3,609/9,624 Month: 480/974 Week: 93/276 Day: 21/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution and the seven Christian hypothesis on Creation ought all be taught
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 34 of 100 (690699)
02-15-2013 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by kofh2u
02-15-2013 11:42 AM


Re: all four are true...
It should be a clue when you have to add more words than were originally there in order for it to add up, that you are forcing the conclusion rather than finding it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by kofh2u, posted 02-15-2013 11:42 AM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by kofh2u, posted 02-16-2013 7:34 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(4)
Message 49 of 100 (690947)
02-18-2013 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by kofh2u
02-16-2013 7:34 PM


Re: all four are true...
It should be a clue when you have to add more words than were originally there in order for it to add up, that you are forcing the conclusion rather than finding it.
Brackets are just the grammatically correct why of interjecting explantions into a paragraph so to indicate they are not part of that text.
Yeah, but you've got more words in the brackets than you do from the Bible. You are forcing an a-priori interpretation into the text, rather than allowing the text to provide the interpretation.
All you are doing is smooshing your own understanding of modern science together with the words from the Bible. There's no reason whatsoever to think that your interpretation is the way its suppose to be understood.
You just want it to be your way so that the Bible doesn't get it wrong, but its not an honest approach to understanding what the Bible says. You could do what you're doing to almost any text and get it to line up with whatever you want when you get to add more words than were already there.
Check it out:
Jack and Jill (the first two people aka Adam & Eve) went up a hill (on which the Tree of Knowledge was sitting and which they ate the fruit from) to fetch a pail of water (that is to gain the knowledge from the tree to become like gods)
OMG look Jack and Jill is really about the Garden of Eden!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by kofh2u, posted 02-16-2013 7:34 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 100 (691022)
02-19-2013 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by kofh2u
02-18-2013 6:43 PM


Re: In the beginning of time is temporal indeed.
At least you atheistic bible bashers are now reduced to minutia and trivial subjective and personal criticism of Genesis.
Uh, no... not really. Your whole approach to it is bad. Here's how you're doing it: "If I assume that Genesis is correct, and that it matches what I think science says, then what do the words have to mean to hold up those assuptions?"
Its just bad theology. You're lying to yourself to uphold a delusion. Honesty is the best policy; The ancient jews were not writing about modern cosmology, they were creating their own mythical stories and trying to make sense of the world as they saw it from a bronze-age perspective.
And I'm not even an athiest nor a bible basher.
But don't pretend that makes the reader right and the bible wrong.
And that's what it ultimately comes down to: You are simply unable to accept that the Bible got something wrong.
Can you even admit one tiny error anywhere? How about Leviticus saying insects have four legs? Come on, its just a little slip of the tounge, right?
You can't, can you? That's gonna be your biggest problem in finding a respectable theology.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by kofh2u, posted 02-18-2013 6:43 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024