Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
There is, at least, one thing that seems to distinguish him from a true YEC. YEC at least make an attempt to align their understanding with something resembling engagement with empirical data. It's a totally backwards approach, but they don't entirely disengage in the way that his position requires.
Neither did Maimonedes. KJV is a modern revision of scripture. Not a bad one. But it has some errors:
Don't see why, but I did a tinyurl on it. Looks good now.
Exactly. And in the view of many, the author didn't think so either. The author intentionally used a word commonly denoting a standard 24 hour day for a literary purpose, not as a literal description. If you assume that he used it with the intent of describing the actual length of time God took to create you have fallen down the literary inerrancy rabbit hole and miss the real theological importance of the story.
I don't know why you go on about this so. All Christians believe that the Bible is inspired, but that doesn't mean we have to think Genesis ! is a literal description of creation.
That's fair, though it might help if I clarify my position a bit. My approach to the Bible is to treat it first and foremost as a literary exercise. I'm not concerned with whether or not it reflects what actually took place in history, only what can be gleaned theologically through analyzing the text. So my goal is to begin with semi-objective questions about the context, grammar, and what can be gathered about initial authorial intent. Allagory certainly exists within the texts, but there are responsible and irresponsible ways of seeking allegorical senses. I'm a big believer in the historic understanding of multifaceted meanings in the text, and I'm completely comfortable with them reflecting all of the ordinary errors of any other text. As far as historical events portrayed, there is only one that I take as unassailable. And this attitude is largely because of my familiarity with the way that ancient literature functioned and ancient understandings of the fluidity of truth.
A better book to read is Plato’s Revenge, the new science of the immaterial genome
Before I begin, thanks for the book recommendation. It sounds like an intriguing concept. That said, it sounds like either you or that author has confused a couple of issues, namely that the theory of evolution is expressly materialistic. The ToE doesn't express any ontological commitments, it is purely an understanding of explanatory mechanism for how the diversity of life came to be. Not its origin, not its ontological status, just a mechanism that lines up with observations and predicts what to expect in future discoveries.
A book published by the Discovery Institute Press? LOL.
That has been the DI's undemonstrated claim for about 30 years.
DI is so devoid of actual science that all they can do is lie about science. It's clear that they are at it again.
Someday the DI will use the scientific method. (Who am I kidding, no they won't.)
That's not how science functions, including biology.
It isn't and we aren't.
Inorganic matter lacks the necessary carbon. No one is making the claim you are trying to counter.
What? Darwin knew nothing about genomes.
Doesn't have anything to do with your god.
Nope. Ya got that backward.
pass
