New Creationist theory on how life spread out after the flood.

[CabVet]

Since the purpose of your question is only to find holes in my answer, I will not even try to explain this to you.

For those who care to understand scripture, they will struggle with this question and consult their brethren for better understanding. There is however no sense in discussing this struggle with an atheist.

Translation: I have no idea who decides which passages are literal and which are not.

 

[Loudmouth]

The Bible does not say that the earth does not move. It says the earth is firmly established (as in its orbit) and can not BE moved.

It says it rests on foundations and can not be moved. That seems pretty clear to me.

Also, if the Sun were not moving the Earth it would travel in a straight line instead of in a circle. The Sun is moving the Earth.

 

[keith99]

The Bible does not say that the earth does not move. It says the earth is firmly established (as in its orbit) and can not BE moved. Can you move the earth? Can an atomic bomb even move the earth? Nothing can move the earth out of where the Lord has established it. This is the meaning of the scripture.

Honestly if I'm recalling that verse correctly it is not teaching that the Earth does not move but instead using the reader knowing that the earth does not move to illustrate something else.

Not understanding the difference is a huge mistake. One could also use the stars being 'fixed' in a similar way. And yes astronomers often refer to those farther away as 'fixed' even though they are well aware that nothing is fixed. But they know they will not show any measurable movement during a lifetime.

No work has ever been written to try to make sure there in no possible way to misread it. Let alone written so that it cannot be twisted after being translated through 2 or 3 languages (Remember many English translation went through Greek and Latin on their way to English).

 

[AV1611VET]

...and ignore list. People who don't feel the need to justify their wild stuff. Well then I don't feel the need to listen to them.

I'll bet you have a doosey of an Ignore List, then.

Welcome to CF, by the way.

 

[keith99]

Translation: I have no idea who decides which passages are literal and which are not.

Sorry I consider your response far too kind.

Reading between the lines I see he has a firm idea of what should be taken literally and what not. Verses are judged depending on convictions already held and go into the figurative or literal bucket depending on which fits better to confirm those convictions.

I instead will echo the thoughts of Lewis. One should use the same techniques and tools one uses for any other document. Some parts are clear beyond doubt. Things given as commands or laws are literal. Some parts are clearly poetry and should be read as such.

I will point out that even commands have one significant issue, one needs to be quite sure of what eh original words meant and in many cases there is dispute regarding the scope of a command.

One final point. A statement may be literal but not detailed. You might tell a friend you house is the first white house on the right side of the street. Only a fool would pass your house by because you failed to mention the blue trim. The description is NOT wrong. It would be wrong if you said it had red trim. There is a difference.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Bible does not say that the earth does not move. It says the earth is firmly established (as in its orbit) and can not BE moved. Can you move the earth? Can an atomic bomb even move the earth? Nothing can move the earth out of where the Lord has established it. This is the meaning of the scripture.

This is called reinterpreting the Bible in light of science.

This is done again and again. For some reason many fundamentalists still have a problem with evolution, I don't know why.

 

[CabVet]

Sorry I consider your response far too kind.

Reading between the lines I see he has a firm idea of what should be taken literally and what not. Verses are judged depending on convictions already held and go into the figurative or literal bucket depending on which fits better to confirm those convictions.

Actually, come to think about it, I completely agree with this. So it goes more or less like this:"if I agree with the literal interpretation, then it is literal, if I don't, then it is allegorical".

I instead will echo the thoughts of Lewis. One should use the same techniques and tools one uses for any other document. Some parts are clear beyond doubt. Things given as commands or laws are literal. Some parts are clearly poetry and should be read as such.

I will point out that even commands have one significant issue, one needs to be quite sure of what eh original words meant and in many cases there is dispute regarding the scope of a command.

Not to mention that there are different lists of commandments in different parts of the Bible.

One final point. A statement may be literal but not detailed. You might tell a friend you house is the first white house on the right side of the street. Only a fool would pass your house by because you failed to mention the blue trim. The description is NOT wrong. It would be wrong if you said it had red trim. There is a difference.

Agreed.

 

[AV1611VET]

For some reason many fundamentalists still have a problem with evolution, I don't know why.

You're kinda new here, aren't you?

 

[LastSeven]

It's somewhat amusing but also somewhat irritating to see atheists and agnostics try to come to grips with the merits of a work of faith. If you don't have faith as a starting point, and you try to read the Bible as a scientific journal, you're going to not only misunderstand, but also completely miss the point.

Of course the whole point of this thread is to discredit people of faith, so it shouldn't be surprising to see you all try so hard, but no matter how hard you try you can't discredit something you don't understand.

I'm not trying to convert anybody to Christianity here. Just trying to bring some balance to the discussion. In the end, everybody was created with a free will, and a choice to believe or not to believe. I guess you just have to ask yourself, when your last day comes, will you be confident in your decision? And even if you are, it won't matter one iota when you die, because whatever happens after you die is out of your control. You'd better hope you've made the right choice.

 

[lasthero]

but no matter how hard you try you can't discredit something you don't understand.

Really? You don't understand evolution and AGW, but you sure had no problem trying to discredit them a few pages ago.

 

[bhsmte]

Actually, come to think about it, I completely agree with this. So it goes more or less like this:"if I agree with the literal interpretation, then it is literal, if I don't, then it is allegorical".



Not to mention that there are different lists of commandments in different parts of the Bible.



Agreed.

Christians have cherry picked and selectively interpreted the bible for centuries and it has only gotten more extreme as science has filled in gaps.

The more science discovers, the wilder the interpretations get. The next 10-20 years should be fun to watch.

 

[RedRover]

Translation: I have no idea who decides which passages are literal and which are not.

Let me make it easy, they all have a literal meaning as well as MANY other meanings. When there is so many layers to work with it is amazing that people can not even figure out the most simple and easy of lessons from the Bible.

 

[AV1611VET]

Let me make it easy, they all have a literal meaning as well as MANY other meanings. When there is so many layers to work with it is amazing that people can not even figure out the most simple and easy of lessons from the Bible.

And, of course, what's their solution to this dilemma?

Don't go to Sunday school, don't go to church, take the Bible out of school, etc.

Thumb their noses at the Bible, thumb their noses at basic doctrine, thumb their noses at speculation ...

... then sit and expect us to explain it to them to their satisfaction.

 

[AV1611VET]

Christians have cherry picked and selectively interpreted the bible for centuries ...

While non-Christians do what? the same thing?

 

[HitchSlap]

Since the purpose of your question is only to find holes in my answer, I will not even try to explain this to you.

For those who care to understand scripture, they will struggle with this question and consult their brethren for better understanding. There is however no sense in discussing this struggle with an atheist.

I didn't think you had an answer without equivocating.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me make it easy, they all have a literal meaning as well as MANY other meanings. When there is so many layers to work with it is amazing that people can not even figure out the most simple and easy of lessons from the Bible.

In other words it means what you want it to mean.

Move over Nostradamus.

 

[HitchSlap]

While non-Christians do what? the same thing?

Why would "non-Christians" need too? We're free to accept reality as it is, unlike those who have to make up farcical scenarios including Neptune, NJ and "maturity without history."

Really, now.

 

[bhsmte]

While non-Christians do what? the same thing?

Objective people critique the bible as they would any other book. Is it accurate, does it have historical credibility etc. etc..

Of course, this investigation irks many christians, who feel the bible should be off limits to any analysis, while at the same time, they refuse to acknowledge the verifiable evidence provided by science.

If that is the way one wants to go through life, then knock yourself out.

 

[Phred]

And, of course, what's their solution to this dilemma?

Don't go to Sunday school,

That's up to you. I find indoctrinating children to be child abuse. Especially when the information is provably false.

don't go to church,

That's up to you. If it makes you happy, go. If not, don't go.

take the Bible out of school, etc.

The Bible has no place in public school. Removing it was a no-brainer. If you want your children exposed to the Bible then you can send them to a Christian school. Simple.

Thumb their noses at the Bible,

Well, yeah. You say it's so many things I simply don't agree with. So... yeah.

thumb their noses at basic doctrine, thumb their noses at speculation ...

Same.

... then sit and expect us to explain it to them to their satisfaction.

You're the one who says it's scientific. You say that it's perfect and agrees with the world around us. I expect you to prove what you say or stop saying it.

 

[CabVet]

And, of course, what's their solution to this dilemma?

Don't go to Sunday school, don't go to church,

Really? Who is advocating that? Or is this just bearing false witness (again)?

take the Bible out of school, etc.

That's called separation of church and state. The Qur'an is kept out of the school for the same reason, and I am sure you are glad for that.

Thumb their noses at the Bible, thumb their noses at basic doctrine, thumb their noses at speculation ...

... then sit and expect us to explain it to them to their satisfaction.

Similarly, you thumb your nose at the Qur'an, at basic Islamic doctrine, at Islamic speculation...

... then you sit and expect us to accept your interpretations of the Bible to your satisfaction.

P.S.: you can replace Islamic references with the religion of your liking.