Should Genesis be taken literally?

[Speedwell]

List them.
Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford:

‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience (b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story (c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark. Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.’

He's right, of course. The author(s) of Genesis 1 had no idea of modern "day-age" theories. Dr. Barr is not a YEC, however, but a critical opponent--which you would know if you actually read his work instead of getting the passage from a creationist quote mine.

 

[Douvie]

I don't think this is a game you want to play. I suggest that there is more nastiness from the creationists than from we "evolutionists". But, to be fair, that is only speculation - I have not counted. Then again, I will bet you, too, are speculating.

Maybe I should quote an earlier post in this thread....It is all there for everyone to see. An no I'm not speculating. But just maybe you have selected memory.

 

[rjs330]

LOL! If so, you've got an uphill battle on your hands. All of the non-YEC denominations are teaching their flocks something different than that about Christian history, even those which reject evolution. During the gulf war the YECs sent missionaries into Iran under the protection of our crusader army to convert the local Assyrian and Armenian Christians to your one true version of Christianity. How did that work out for you? Do you really think you will be able to convince the Catholics that they have never believed in Sacred Tradition? Do you really think you can make fundamentalist Protestants out of the Copts? The Ethiopians?

I'm not sure I get what any of that has to do with whether or not Genesis is literal and whether or not the words of Christ and the apostles prove they believed it also. I'm not sure what that has to do whether or not someone believes in Sola Scriptura and the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture.

 

[KWCrazy]

He's right, of course. The author(s) of Genesis 1 had no idea of modern "day-age" theories. Dr. Barr is not a YEC, however, but a critical opponent--which you would know if you actually read his work instead of getting the passage from a creationist quote mine.

I know and don't care what he believes. He is absolutely right that the author of Genesis intended to convey exactly what it says.

 

[Douvie]

But to your questions. I think many people would see God as having even greater creative power if the created a Universe in which human beings arise by "natural" means. In this respect, I don't think that the theory of evolution even remotely touches on the matter of what the Universe needs to be "like" in order for evolution to happen - the experts simply know that evolution has, in fact, happened.

They do, do they? Or are they making up fairy tales? I'll give you another quote - if you like?

 

[Speedwell]

I'm not sure I get what any of that has to do with whether or not Genesis is literal and whether or not the words of Christ and the apostles prove they believed it also. I'm not sure what that has to do whether or not someone believes in Sola Scriptura and the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture.

It has to do with your agenda. Can you answer the question? You sent missionaries to Iraq to meddle with the beliefs of indigenous Christians. Under pressure from the Religious Right, the US army allowed, or perhaps encouraged, the sacking of the Baghdad museum in the belief that something in it might show the Bible to be true and historical, but not to the standards of YECism. What's next?

 

[rjs330]

It has to do with your agenda. Can you answer the question? You sent missionaries to Iraq to meddle with the beliefs of indigenous Christians. Under pressure from the Religious Right, the US army allowed, or perhaps encouraged, the sacking of the Baghdad museum in the belief that something in it might show the Bible to be true and historical, but not to the standards of YECism. What's next?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Speedwell]

I have no idea what you are talking about.

YEC in action is what I'm talking about.

 

[Douvie]

You don't think animals know they are going to die. Or, any comprehension of death? You have obviously never been on a farm when you have to kill a bunch of chickens or hogs or cattle at a stockyard.

The chickens literally defecate with the pre knowledge of their coming death.

Yes maybe Speedwell would like to accompany me to a slaughter house. You'll see the many thousand of cattle, sheep and goats per day just before they receive the bolt - they realise their end is nigh.

 

[rjs330]

YEC in action is what I'm talking about.

Sorry still don't know what you are talking about.

 

[expos4ever]

How about this quote:

The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory - is it a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof. (L.Harrison Matthews, FRS, Introduction to Darwin's The Origin of Species, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, p. xi.)

You want some more?

Oh please. You are falling for word play.

No one has claimed that evolution has been "proven" since it is not possible to prove anything scientifically. Science does not claim to prove anything.

There is nothing in this quote that would lead any reasonable person to believe the person who made the quote is in any sense denying that evolution is massively supported by a wealth of evidence.

 

[expos4ever]

Maybe I should quote an earlier post in this thread....It is all there for everyone to see. An no I'm not speculating. But just maybe you have selected memory.

Go ahead, but be warned. If you choose to post a list of nastiness, I shall do likewise. And I am quite sure my list will be longer.

 

[Speedwell]

Sorry still don't know what you are talking about.

Why did the US Army allow the Baghdad museum to be sacked?

 

[Speedwell]

Yes maybe Speedwell would like to accompany me to a slaughter house. You'll see the many thousand of cattle, sheep and goats per day just before they receive the bolt - they realise their end is nigh.

I've seen it. They surely think that something terrible is about to happen. But do they contemplate their own mortality as we do? To the ever wonder how long they have to live and what their prospects are after death as we do? I don't know. Perhaps the kind of self-aware intelligence I am speculating about is not an either-or thing. Perhaps other creatures possess it in some degree. There have been some interesting experiments done with animals to see if they can recognize themselves as themselves in a mirror.

 

[expos4ever]

Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless. (Prof. Louis Bounoure, Former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum, later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research - as quoted in "The Advocate, 8 March 1984, p. 17.)

Is that good enough? Or do I need to quote more?.

Now back to this softball:

Hovind attributes this: "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." to Professor Louis Bounoure, supposedly the former president of the Biological Society of 'Strasbourg'. A creationist web site actually gives a reference: The Advocate, March 8, 1984, p. 17

Lie #315. E.T. Babinski actually contacted French authorities. They revealed that Louis Bounoure never served as Director or even a member of the CNRS. He was a professor of biology at the University of Strasbourg. Bounoure was a Christian but did not affirm that Genesis was to be taken to the letter.

The beginning of the quotation, "Evolution is a fairy tale for adults" is not from Bounoure but adapted from Jean Rostand, a member of the Academy of Sciences of the French Academy. Rostand also wrote that "Transformism may be considered as accepted, and no scientist, no philosopher, no longer discusses the fact of evolution." (L'Evolution des Especes [i.e., The Evolution of the Species], Hachette, p. 190).

The end of Bounoure's quotation is from his book, "Determinism and Finality." It runs, "That, by this, evolutionism would appear as a theory without value, is confirmed also pragmatically. A theory must not be required to be true, said Mr. H. Poincare, more or less, it must be required to be useable. Indeed, none of the progress made in biology depends even slightly on a theory, the principles of which are nevertheless filling every year volumes of books, periodicals, and congresses with their discussions and their disagreements."

In other words, Hovind's quote is complete fiction and he is too incompetent and dishonest to correct it or even check up on it.

Had enough? I am happy to go on, but you are oh-for-two in terms of your quotes supporting your case. This one is an out-and-out fraud and the second one has been shown to not particularly challenge the truthfulness of evolutionary theory.

 

[AnnaliseH]

Me, earlier:

Here's an article listing transitional whale forms now known:

Evolution -- Land-to-Sea Transitional Series

Here's another site, discussing the vestiges found in whales.

True Vestigial Structures in Whales and Dolphins | NCSE

It includes this quote:

Those who can be persuaded by evidence will agree it has been proved.

I will believe that when I SEE whales walking out of the sea on legs. ... And when pigs fly.

 

[AnnaliseH]

I have a question for those of you who base your interpretation of Genesis on Apostolic Tradition.

You believe that your beliefs were handed down to you directly from the original Apostles, passed along from generation to generation of successor Apostles. Correct?

I still have not gotten an answer to my question.

 

[Douvie]

Go wild. The Bounoure quote is demonstrably taken out of context. If I were you, I would not pursue this.

Really that seems to be your standard quote - like an old fashioned rubber stamp. Are you trying to tell me what do? What arrogance!

Let me pursue it. The Advocate quoted it so maybe you should make your claim to the The Advocate to retract it. Bounoure certainly didn’t. So the ball is in your court.

 

[Douvie]

Now back to this softball:

Hovind attributes this: "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." to Professor Louis Bounoure, supposedly the former president of the Biological Society of 'Strasbourg'. A creationist web site actually gives a reference: The Advocate, March 8, 1984, p. 17

Lie #315. E.T. Babinski actually contacted French authorities. They revealed that Louis Bounoure never served as Director or even a member of the CNRS. He was a professor of biology at the University of Strasbourg. Bounoure was a Christian but did not affirm that Genesis was to be taken to the letter.

The beginning of the quotation, "Evolution is a fairy tale for adults" is not from Bounoure but adapted from Jean Rostand, a member of the Academy of Sciences of the French Academy. Rostand also wrote that "Transformism may be considered as accepted, and no scientist, no philosopher, no longer discusses the fact of evolution." (L'Evolution des Especes [i.e., The Evolution of the Species], Hachette, p. 190).

The end of Bounoure's quotation is from his book, "Determinism and Finality." It runs, "That, by this, evolutionism would appear as a theory without value, is confirmed also pragmatically. A theory must not be required to be true, said Mr. H. Poincare, more or less, it must be required to be useable. Indeed, none of the progress made in biology depends even slightly on a theory, the principles of which are nevertheless filling every year volumes of books, periodicals, and congresses with their discussions and their disagreements."

In other words, Hovind's quote is complete fiction and he is too incompetent and dishonest to correct it or even check up on it.

Had enough? I am happy to go on, but you are oh-for-two in terms of your quotes supporting your case. This one is an out-and-out fraud and the second one has been shown to not particularly challenge the truthfulness of evolutionary theory.

So again you duck and weave. Why should I believe Hovind? But the point was Bounoure was a theistic evolutionist. And that is the point you have failed to understand. And as I said that article was so quoted in The Advocate. Take your issue to The Advocate.

 

[-57]

What part of the Biology book do you have problems with?

Mutations can't add up over generations and produce the sophistication we see today.