New Creationist theory on how life spread out after the flood.

[Subduction Zone]

-- Please, please don't tell me I'm becoming a common noun, verb, adverb, or adjective!

Please!

I'll leave this place forever before that happens.

Yep, here is their AV. Notice the strong resemblance:

 

[LastSeven]

No, those are lies by apologists. Christian apologists are merely liars for Jesus. The actual word refers to an inscribed circle. There was a perfectly good word for a sphere that was not used.

Secondly since the Sun "went around the Earth", which the Bible does support, as did everything else that could be observed it was assumed the Earth was the center of the universe by all early Christians that gave it any thought.

Plus you are forgetting at least three events that could only happen on a flat Earth. Three different times it was stated that the whole Earth could be seen from a one point or that one point could be seen from the whole Earth. The second is equivalent to the first, if you took an geometry.

The first rule about reading scripture: Don't take everything literally. There are many times in scripture, where it says "the whole world" but refers to merely the whole known world. And it was a pretty small world in those days.

 

[CabVet]

I'll leave this place forever before that happens.

And stop bragging about your 2.7 million "posts"? I doubt it.

 

[CabVet]

The first rule about reading scripture: Don't take everything literally. There are many times in scripture, where it says "the whole world" but refers to merely the whole known world. And it was a pretty small world for in those days.

Yet nobody agrees in which parts should be taken literally and which should not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The first rule about reading scripture: Don't take everything literally. There are many times in scripture, where it says "the whole world" but refers to merely the whole known world. And it was a pretty small world for in those days.

And yet creationists take Genesis literally.

 

[lasthero]

The first rule about reading scripture: Don't take everything literally. There are many times in scripture, where it says "the whole world" but refers to merely the whole known world. And it was a pretty small world for in those days.

Depends on what you mean by 'known'. Humanity was pretty spread out, even at that point.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yep, here is their AV. Notice the strong resemblance:

Handsome bloke, eh?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Handsome bloke, eh?

That would be a "No."

But thanks for quoting me so the two images could be compared.

 

[AV1611VET]

That would be a "No."

I meant the one on top.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And he even sounds a bit like AV. This is his most recent post:

You are incorrect. Cold can be reflected. Since all temperatures are above absolute zero, they can be reflected. If we consider 60o F to be "cold", then 60o F can be reflected and trasnmuted into another object, giving it the same coldness.

If we are in space, reflecting 60o F onto the tip of a thermometer, the thermometer will eventually read 60o F.

 

[AV1611VET]

And he even sounds a bit like AV. This is his most recent post:

Where is this at?

 

[HitchSlap]

The first rule about reading scripture: Don't take everything literally. There are many times in scripture, where it says "the whole world" but refers to merely the whole known world. And it was a pretty small world in those days.

Simple question: How do you determine what is to be taken literally, and what is not?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where is this at?

Rowbotham seems like a pretty dumb guy

 

[AV1611VET]

Rowbotham seems like a pretty dumb guy

Thank you.

 

[Split Rock]

The first rule about reading scripture: Don't take everything literally. There are many times in scripture, where it says "the whole world" but refers to merely the whole known world. And it was a pretty small world in those days.

Absolutely! It is a recent phenomenon to use a term like "world" to include the entire planet.

Yet nobody agrees in which parts should be taken literally and which should not.

Absolutely! This is where many outspoken creationists here show their lack of humility. I contend that no one completetly understands the intent of the writers of the bible. Therefore, it makes little sense to talk about "the inerrant word of God," when no one can really say their interpretation is accurate.

Simple question: How do you determine what is to be taken literally, and what is not?

For one thing, context should be taken into account. The books of the bible were not written by or for 21st century American Protestant Christians, and should not be interpreted as if they were.

Secondly, common sense should be utilized. If a given interpretation conflicts with objective reality, then that interpreation must be wrong. Instead, many creationists here dig their shoes into the ground and take pride in rejecting reality under the mistaken belief that it demonstrates their faith is strong.

Finally, one has to accept that no one's interpretation is going to be completetly accurate.

 

[Loudmouth]

First of all the word used for disc can also be translated as sphere. Secondly the Bible doesn't teach that the earth is the center of the universe. That was an invention of the Roman Catholic Church.

No, the Bible clearly states that the Earth is immovable and does not move. It is only modern christians that have changed the meaning of what the Bible says to match up with what scientists have discovered.

 

[LastSeven]

Simple question: How do you determine what is to be taken literally, and what is not?

Since the purpose of your question is only to find holes in my answer, I will not even try to explain this to you.

For those who care to understand scripture, they will struggle with this question and consult their brethren for better understanding. There is however no sense in discussing this struggle with an atheist.

 

[Lethe]

Since the purpose of your question is only to find holes in my answer, I will not even try to explain this to you.

For those who care to understand scripture, they will struggle with this question and consult their brethren for better understanding. There is however no sense in discussing this struggle with an atheist.

...and ignore list. People who don't feel the need to justify their wild stuff. Well then I don't feel the need to listen to them.

 

[Split Rock]

Since the purpose of your question is only to find holes in my answer, I will not even try to explain this to you.

For those who care to understand scripture, they will struggle with this question and consult their brethren for better understanding. There is however no sense in discussing this struggle with an atheist.

I wouldn't mind reading your response to the question. You seem like a reasonable type, and I'm not looking for any "holes."

 

[LastSeven]

No, the Bible clearly states that the Earth is immovable and does not move. It is only modern christians that have changed the meaning of what the Bible says to match up with what scientists have discovered.

The Bible does not say that the earth does not move. It says the earth is firmly established (as in its orbit) and can not BE moved. Can you move the earth? Can an atomic bomb even move the earth? Nothing can move the earth out of where the Lord has established it. This is the meaning of the scripture.