-
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Atheist challenge #2
- Thread starter adam332
- Start date
Most flat maps are distorted to make them flat.
They really wouldnt be corners but sides, and they arent set in stone. Just like north is only up on a map because we decided it was.
They really wouldnt be corners but sides, and they arent set in stone. Just like north is only up on a map because we decided it was.
Upvote
0
Mechanical Bliss
Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
I also find interesting the people who use the Bible to justify a fixed Earth model with other bodies of the solar system revolving around it.
http://www.geocentricity.com/
The Biblical Astronomer, now in Ohio (hotbed for fundies of all types, it seems) gives his own testimonial of how truths are revealed to him by God and how the Bible shows that modern astronomy (or rather astronomy from a variety of cultures for thousands of years even before science) is wrong because the Bible says so.
Now maybe this is a joke, but is this guy for real?
That seems to be the good ol' "plain teaching of scripture" taken literally to him.
http://www.geocentricity.com/
The Biblical Astronomer, now in Ohio (hotbed for fundies of all types, it seems) gives his own testimonial of how truths are revealed to him by God and how the Bible shows that modern astronomy (or rather astronomy from a variety of cultures for thousands of years even before science) is wrong because the Bible says so.
Now maybe this is a joke, but is this guy for real?
That seems to be the good ol' "plain teaching of scripture" taken literally to him.
Upvote
0
Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
Christ warned of types like Koresh and Jim Jones.
Nuts will come and go.
This person you speak of obviously did not take the time (or wasnt able to) to study.
I have found quite a few preachers who make incorect assumtions about scripture either because they are blinded because of arrogance/sin or because they are not yet ready to teach and jump into a leadership role before they are ready.
I know a man who once tried to show me that animals used to be able to talk as we do.
He based this on the idea that Eve was not amazed that the serpent spoke to her.
VERY thin ice. We know nothing of Eves initial reaction.
We do know, however, that God gave a good definition of a day in Genesis 1: 5 and then proceeded to give a play by play account of His workings.
(so very nice of Him seeing how Moses and others probably didnt even need to know all this)
Some Hebrew ''Theologians'' say that Genesis 1 is not literal.
Most of the Hebrew Language Scholoars that I have come across so far say that Genesis 1 is obviously VERY literal.
Seeing that the issue is one of language, I will believe the linguist over the theologian any day. The theologians are the one who got in trouble with God to begin with.
Upvote
0
Mechanical Bliss
Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
You missed the point. He presents parts of your scripture on his website that, when he takes them literally, "prove" his case. He's not really adding any of his own interpretation (like your animals talking example); he's taking it at face value.
Upvote
0
Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
The serpent spoke. THATS face value.
Further investigation shows that animals probably did not talk as a general rule.
Upvote
0
Mechanical Bliss
Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
That's not face value if an interpretation was added. You yourself claimed that he based it on the serpent speaking AND an interpretation of Eve's initial reaction and then you point out that he can't know anything of Eve's initial reaction. Thus, it's not face value--he added something to it (the initial reaction) that apparently isn't taking it at face value.
Upvote
0
Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
I bet you really gave your HS teachers a run for thier money.
Oh well, questioning everything is what changed my beliefs.
Just keep on questioning things, maybe youll find a different POV someday.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
i]Today at 01:34 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #165
We do know, however, that God gave a good definition of a day in Genesis 1: 5 and then proceeded to give a play by play account of His workings.
(so very nice of Him seeing how Moses and others probably didnt even need to know all this[/I])
Then after all this, in Genesis 2:4b God tells Moses He created the heavens and the earth within a single day. (beyom)
Some Hebrew ''Theologians'' say that Genesis 1 is not literal.
Most of the Hebrew Language Scholoars that I have come across so far say that Genesis 1 is obviously VERY literal.
So what? English language scholars will say that Tom Clancy novels are also very literal. Yet they are fiction. You don't decide literal based solely on the language.
As to "some Hebrew theologians", go into any synagogue and look at the commentary on the Torah. All of them say that Genesis 1 is not literal.
Seeing that the issue is one of language, I will believe the linguist over the theologian any day.
Then you have to take the linguist about "beyom", don't you? And ignore the theologian that tries to put Genesis 2 in day 6 of Genesis 1.
I have found quite a few preachers who make incorect assumtions about scripture either because they are blinded because of arrogance/sin or because they are not yet ready to teach and jump into a leadership role before they are ready.
Like you?
The theologians are the one who got in trouble with God to begin with.
I can't wait to see you justify this claim.
We do know, however, that God gave a good definition of a day in Genesis 1: 5 and then proceeded to give a play by play account of His workings.
(so very nice of Him seeing how Moses and others probably didnt even need to know all this[/I])
Then after all this, in Genesis 2:4b God tells Moses He created the heavens and the earth within a single day. (beyom)
Some Hebrew ''Theologians'' say that Genesis 1 is not literal.
Most of the Hebrew Language Scholoars that I have come across so far say that Genesis 1 is obviously VERY literal.
So what? English language scholars will say that Tom Clancy novels are also very literal. Yet they are fiction. You don't decide literal based solely on the language.
As to "some Hebrew theologians", go into any synagogue and look at the commentary on the Torah. All of them say that Genesis 1 is not literal.
Seeing that the issue is one of language, I will believe the linguist over the theologian any day.
Then you have to take the linguist about "beyom", don't you? And ignore the theologian that tries to put Genesis 2 in day 6 of Genesis 1.
I have found quite a few preachers who make incorect assumtions about scripture either because they are blinded because of arrogance/sin or because they are not yet ready to teach and jump into a leadership role before they are ready.
Like you?
The theologians are the one who got in trouble with God to begin with.
I can't wait to see you justify this claim.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Yesterday at 02:06 PM Terry.Trent said this in Post #147
he parents wouldn't have chosen that symbol if the school hadn't offered it. The school offered 2 other religious symbols as well. personally, i think the school could have avoided the problem all together if they hadn't offered any symbols at all. The school didn't tell the parents 'find your own symbol'. they gave them a list to choose from[/I].
Then that's the problem. Now you have schools sponsoring selected religious beliefs.
and as for creationism being a falsified theory-its not. there is proof for it and against it. there is also proof for and against the big bang theory, but its not falsified, is it?
"Proof for and against" is not a way that scientific theories are evaluated. In science, theories can be refuted/falsified but not "proven". Hypotheses/theories are statements about the physical universe. These statements have deductions that have consequences that can be observed. Now, if the observations are contrary to the deductions, then the statements are false. True statements can't have false consequences.
Science is littered with falsified theories: flat earth, geocentrism, aether, proteins as hereditary material, chondrocytes turning into osteoblasts, etc. In fact, of all the theories in science, 99.9999% of them have been falsified. And creationism is one of these.
Evidence "for" a theory takes second place to evidence falsifying it. Evidence "for" a theory only counts if it is an honest attempt to falsify.
Now, Big Bang has no falsifying evidence. Instead, all the current evidence supports it.
he parents wouldn't have chosen that symbol if the school hadn't offered it. The school offered 2 other religious symbols as well. personally, i think the school could have avoided the problem all together if they hadn't offered any symbols at all. The school didn't tell the parents 'find your own symbol'. they gave them a list to choose from[/I].
Then that's the problem. Now you have schools sponsoring selected religious beliefs.
and as for creationism being a falsified theory-its not. there is proof for it and against it. there is also proof for and against the big bang theory, but its not falsified, is it?
"Proof for and against" is not a way that scientific theories are evaluated. In science, theories can be refuted/falsified but not "proven". Hypotheses/theories are statements about the physical universe. These statements have deductions that have consequences that can be observed. Now, if the observations are contrary to the deductions, then the statements are false. True statements can't have false consequences.
Science is littered with falsified theories: flat earth, geocentrism, aether, proteins as hereditary material, chondrocytes turning into osteoblasts, etc. In fact, of all the theories in science, 99.9999% of them have been falsified. And creationism is one of these.
Evidence "for" a theory takes second place to evidence falsifying it. Evidence "for" a theory only counts if it is an honest attempt to falsify.
Now, Big Bang has no falsifying evidence. Instead, all the current evidence supports it.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Yesterday at 09:45 PM Terry.Trent said this in Post #150
under the light of the fact that what you two have said-i can only say that you may be right. i still take the bible literally, and still beleive in Creationism, for the same reason you two desipise-Goddidit[/I].
I'm sorry, but wrong premise. Creationism isn't about whether "Goddidit". Creationism is a particular how God did it. Evolution is also a how God did it.
and the big bang theory-i still take that as it is-a theory. they have not found enough evidence or proof to call it the 'Big Bang' instead of 'Big Bang Theory'. But still, thats my choice.
I'm afraid this is based on a misconception of what a "theory" is in science. "Theory" is not a "guess". Theory is as good as it gets. It just depends on whether the theory is supported (and valid) or falsified.
unlike the previous two that you debated with (adam and tacoman), i don't think i have any, or enough, evidence to convince you otherwise. this is an uphill battle, with rocks rolling down towards me. I can only pray that God will show himself to you, and give you the answers you are trying to find.
Again, wrong premise. You are thinking that science is atheism. It's not. You are fighting the wrong battle at the wrong place. You are fighting the theism vs atheism battle on science. Won't work. You can fight atheism. But not this way.
under the light of the fact that what you two have said-i can only say that you may be right. i still take the bible literally, and still beleive in Creationism, for the same reason you two desipise-Goddidit[/I].
I'm sorry, but wrong premise. Creationism isn't about whether "Goddidit". Creationism is a particular how God did it. Evolution is also a how God did it.
and the big bang theory-i still take that as it is-a theory. they have not found enough evidence or proof to call it the 'Big Bang' instead of 'Big Bang Theory'. But still, thats my choice.
I'm afraid this is based on a misconception of what a "theory" is in science. "Theory" is not a "guess". Theory is as good as it gets. It just depends on whether the theory is supported (and valid) or falsified.
unlike the previous two that you debated with (adam and tacoman), i don't think i have any, or enough, evidence to convince you otherwise. this is an uphill battle, with rocks rolling down towards me. I can only pray that God will show himself to you, and give you the answers you are trying to find.
Again, wrong premise. You are thinking that science is atheism. It's not. You are fighting the wrong battle at the wrong place. You are fighting the theism vs atheism battle on science. Won't work. You can fight atheism. But not this way.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Do you take the Bible so literally that you believe all the world was taxed? Luke 2:1.
Or do you take extrabiblical evidence to know that a literal interpretation is wrong here?
If that is the case, why don't you take extrabiblical evidence that shows that Genesis 1-2 is not literal?
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
But the earth is not flat in reality, is it?
Here you have examples of passages that were read literally until extrabiblical evidence showed that this interpretation was wrong. Then the interpretation was changed.
St. Augustine of Hippo discarded a literal reading of Genesis 1 in the 400s. When extrabiblical evidence came along in the late 1700s and early 1800s, the literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 was discarded. Which allowed the theological messages to come to the fore.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
The cosmology of the Bible is that of the Babylonians, which had a flat earth with a vault for "heaven". As such, the cosmology is embedded in several passages of the OT. These are: Genesis 1:2-8, Genesis 7:12, Isaiah 40:21-22, Job 22:14, Job 37:18, and finally Daniel 4:11. The passage in Daniel can only be literally true if the earth is flat, otherwise the view is impossible on a spherical earth. There is another passage in Isaiah that refers to the earth as a circle, but I remind you that a circle still lies all in one plane and is flat. Finally, there are astronomical sections in the noncanonical but influential Book of Enoch that refer to the earth as flat.
These passages led early Church fathers like Lactantius, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria to be flat-earthers. About 550 AD Cosmas Indocopleutes published Christian Topography that explicitly spelled out a flat earth.
However, the Bible states in plain Hebrew
that the earth is immovable. Job 26:7, I Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, and Psalm 104:5. This led to the fight in the Church over Copernicus and Galileo.
Upvote
0
Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
1)
The word in Genesis 1 is ''yom''.
The word alone can be many different timeframes.
Yom is further defined by things such as numbers and phrases like ''a evening and a morning''
As I said, I have studied this extensively and take the language scholars word over theologians.
You'll just have to deal with that. Sorry, but its my decision that took 2 full years to come too...
2)
Probably like you, since I have studied Gods word whoelheartedly and obviously YOU have not or you would KNOW the reason for this;
''The theologians are the one who got in trouble with God to begin with
I can't wait to see you justify this claim''
Upvote
0
LastMaxim
Soldier of Christ
I'm new to these surroundings guys, so please bear with me...I'd love a good lesson in 'Hebrew', if you're up to it...However, the Bible states in plain Hebrew
...now guys, I certainly don't want to start something else going here, nor continue any of the off-topic (I almost want to say 'rantings' at this point), but I'd like to see some of the 'outstanding stuff explained abit better on both sides, if no-one objects (grief, you guys do carry on, don't ya...been reading this one topic for a really long time now...lol). instead of saying "...go back and see this...", would you mind spelling it out for the rest of us? (it's the time factor, for me, atleast)...plus I'd need a degree to delve into most of this, anyway.
Actually, I remember several people mentioning the validity and necessity of degrees in there a few times, and I agree with what i remember one said, which basically states that it's not the degree that's important, but the learning behind it. I can tell you that I've been sick with an (as yet) uncurable, and very hard to diagnose illness for most of my life, and that though I do not have a 'degree' in medicine, i can shred most doctors if need be, in the areas that touch directly on my illness. This simply is due to the time and effort i've put into researching and learning myself...so it is certainly not necessary to have a degree to know what you are talking about, though i can say it would help emensly at times (when i need to be taken seriously)...
...it's late here, and i'm rather tired (especially after having read all of this), so i hope I made some kind of sense just now. Thanks for making this forum interesting, guys (and please ignore the many typos i'm sure crept in there some where...)...incidently, I like the way this topic is developing here guys, even counting the length
...
Upvote
0
Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
Today at 10:22 PM LastMaxim said this in Post #178
I'm new to these surroundings guys, so please bear with me...I'd love a good lesson in 'Hebrew', if you're up to it...
...now guys, I certainly don't want to start something else going here, nor continue any of the off-topic (I almost want to say 'rantings' at this point), but I'd like to see some of the 'outstanding stuff explained abit better on both sides, if no-one objects (grief, you guys do carry on, don't ya...been reading this one topic for a really long time now...lol). instead of saying "...go back and see this...", would you mind spelling it out for the rest of us? (it's the time factor, for me, atleast)...plus I'd need a degree to delve into most of this, anyway.
Actually, I remember several people mentioning the validity and necessity of degrees in there a few times, and I agree with what i remember one said, which basically states that it's not the degree that's important, but the learning behind it. I can tell you that I've been sick with an (as yet) uncurable, and very hard to diagnose illness for most of my life, and that though I do not have a 'degree' in medicine, i can shred most doctors if need be, in the areas that touch directly on my illness. This simply is due to the time and effort i've put into researching and learning myself...so it is certainly not necessary to have a degree to know what you are talking about, though i can say it would help emensly at times (when i need to be taken seriously)...
...it's late here, and i'm rather tired (especially after having read all of this), so i hope I made some kind of sense just now. Thanks for making this forum interesting, guys (and please ignore the many typos i'm sure crept in there some where...)...incidently, I like the way this topic is developing here guys, even counting the length
What do yo have?
I have Acute Intermittant Porphyria and I know that I have to educate evrey doctor I see.
Upvote
0
Terry.Trent
Active Member
Thats quite an interesting statement. Its weird how its not true. Actually, its not weird. Its God. I believe everything God has told me. If God says the world is flat, then sobeit. If God tells me that He flooded the earth, then there ya go. If God tells me to believe in Him no matter what, then i will beleive in Him no matter what. Life is full of two many 'coincidences' for God not to be real.
So until you can show me some physical proof, something that i will be able to take and say 'hey, God's not real at all', then God will have all the faith and love i can muster for Him.
So until you can show me some physical proof, something that i will be able to take and say 'hey, God's not real at all', then God will have all the faith and love i can muster for Him.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
