it seems like creationists arn't looking 4 the truth

[AV1611VET]

IMHO, it takes maturity to realise that whether or not the Bible is literal at any point it doesn't detract from the Truth it contains. It's an interesting intellectual pursuit to find out what is historically accurate and what is not, but at the end of the day it doesn't really matter.

If you are constantly worrying about what section is literal and which is not then you're going to miss the forest for the trees. Read the Bible for the message it delivers and don't worry about whether or not any of the things you're reading every actually happened.

This isn't what I meant.

Misinterpretation of Scripture can lead to all sorts of junk theology --- which at best is humorous, and at worst, is deadly.

 

[Valkhorn]

Misinterpretation of Scripture can lead to all sorts of junk theology --- which at best is humorous, and at worst, is deadly.

What about ignoring evidence and facts just because it disagrees with your interpretation?

If it disagrees with the King James Bible - it's wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

What about ignoring evidence and facts just because it disagrees with your interpretation?

What about it?

If I ignore certain laws --- like gravity --- I'm toast. By the same token, if I ignore certain Biblical principles --- I'm toast.

Can you give me an example of a law (or principle) of science that both:

1. Has deadly consequences if ignored and,
2. Goes against the clear teachings of Scripture?

 

[trivista]

What about it?

If I ignore certain laws --- like gravity --- I'm toast. By the same token, if I ignore certain Biblical principles --- I'm toast.

Can you give me an example of a law (or principle) of science that both:

1. Has deadly consequences if ignored and,
2. Goes against the clear teachings of Scripture?

What do you mean by "ignore the law of gravity"?

 

[thaumaturgy]

Misinterpretation of Scripture can lead to all sorts of junk theology --- which at best is humorous, and at worst, is deadly.

True. True,true,true. Some people interpret scripture and holy words in such horrendous ways that lots of people die quite tragically.

 

[PacificPandeist]

Should we bother studying science at all, then? Should we bother trying to find cures for cancer or stronger and lighter materials? Should we bother conducting any space exploration? We're only going to keep discovering stuff that contradicts the Bible, and is therefore not true....

//// Pacific PanDeist

 

[AV1611VET]

Should we bother studying science at all, then? Should we bother trying to find cures for cancer or stronger and lighter materials? Should we bother conducting any space exploration? We're only going to keep discovering stuff that contradicts the Bible, and is therefore not true....

//// Pacific PanDeist

Like I've said before --- go ahead and build a better mousetrap --- but just don't contradict the Scriptures.

If you want to make a car go faster --- do it --- but don't do it, and at the same time give us a lecture on how fast people traveled 30,000 years ago.

 

[trivista]

Like I've said before --- go ahead and build a better mousetrap --- but just don't contradict the Scriptures.

If you want to make a car go faster --- do it --- but don't do it, and at the same time give us a lecture on how fast people traveled 30,000 years ago.

You left off the words "my personal interpretation of" before the words "the scriptures"

 

[thaumaturgy]

Like I've said before --- go ahead and build a better mousetrap --- but just don't contradict the Scriptures.

This is something I struggle with daily! There are days when I want to make a colloidal suspension of silicon dioxide so blasphemous that it would make the angels cry, but then I realize that that's something I just shouldn't do.

 

[AV1611VET]

You left off the words "my personal interpretation of" before the words "the scriptures"

Ya --- on purpose:

• [bible]2 Peter 1:20[/bible]

 

[crimsondeath]

but it forces that upon the readers of the bible

 

[AV1611VET]

but it forces that upon the readers of the bible

It should --- it's [mainly] prose --- not poetry.

 

[trivista]

Ya --- on purpose:

• [bible]2 Peter 1:20[/bible]

That is funny coming from someone who views their private interpretation of the Bible as the correct one.

 

[AV1611VET]

That is funny coming from someone who views their private interpretation of the Bible as the correct one.

Let's view how YOU interpret Scripture --- shall we, Trivista?

• [bible]Isaiah 7:14[/bible]

Interpret that for us correctly, would you please?

 

[trivista]

Let's view how YOU interpret Scripture --- shall we, Trivista?

• [bible]Isaiah 7:14[/bible]

Interpret that for us correctly, would you please?

Not my words -found via a quick search.

http://www.crivoice.org/isa7-14.html

If you would like me to research this in more detail please contact me via private message so we can work out a per hour rate.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not my words -found via a quick search.

http://www.crivoice.org/isa7-14.html

If you would like me to research this in more detail please contact me via private message so we can work out a per hour rate.

So all you want to do is nitpick, right? You won't participate yourself, but you'll be glad to critique those who do?

 

[trivista]

So all you want to do is nitpick, right? You won't participate yourself, but you'll be glad to critique those who do?

I gave you a partial answer, did I not?

Would you rather me use the AV1611VET/DAD tactic of ignoring ideas I don't like?

 

[Valkhorn]

Can we actually get back on topic? Believe in Jesus (or the lack thereof) does not have ANYTHING to do with Evolution and the fact that the age of the Earth is 4.6 billion years old and that there was never a global flood.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Like I've said before --- go ahead and build a better mousetrap --- but just don't contradict the Scriptures.

If you want to make a car go faster --- do it --- but don't do it, and at the same time give us a lecture on how fast people traveled 30,000 years ago.

Tough. The study of the past can be useful. For example, study of paleoclimates and using the data to predict global environmental trends. Or the study of evolutionary trees and it's application to comparative genomics (particularly in areas of medical and agricultural research).

Science marches onward... whether you like it or not.

 

[Parmenio]

Though you may quote something as saying there are no personal interpretations, how can you argue that your interpretation is correct and others' are not without first accepting that different people have different takes on the Scriptures? Or do you start from the base assumption that you are correct and we are simply holding a contrary view out of our own arrogance and conceit, and that deep down within us we know that we are wrong?