Evolution defies Belief

Athanasian Creed · Feb 27, 2007

'thaumaturgy' replied:

I will gladly agree that I have difficulty matching up things like:

Matthew 27:5And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
and
Acts 1:18Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

There is no difficulty nor discrepancy here. Judas first hanged himself, and then fell and was burst asunder.

OR

1 Samuel 31:4Then said Saul unto his armourbearer, Draw thy sword, and thrust me through therewith; lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through, and abuse me. But his armourbearer would not; for he was sore afraid. Therefore Saul took a sword, and fell upon it.
and
2 Samuel 1:15And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died.

You should do a better job of connecting the dots. The account of Saul dying has nothing to do with the 2 Samuel 1:15 verse. The 2 Samuel verse is dealing with the killing of the person who brought news to David that Saul was dead - not that David ordered Saul's death by the hand of one of his men!

But for those super prophecies, the bible is only occasionally wrong, like this one!

Genesis 49:10The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.(You are obviously aware that Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin)

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what this prophecy has to do with Saul?? :scratch:

It is actually in reference to Jesus the Messiah (Shiloh) and His everlasting reign as King Messiah. He was from the tribe of Judah.

Luke 21:32Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Matthew 23:36Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Mark 13:30Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

These verses refer to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world. The destruction of Jerusalem took place about forty years after this was spoken (a generation being around 40 years)

...

(BTW, I love listing those over and over again!)

BTW, i love pointing out over and over again that there are no discrepancies or falsehood with the verses people like you bring up over and over and over again ad naseum!
...

So, sure, it's my failed brain. A "man like me" can only understand what is said. I guess in God's world the "fun" part is making people guess what is meant!

No, "a man like you" can only read but will never come to an understanding of what the Bible truly says because it is "spiritually discerned" which sinful man cannot receive because you need to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit first!

Ray :wave:

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

I really want a good defensor fides. I yearn for the days when someone can defend their faith the way the church fathers of old did (without all the swords and inquisitions, of course). But a real spirited defense.

(thaumaturgy)

You talk about defense of the faith........If only we had such fire in the belly as the early church.

I don't....sadly.

But I recall when God filled me......and as we say in Yorkshire "it is better felt than telt" I am what I am because there was a day in my life, looking to find God, praying, God came upon me. I rolled on the floor.

Having tasted... experienced such........No amount of argument can dissuade me

I transgress from the O.P.

Chalnoth · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
(thaumaturgy)

You talk about defense of the faith........If only we had such fire in the belly as the early church.

Thaumaturgy's quote had little to do with the amount of fervor presented by believers. We have plenty of that today. He was quite clearly talking about the total lack of engagement in debate.

There's a good reason for this, of course: the position of the church is indefensible through reason and evidence. So any church that rests its beliefs upon reason and evidence quickly disappears as people realize they have no actual reason to believe. Instead the church is based pretty much solely around one big appeal to emotion fallacy, where people get some idea that their world will go to hell if they stop believing. Too bad most of them will never get the chance to realize that it probably won't.

Upisoft · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
You make a mockery of the discussion. We are talking about design. You tivialise

No. I'm pointing out there is no connection.

You say:
watch -> designer
living being -> ?

Then bring some analogy between watch and living being and conclude that "?" have to be substituted by "designer".

And when I show that your analogy is broken, you say I'm making mockery. What kind of argument is that?

What renders your analogy broken is the very fact that watches do not reproduce themselves. You may find that funny, ridiculous or whatever, but it is true.

us38 · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
I have been move by the Holy Spirit, so I believe it is quite possible for other to be moved also.

It's one thing to say that it is possible they were moved by the holy spirit. It's another to say they were. Again I ask how you know they were moved by the holy spirit.

Athanasian Creed said:
There is no difficulty nor discrepancy here. Judas first hanged himself, and then fell and was burst asunder.

So wait, you're telling me a guy hung himself, somehow twisted in midair while dead and hanging from a rope so he could fall head first, somehow got loose from the rope, and had his intestines burst out when he hit the ground? Please don't take it personal when I tell you this defense makes no sense at all.

Verwirrung

-- D

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

Chalnoth said:
Thaumaturgy's quote had little to do with the amount of fervor presented by believers. We have plenty of that today. He was quite clearly talking about the total lack of engagement in debate.

There's a good reason for this, of course: the position of the church is indefensible through reason and evidence. So any church that rests its beliefs upon reason and evidence quickly disappears as people realize they have no actual reason to believe. Instead the church is based pretty much solely around one big appeal to emotion fallacy, where people get some idea that their world will go to hell if they stop believing. Too bad most of them will never get the chance to realize that it probably won't.

I am sure you are correct....

thaumaturgy · Feb 27, 2007

Athanasian Creed said:
There is no difficulty nor discrepancy here. Judas first hanged himself, and then fell and was burst asunder.

Firstly, did he pitch the money and then go back and pick it up to buy a field with it?

Secondly, interesting physics when one hangs oneself such that they can then "pitch forward". But more importantly wouldn't the hanging part be the death part and not the pitching forward and exploding on the ground? Wouldn't it be important to mention the hanging part before talking about the pitching forward? It's like saying JFK died from falling forward in the limosene in Dealy Plaza.

Good defense tho'. Keep 'em comin'!

You should do a better job of connecting the dots. The account of Saul dying has nothing to do with the 2 Samuel 1:15 verse. The 2 Samuel verse is dealing with the killing of the person who brought news to David that Saul was dead - not that David ordered Saul's death by the hand of one of his men!

It would appear that the 2 Samuel verses are part of a story in which an Amalekite killed Saul. I was amiss in quoting 2Sam 1:15, when I should have quoted 2Sam 1:10.

THAT was the place where the Amalekite slew Saul.

You must admit this is a bit different from Saul killing himself. No? Or do Bible folks have multiple ways of dying? Is that the apologetic?

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what this prophecy has to do with Saul??

Gladly. Saul was the first king of Israel (according to the Bible). The first king, right off the bat was NOT from the tribe of Judah. He was from Benjamin.

It is actually in reference to Jesus the Messiah (Shiloh) and His everlasting reign as King Messiah. He was from the tribe of Judah.

But the scepter departed from Judah pretty durn quick when the first king was not from Judah, but Benjamin. Shiloh is the reference to Jesus, if I recall.

Again, prophecies are only useful if they actually say something. If you have to gin something up after the fact and rely on data not in evidence then it becomes nearly useless to even make the prophecy.

(cf: all the people who try to make Nostradamus prophecies fit reality)

These verses refer to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world. The destruction of Jerusalem took place about forty years after this was spoken (a generation being around 40 years)

Really? Where do you have this information that the destruction of the Temple is the same as:

[bible]Matthew 24:29[/bible]

Because it sounds different, what with the darkening of the sun and moon and the stars falling from the sky.

BTW, i love pointing out over and over again that there are no discrepancies or falsehood with the verses people like you bring up over and over and over again ad naseum!

I will gladly acquiesce to that statement if you are willing to agree that the bible then does not say what it says.

No, "a man like you" can only read but will never come to an understanding of what the Bible truly says because it is "spiritually discerned" which sinful man cannot receive because you need to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit first!

Need I point out to the good gentleman that I was a Christian for 40+ years and I strove DAILY, with an almost obsessive effort to be "spiritually discerning". Didn't take.

The Bible says what it says. If it says that which it didn't say then why was it even written? If it contains truth the truth must stand on its own. It shouldn't need "interpretations" to make the facts fit with the scripture.

I am merely a person. And I like to see defense of the faith. I actually learn from it (cf another post in this thread). But what I cannot abide is being told:

1. You can't understand the bible because you don't want to. To my knowledge only the tablets of moroni required magic golden spectacles to read the originals.

2. The Bible may use these words, but they really don't say that...they say this over here which we've cobbled together because the actual words are patently false. Unless the point is it is allegorical.

Again, I have no issue with the claims that the Bible is NOT inerrant. I'm OK with that. Then it becomes a matter of faith (which I don't have), but not a matter for debate.

IT IS a matter of debate when someone says 1+1=3 and then claims that's because they already had a 1 in their pocket so that makes it true that if you have a 1 and you then add 1+1 to that you have 3!

I am also quite OK if allegory is part and parcel. Allegory should be clearly defined otherwise it can easily lead to error if it is spoken as literal fact. Surely the creator of the universe would understand that point.

It is as if I were to say "dogs explode when you put a piece of plastic on them."

But, you reply, "That isn't true"

I respond by saying "In this case 'dog' is allegorical for a critical mass of Uranium 235 and the 'piece of plastic' is a neutron of the appropriate energy that the U-235 can capture it and thus fission, or 'blow up'. It was proven by the atomic bomb!"

What I originally said is patently false. If I come back and say it was all allegorical you would be right to tell me that the allegory was flawed. It didn't say the truth.

Now what if I never bothered to explain the allegory to you but left it up to you to figure what I really meant by saying "A dog will explode if you put a piece of plastic on it."?

Am I making my point clearly?

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

It's one thing to say that it is possible they were moved by the holy spirit. It's another to say they were. Again I ask how you know they were moved by the holy spirit.

Ask the Lord God Almighty. Ask Jesus. John Baptist said of Jesus, when He gets here He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost.

Ask Jesus to baptise you with the Holy Ghost. Keep asking.....I assume you are living a holy life? and follow Jesus?

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

Chalnoth said:
Thaumaturgy's quote had little to do with the amount of fervor presented by believers. We have plenty of that today. He was quite clearly talking about the total lack of engagement in debate.

There's a good reason for this, of course: the position of the church is indefensible through reason and evidence. So any church that rests its beliefs upon reason and evidence quickly disappears as people realize they have no actual reason to believe. Instead the church is based pretty much solely around one big appeal to emotion fallacy, where people get some idea that their world will go to hell if they stop believing. Too bad most of them will never get the chance to realize that it probably won't.

Appreciate your remarks.

But please do not refute such experience. One ounce of experience is more valuable than a ton of theory.

As I see it!!

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

Upisoft said:
No. I'm pointing out there is no connection.

You say:
watch -> designer
living being -> ?

Then bring some analogy between watch and living being and conclude that "?" have to be substituted by "designer".

And when I show that your analogy is broken, you say I'm making mockery. What kind of argument is that?

What renders your analogy broken is the very fact that watches do not reproduce themselves. You may find that funny, ridiculous or whatever, but it is true.

We talk about creation. You conflict creation with evolution

us38 · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
Ask the Lord God Almighty. Ask Jesus. John Baptist said of Jesus, when He gets here He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost.

So basically, if I assume you're correct, I'll see why you're correct? I do believe there is logical fallacy involving circles somewhere in hear.

Ask Jesus to baptise you with the Holy Ghost. Keep asking.....I assume you are living a holy life? and follow Jesus?

Wait a sec. Have to check. It might have changed since last I looked.
.
..
...
Nope, I still have the atheist symbol. Guess I'm still an atheist.

FTR, yes, I was a christian. God must have forgot to pay the phone bill, because that guy neveer answers. Maybe I should've sent an e-mail, or perhaps a carrier pigeon.

Verwirrung

-- D

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

Upisoft said:
No. I'm pointing out there is no connection.

You say:
watch -> designer
living being -> ?

Then bring some analogy between watch and living being and conclude that "?" have to be substituted by "designer".

And when I show that your analogy is broken, you say I'm making mockery. What kind of argument is that?

What renders your analogy broken is the very fact that watches do not reproduce themselves. You may find that funny, ridiculous or whatever, but it is true.

You miss the point....the watch comparison has taken over

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

Athanasian Creed said:
'thaumaturgy' replied:

I will gladly agree that I have difficulty matching up things like:

Matthew 27:5And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
and
Acts 1:18Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

There is no difficulty nor discrepancy here. Judas first hanged himself, and then fell and was burst asunder.

OR

1 Samuel 31:4Then said Saul unto his armourbearer, Draw thy sword, and thrust me through therewith; lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through, and abuse me. But his armourbearer would not; for he was sore afraid. Therefore Saul took a sword, and fell upon it.
and
2 Samuel 1:15And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died.

You should do a better job of connecting the dots. The account of Saul dying has nothing to do with the 2 Samuel 1:15 verse. The 2 Samuel verse is dealing with the killing of the person who brought news to David that Saul was dead - not that David ordered Saul's death by the hand of one of his men!

But for those super prophecies, the bible is only occasionally wrong, like this one!

Genesis 49:10The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.(You are obviously aware that Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin)

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what this prophecy has to do with Saul?? It is actually in reference to Jesus the Messiah (Shiloh) and His everlasting reign as King Messiah. He was from the tribe of Judah.

Luke 21:32Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Matthew 23:36Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Mark 13:30Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

These verses refer to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world. The destruction of Jerusalem took place about forty years after this was spoken (a generation being around 40 years)

...

(BTW, I love listing those over and over again!)

BTW, i love pointing out over and over again that there are no discrepancies or falsehood with the verses people like you bring up over and over and over again ad naseum!
...

So, sure, it's my failed brain. A "man like me" can only understand what is said. I guess in God's world the "fun" part is making people guess what is meant!

No, "a man like you" can only read but will never come to an understanding of what the Bible truly says because it is "spiritually discerned" which sinful man cannot receive because you need to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit first!

Ray

Please go away

cavell · Feb 27, 2007

us38 said:
So basically, if I assume you're correct, I'll see why you're correct? I do believe there is logical fallacy involving circles somewhere in hear.

Wait a sec. Have to check. It might have changed since last I looked.
.
..
...
Nope, I still have the atheist symbol. Guess I'm still an atheist.

FTR, yes, I was a christian. God must have forgot to pay the phone bill, because that guy neveer answers. Maybe I should've sent an e-mail, or perhaps a carrier pigeon.

Verwirrung

-- D

Dear friend

Why not give God an opportinity?

Wanting to help!!!!

Chalnoth · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
But please do not refute such experience. One ounce of experience is more valuable than a ton of theory.

And one ounce of evidence is more valuable than a ton of experience. Nobody is talking about theory refuting Christianity or the Bible. We're talking about evidence refuting Christianity and the Bible.

Upisoft · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
You miss the point....the watch comparison has taken over

If it's so, I'm sorry. Errors happen.

Nathan Poe · Feb 27, 2007

Athanasian Creed said:
No, "a man like you" can only read but will never come to an understanding of what the Bible truly says because it is "spiritually discerned" which sinful man cannot receive because you need to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit first!

Ray

IOW, it's a Magical book which can only be read by Magical people.

In a related story, fools couldn't see the Emperor's new clothes -- they actually thought he was naked!

Nathan Poe · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
Dear friend

Why not give God an opportinity?

Wanting to help!!!!

Tried it. Wasn't impressed.

Nathan Poe · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
Please go away

Odd thing to say in a debate forum, wouldn't you think?

thaumaturgy · Feb 27, 2007

cavell said:
Appreciate your remarks.

But please do not refute such experience. One ounce of experience is more valuable than a ton of theory.

As I see it!!

A religious experience is out of the field here. There are many who claim them and many who see them as just another personal experience.

I don't see any value in debating someone's personal experience.

That is why I prefer debates about the physical manifestations of the faith. The Bible, the histories, the ideas who wrote what and when.

The real problem lies in the fact that when the debate gets heated, the Christian can always easily be hurt. It is a dodgy game playing with the faithful.

My original point of wanting a fierce defense of the faith is in earnest. I want someone who believes their faith so strongly and understands its weaknesses as well as its strengths.

Whenever I talk to a fellow scientist about stuff there are two things I get leary of:

1. if he or she automatically takes anything I say as true without question. I'd like to be an expert on stuff, but I realize I'm not. It's gotta be backed up.

2. if he or she declares something without any room for their being wrong. I inherently distrust people who have "the Truth" and can't conceive that they might be wrong.

So you see, I don't have the truth, but by the same token I don't necessarily believe you do either.

If someone makes a claim like "humans are above animals" and "the bible is inerrant literal truth" then those kinds of statements demand a rebuttal.

And if an idea is strong it will stand up. If not it will fade away. No ideas or any concepts should be accepted unless they can withstand scrutiny of the most in-depth sort.

Personal experience? That's something I don't want to touch on. That's who someone is. I'm willing to bet you that I've had moving personal experiences as well and in the end I don't come away from them with a supernatural explanation. But that is neither here nor there.

The physicality of the Bible and the faith-as-data is where I think the discussion lies here on CF. When someone introduces the bible into the scientific discussion it has to play by all the same rules as any other piece of data. No exceptions.

Evolution defies Belief

Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Solus Christus !!!

Senior Veteran

Senior Contributor

CEO of a waterfal

im in ur mind, disturben ur sanities

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

im in ur mind, disturben ur sanities

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Contributor

CEO of a waterfal

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads