Why do you believe in the evolution theory? (2)

[dad]

The above rejection of evolution was written by a human with a coccyx.

..and a brain!

 

[dad]

Declarative sentences don't change reality.

That depends who declares them actually. Yours don't.

 

[dad]

One is reminded of the Bard's words -

"Methinks the lady doth protest too much......"

In this case, I think it is appropriate to think of the "lady" as the creationists who loudly try to deny the reality of the world around them. Have you noticed? The almost manic hyperbole that is employed by many creationists can be contrasted with the more sober, reasoned approach of those fuelled by the scientific method.

I think that says something.

I agree. It says that passion is a part of loving Christ and belief. It also says that many believe man over God.

 

[dad]

(note my bold)

You don't seem to have any respect for scientists or the scientific method, something even St. Paul would of warned against.

I have great disrespect. St Paul does too. Try and back your jello claim up and see.

I'm sure if he'd have lived in our time, he'd certainly be the first Christian to object to modern pseudoscience.

You are dreaming if you think that means he would doubt creation by Christ in a real way for a moment.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I have great disrespect. St Paul does too. Try and back your jello claim up and see.


You are dreaming if you think that means he would doubt creation by Christ in a real way for a moment.

'jello claim'

'dreaming'

Not much one can do with a shut-mind.

Bye-bye

 

[Loudmouth]

That record of Scripture that clearly tells where we came from has zilch to do with me. Get a grip.

You are the one who is claiming that it is a historical record.

 

[Loudmouth]

No more than with Peter or the prophets or angels etc. It is what it is.

No more so than the Prodigal Son, or the other parables that Jesus supposedly told? Why must everything in the Bible be literal when myths were an accepted way of conveying truth in the ancient world?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

No more so than the Prodigal Son, or the other parables that Jesus supposedly told? Why must everything in the Bible be literal when myths were an accepted way of conveying truth in the ancient world?

It's a common problem with those who read the sacred texts, ignoring the overall context. Such often read it without so much as considering any of the ancient literature which accompanies them, or even the sort of literary device being used.

 

[Loudmouth]

It's a common problem with those who read the sacred texts, ignoring the overall context. Such often read it without so much as considering any of the ancient literature which accompanies them, or even the sort of literary device being used.

They even ignore one of the more important pieces of context. The creation myth in Genesis was written in Babylon. Those who first heard the creation myth would have immediately recognized it as a retelling of the Babylonian myths with the many gods replaced by a single God. It is quite obvious that Genesis was making the argument that the gods of Babylon were being replaced by the single God of the Hebrew people. Even Noah's flood story is an almost exact knockoff of the Utnapishtim story in the Enuma Elish.

More importantly, there is nothing wrong with this. Using myths and legends to convey truth is completely legitimate. It is only very myopic minded people that require every story to be literal in order to contain truth.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

They even ignore one of the more important pieces of context. The creation myth in Genesis was written in Babylon. Those who first heard the creation myth would have immediately recognized it as a retelling of the Babylonian myths with the many gods replaced by a single God. It is quite obvious that Genesis was making the argument that the gods of Babylon were being replaced by the single God of the Hebrew people. Even Noah's flood story is an almost exact knockoff of the Utnapishtim story in the Enuma Elish.

More importantly, there is nothing wrong with this. Using myths and legends to convey truth is completely legitimate. It is only very myopic minded people that require every story to be literal in order to contain truth.

I have no problem with that.
Either it has some deeply important and significant meaning, or it is simply an attempt at intuiting divine mysteries which are more mystical than mythical in nature.
I don't ascribe any sort of accurate divine voice to these old writings, though it's clear that the writers (however many they were at the time, or subsequently) were aiming to connect people (firstly in the aural and later the written traditions) to something extremely personally and intimate -- for nearly every single text carries these unique elements, some hidden in plain sight, others disguised as parable to frustrate the proud and evil.
It is Jesus (and not only he) who explained that whatever is in the texts, is less about what a person may gain, or profit from -- and more about a unique something which is called the keys of knowledge.
The truth of these texts is simple to the simple and a frustration to those who attempt to over-intellectualize and even worship the texts and not the one about whom they all testify.

 

[dad]

'jello claim'

'dreaming'

Not much one can do with a shut-mind.

Bye-bye

Nothing I want to do with yours. Just keep the hot or cold demo going.

 

[dad]

You are the one who is claiming that it is a historical record.

Right...and ..so? The point you missed was that it is what it is not because of me. Not my idea.

 

[dad]

No more so than the Prodigal Son, or the other parables that Jesus supposedly told? Why must everything in the Bible be literal when myths were an accepted way of conveying truth in the ancient world?

A parable is a parable and it was told so that some would NOT be able to understand it and some would. The creation account and flood are not parables. It might be an idea for you to try to seek out a friend with a small knowledge of Scripture before posting.

 

[dad]

It's a common problem with those who read the sacred texts, ignoring the overall context.

The context of Jesus creating all thing is clear from cover to cover. It is belief not context that is the issue.

Such often read it without so much as considering any of the ancient literature which accompanies them, or even the sort of literary device being used.

False. Trying to use ancient so called 'devices' some think were in play in no way can change the basics. This lukewarm stuff is strange.

 

[dad]

They even ignore one of the more important pieces of context. The creation myth in Genesis was written in Babylon. Those who first heard the creation myth would have immediately recognized it as a retelling of the Babylonian myths with the many gods replaced by a single God. It is quite obvious that Genesis was making the argument that the gods of Babylon were being replaced by the single God of the Hebrew people. Even Noah's flood story is an almost exact knockoff of the Utnapishtim story in the Enuma Elish.

Not true. Moses went to Babylon to write Genesis? Moses appeared to some of us on the mountain with Jesus. He forgot to mention the twisted dark utterances you cite.

 

[dad]

I don't ascribe any sort of accurate divine voice to these old writings,...

No? So when God spoke to Moses or Job and others that was what? They lied? Drugs? You really thought you could overrule them?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

 

[Loudmouth]

A parable is a parable and it was told so that some would NOT be able to understand it and some would.

Genesis seems like an unmistakeable parable to me. It even has talking animals.

Once again, it is YOU that is claiming it must be interpretted literally. Stop pretending that you are God.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Genesis seems like an unmistakeable parable to me. It even has talking animals.

Once again, it is YOU that is claiming it must be interpretted literally. Stop pretending that you are God.

Everyone who talks about the Garden of Eden, brings up the matter of the talking serpent.

Don't forget the matter of the magic tree in the center of the garden, called 'The Tree of Life', as well as another tree called 'The Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil'

It's so got an Alice in Wonderland feel to it!