Ostrich wings, Intelligent design. Goofed up?

[Roderick Spode]

One can accept all of the miracles mentioned in the Bible. Why is literal inerrancy necessary to that acceptance?

Yes, that is a fundamental Christian doctrine. Why is literal inerrancy necessary to accept that doctrine?

What I believe is that the God successfully inspired the authors to write down His account just as He willed. What we read in the Bible is what God intends us to see.

So there were no errors as in portions of the Bible not being what God intended. Nothing accidentally slipped in there that could be written off as error.

Although Thomas Jefferson apparently didn't see it that way.

 

[BCP1928]

By observation I could argue that the resurrection didn't happen.

Why do you believe that it did happen? I have heard of Christians who only believe in the Resurrection because they believe the Biblical accounts of it are literal and accurate. It's kind of a fringe thing, but could that be your position?

 

[The Barbarian]

No.

The day Adam was created.

Adam was created after bronze was invented? You sure about that?

Assuming they used stone first.

Documented in many, many places. C'mon.

Even if God didn't show Adam around His creation (including the earth from space)

That's your addition to scripture. The Bible says no such thing. This is not a creative writing assignment.

People keep thinking "east and west" and overlook "north and south."

It works north and south, too. Thought you realized this.

Anyone walking from southern Pangaea to northern Pangaea

Would not be a human, since humans didn't appear until long after the breakup of the continents.

It would take the arrival of scientists (known as empiricists back then) to start teaching the earth was flat.

Which scientist do you think taught that the Earth is flat? The Hebrews thought that the Earth was flat under the solid dome of a sky, but they had no scientists, and by Hellenistic times, they knew better, too.

Tell us about that scientist, though; I really want to know.

 

[The Barbarian]

Ya ... history is full of things cross-checked for accuracy, isn't it?

Yep. It's what historians do. You didn't know that?

 

[BCP1928]

What I believe is that the God successfully inspired the authors to write down His account just as He willed. What we read in the Bible is what God intends us to see.

So there were no errors as in portions of the Bible not being what God intended. Nothing accidentally slipped in there that could be written off as error.

Yes, again, that is a widespread if not universal Christian belief. But it does not require that the Genesis stories be 100% accurate literal history,

 

[Roderick Spode]

Showing off His Glory and His Sovereignty and His Authority and so on ?
He did PROMISE
not to destroy all mankind again, not be a flood anyway. (by fire, yes, but that's later)

I personally think this is why there's not enough water available now to flood the entire globe, which is one of the arguments made against it.

If there was evidence of a global flood, chances are it could happen again.

 

[The Barbarian]

The members of the Discovery Institute set a goal influencing society. They apparently understand their restrictions on pushing religion in the public classroom.

Well, let's take a look... From the Wedge Document of the Discovery Institute:

Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Christians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidences that support the faith, as well as to "popularize" our ideas in the broader culture.
...
We will also pursue possible legal assistance in response to resistance to the integration of design theory into public school science curricula.

The Wedge Document | National Center for Science Education

(Note - This is the text of the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Document," prepared in 1998.

ncse.ngo

Apparently, they don't. They are willing to sue school districts to insert their religious beliefs into public school curricula. ID founder Philip Johnson called the Dover Trial a "train wreck" for ID, not because he objected to ID being imposed on public school children, but because he believed it was too early to make a case of it.

 

[The Barbarian]

As written somewhere in Scripture what is falsely called knowledge is used to oppose both Yahweh Creator and Yahshua Messiah. (in arguments opposed to Truth)

It happens that some advocates of a global flood have confused themselves with God and His word. But far from all of them.

 

[Roderick Spode]

As written somewhere in Scripture what is falsely called knowledge is used to oppose both Yahweh Creator and Yahshua Messiah. (in arguments opposed to Truth)

1 Timothy 6:20?

 

[Roderick Spode]

In Judeo-Christian tradition, the story of the Flood symbolises God’s punishment of sin among mankind. He decides to destroy all of man except for Noah and his family, because Noah alone among men had lived a life free from sin and evil. Noah and his descendants thus mark the beginning of a new relationship between God and man, with the rainbow symbolising God’s promise not to flood again.

This ‘covenant’ paves the way for the New Testament and Jesus Christ, whose covenant with mankind will be even more pronounced, since Jesus will sacrifice himself for all humans, to redeem their sins.

A Summary and Analysis of the Biblical Story of the Flood and Noah’s Ark

By Dr Oliver Tearle (Loughborough University) The Biblical account of the Flood, in the Book of Genesis, is similar to the older Babylonian accounts of a Great Flood. These texts, written much earl…

interestingliterature.com

So you do believe the narrative was an actual event?

 

[Roderick Spode]

I don't get your point with these cultural references.

I think cultural influences at times influence our perception of the bible. If you don't think that applies to you, I wouldn't worry about it, but I'll give you an example.

The account of Elisha and the bears:

When I first read it, I thought the same thing many people seem to think at first glance reading. An insecure adult man, angered by some little brats insulting him, cursed them resulting in God sending 2 bears to pacify his prophet's anger. And our culture might lead us to read the text this way

After considering the language and historicity of the times and location, it's clear that it's not the case. The little brats were more than likely a mob of young men, possibly about to do Elisha much harm.

So it does. Why does literal inerrancy matter?

Matter for what?

There are many literary genres present in the Bible. Some of them are historical genres. Why is a framework of literal inerrancy necessary to understand them?

Understand parables? If that's what you're talking about, the meaning of parables are explained by Jesus Himself so His disciples, and the readers can readily understand them.

 

[BCP1928]

I think cultural influences at times influence our perception of the bible. If you don't think that applies to you, I wouldn't worry about it, but I'll give you an example.

The account of Elisha and the bears:

When I first read it, I thought the same thing many people seem to think at first glance reading. An insecure adult man, angered by some little brats insulting him, cursed them resulting in God sending 2 bears to pacify his prophet's anger. And our culture might lead us to read the text this way

After considering the language and historicity of the times and location, it's clear that it's not the case. The little brats were more than likely a mob of young men, possibly about to do Elisha much harm.

Matter for what?

Understand parables? If that's what you're talking about, the meaning of parables are explained by Jesus Himself so His disciples, and the readers can readily understand them.

No, I'm not talking about parables. I'm talking about the entire collection of texts we call the Bible.

 

[Roderick Spode]

No. But I am very curious why you hold and defend it and (if not you then many of those who feel the same way about it) disparage the faith of other Christians for not holding it.

Where/when did I disparage the faith of other Christians not holding it?

That the majority of Christians do not feel a need to embrace literal inerrancy to pursue those tasks. Why do you?

I meant to ask you, what do you mean by literal inerrancy? I don't see the two words combined much.

 

[Roderick Spode]

1 Timothy 6:20 (NKJV)

"20 O Timothy! nGuard what was committed to your trust, oavoiding the profane and 6idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge—"
Partly , when used properly. Actually, if used here few who are <hopefully> faithful to Jesus would reply to vain threads Scripture warns against, eh ?

Are you saying we shouldn't reply to these threads?

 

[The Barbarian]

So you do believe the narrative was an actual event?

I don't know if it was or not. Doesn't matter to the message. But there is evidence of a great flood in the Middle East at about the right time.

 

[BCP1928]

Where/when did I disparage the faith of other Christians not holding it?

I said, if not you then many others. It happens frequently even in this forum which is heavily moderated against it and one of the reasons I don't put my faith in my profile.

I meant to ask you, what do you mean by literal inerrancy? I don't see the two words combined much.

https://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_1.pdf

 

[The Barbarian]

Since God Himself Reveals Clearly His Purpose and His PLan in Sending the Global Flood to destroy all mankind except for the Eight He Saved,

Scripture doesn't say it was global. "Global"is man's add-on to God's word.

 

[Roderick Spode]

It seems clear enough that if one's interpretation of the Bible is at odds with observed phenomena, there's something wrong with the interpretation. How could God be wrong about His own creation?


You were there? Science doesn't rule out miracles. But the point is, miracles aren't done because God has to patch up nature so it will work. He does a miracle to teach us something.

No I wasn't there, just like none of us were there at the time life came on the scene.

The question remains; how could God be wrong about His own creation?

A YEC sees the same thing you or anyone else sees. Does a YEC describe the observable any different than you?

That's the problem for YE creationists. They have to invent all sorts of unscriptural miracles to make their doctrines believable. A major red flag for any doctrine.

Can you give me an example?

 

[Roderick Spode]

Well, let's take a look... From the Wedge Document of the Discovery Institute:

Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Christians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidences that support the faith, as well as to "popularize" our ideas in the broader culture.
...
We will also pursue possible legal assistance in response to resistance to the integration of design theory into public school science curricula.

The Wedge Document | National Center for Science Education

(Note - This is the text of the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Document," prepared in 1998.

ncse.ngo

Apparently, they don't. They are willing to sue school districts to insert their religious beliefs into public school curricula. ID founder Philip Johnson called the Dover Trial a "train wreck" for ID, not because he objected to ID being imposed on public school children, but because he believed it was too early to make a case of it.

Yes, and they also made a distinction between Christianity and design theory. The verdict was not based on their religious fanaticism. If they taught natural evolution and at the same time were religious fanatics on their own time, there wouldn't be an issue.

I understand that they infuriate many like yourself, but emotions should be put aside. Obviously they weren't in this trial. It was essentially a witch trial of sorts. I myself find the humanist propaganda infuriating. But as long as proponents of humanism keep their anti-Christianity out of the classroom, they have certain rights that the DI should have to influence society.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Scripture doesn't say it was global. "Global"is man's add-on to God's word.

I think Genesis 7:23 allows a global inference. If every living thing on the face of the earth were "wiped out" (NIV), how were koalas killed by a flood in Mesopotamia?