Criteria for determining design

[dad]

I believe the parables Jesus told were actual events that occurred.

Me too.

 

[AV1611VET]

Me too.

Gandhi would not have liked you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe the parables Jesus told were actual events that occurred.

Very few biblical scholars do. There is no need for them to be true, they are lessons on their own.

Demanding that all aspects of the Bible be true or none of it is true will drive people away from the Bible. I am just trying to help. It is the "Christian" thing to do.

 

[AV1611VET]

Demanding that all aspects of the Bible be true or none of it is true will drive people away from the Bible.

That's the nature of the word of God.

Either you like It, or It will drive you away.

God isn't neutral.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's the nature of the word of God.

Either you like It, or It will drive you away.

God isn't neutral.

That is a false dichotomy. It is only a either or in your opinion. Many Christians can accept parts of the Bible and reject the obvious false parts of the Bible without a problem.

 

[dad]

Gandhi would not have liked you.

Good thing he was non violent. I wonder if he swatted flies?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

That's the nature of the word of God.

Either you like It, or It will drive you away.

God isn't neutral.

Believing the parables are literally true is one of the silliest aspect of literalism. It diminishes the gospels by denying Jesus the use of analogy and metaphor and dragging him down to their own level really, but there we are.

 

[dad]

Believing the parables are literally true is one of the silliest aspect of literalism.

There is no reason to assume they are fibs.

It diminishes the gospels by denying Jesus the use of analogy and metaphor and dragging him down to their own level really, but there we are.

One can use true stories for a metaphor. It adds juice to em.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no reason to assume they are fibs.
One can use true stories for a metaphor. It adds juice to em.

Yes one can, but using stories as allegories is not fibbing.

 

[ChetSinger]

Woah, hold on there.

Who said anything about DNA? I'm just talking about self replicating molecules. Never said it had to be DNA.

I've been talking about DNA, because imo any abiogenesis theory that doesn't result in living things has no explanatory power.

You know what an enzyme is? An enzyme is a molecule that can take two other molecules and put them together (among other things). The enzyme itself is named after what it works on, with "-ase" added to the end. For example, an enzyme that works on Fructose is called Fructase.

Now let's say that we have an enzyme that takes Molecule A and Molecule B and joins them together into Molecule C. We could call this enzyme "Abcase."

Each molecule of Abcase would float around, grabbing an A molecule here, a B molecule there, and then joining them together into Molecule C.

ANd now, what if Molecule C turns out to be Abcase itself? Each Abcase molecule would be making more of itself out of molecule A and molecule B. That's self replication.

And if you had some Abcase molecules that were able to put the A and B molecules together in a slightly different way that made the joining stronger, then this would give it an advantage, and so natural selection would operate to increase the percentage of Abcase molecules with this alteration.

It is entirely plausible that this could have been the way life originally developed. Over time, as the molecules changed, they could have settled on a number of amino acids that worked better, and the molecule could have become more and more adapted to replicating itself. And so you would have the development of DNA as an adaptation to replicate itself better. Over many generations, the repair mechanisms we see today could have evolved as some of the many adaptations that evolution has produced. But it's a mistake to think that the first life forms needed those repair mechanisms, or even that they needed DNA at all.

I find this unconvincing because I think it's storytelling, which you have confidence in but I don't.

I see numerous interdependencies between the elements of cells that I consider evidence of engineering. Thanks for sharing your opinion, but imo it hasn't explained away those interdependencies.

 

[dad]

Yes one can, but using stories as allegories is not fibbing.

Too bad you have no way of knowing. Since Jesus is the truth I will assume He used truth in illustrations also.

 

[AV1611VET]

Good thing he was non violent. I wonder if he swatted flies?

Thanks to people like him, those in India are starving to death while [sacred] cows roam around right in front of them.

They also run down to the [sacred] Ganges and bathe, while their [sacred] cows deficate and urinate upstream.

Then our educated elite wonder why they're sick all the time.

 

[AV1611VET]

Believing the parables are literally true is one of the silliest aspect of literalism.

Spoken like a true non-literalist.

It diminishes the gospels by denying Jesus the use of analogy and metaphor and dragging him down to their own level really, but there we are.

LOL

Mark 12:37b And the common people heard him gladly.

The scientists? well, they were another story.

But the common people heard Him gladly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Spoken like a true non-literalist.

LOL

Mark 12:37b And the common people heard him gladly.

The scientists? well, they were another story.

But the common people heard Him gladly.

Yes, people of all times loved to hear stories. Thanks for supporting Strawberry.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Too bad you have no way of knowing. Since Jesus is the truth I will assume He used truth in illustrations also.

I thought The Truth was a professional wrestler.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, people of all times loved to hear stories.

Yup -- and many carried them right into the coleseums to face the lions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yup -- and many carried them right into the coleseums to face the lions.

Not really. Many Christians were made martyrs simply because they were of the lower classes and were fomenting resistance. There is not much support for claims that people gladly went to martyrdom. One very questionable source claimed this.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not really. Many Christians were made martyrs simply because they were of the lower classes and were fomenting resistance. There is not much support for claims that people gladly went to martyrdom. One very questionable source claimed this.

It doesn't matter if they went there laughing or crying, does it?

It proves they took your "stories" a lot more seriously.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It doesn't matter if they went there laughing or crying, does it?

It proves they took your "stories" a lot more seriously.

Nope, they died and that was that. It proves nothing about them taking stories literally. And I thought you were a Christian. That would make them "your" stories. Or are you claiming that you do not believe them now. I wish you were not so inconsistent.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nope, they died and that was that. It proves nothing about them taking stories literally.

Wow -- just wow.

Here's what God thinks of them ...

Hebrews 11:38a ( Of whom the world was not worthy: )

And I thought you were a Christian.

I prefer the word the Bible uses more: "saint."

"Christian" was conferred on us by our first century educated antagonists.