Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps you could explain why you think it's important.

I've been accused of injecting pseudoscience into Genesis 1.

That "pseudoscience" prevents egregious mistakes like he made from happening.

 

[ottawak]

Of course its not the point of the account.

Mine of course is just that the story is in some
measure inaccurate, and what that so- obvious fact
means for literalists.

Good luck getting an answer to that one. Having been raised in a faith which regards Scripture as the inspired word of God but which does not embrace literalism, the "why" of it has always escaped me. Perhaps that is why I hang around in chatrooms like this, and perhaps someday I will come across a sensible answer.

 

[Astrid]

Good luck getting an answer to that one. Having been raised in a faith which regards Scripture as the inspired word of God but which does not embrace literalism, the "why" of it has always escaped me. Perhaps that is why I hang around in chatrooms like this, and perhaps someday I will come across a sensible answer.

Well !

Mutual wishes for good luck!

 

[AV1611VET]

Good luck getting an answer to that one. Having been raised in a faith which regards Scripture as the inspired word of God but which does not embrace literalism, the "why" of it has always escaped me. Perhaps that is why I hang around in chatrooms like this, and perhaps someday I will come across a sensible answer.

You mean like here: Post 1512

In short, the molten sea was oval, not circular.

But the Bible calls it "round," which can be either oval or circular.

1 Kings 7:23 And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

To call it "circular," then say the Bible is wrong, might get you on the Dean's list, but you would be wrong.

 

[BNR32FAN]

So 99.9 percent of all pre flood species became extinct in the flood?

Of course not don’t be silly, there were many species that could survive the flood without an ark.

 

[ottawak]

You mean like here: Post 1512

In short, the molten sea was oval, not circular.

But the Bible calls it "round," which can be either oval or circular.

To call it "circular," then say the Bible is wrong, might get you on the Dean's list, but you would be wrong.

It depends on what you mean by "the Bible is wrong." To say that the Bible is not always literally accurate is only an accusation of wrongness to a literalist.

 

[AV1611VET]

Mutual wishes for good luck!

What you call "luck," I call "apologetics."

 

[AV1611VET]

It depends on what you mean by "the Bible is wrong." To say that the Bible is not always literally accurate is only an accusation of wrongness to a literalist.

God: And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

Polyhymnia: And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was circular all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

Polyhymnia's students: The Bible shows Pi as 3.0

 

[BNR32FAN]

It is a possible answer, but far from perfect, for lo:
There is simply no way the measurements are very accurate.

Common sense tells you that.

So, the q. Is still- are you going to take the numbers as literally true?

When your using a cubit as a method for measurement you can only expect the accuracy to be within about 18 inches or so. So a .08” difference is hardly something that needed to be included in the description of Saul’s pool. I’d be willing to bet that if someone were to buy a swimming pool and the measurement of the pool was .08” bigger than advertised no one would think twice about it.

 

[ottawak]

When your using a cubit as a method for measurement you can only expect the accuracy to be within about 18 inches or so. So a .08” difference is hardly something that needed to be included in the description of Saul’s pool. I’d be willing to bet that if someone were to buy a swimming pool and the measurement of the pool was .08” bigger than advertised no one would think twice about it.

So why do you defend the accuracy of the measurements?

 

[Astrid]

Of course not don’t be silly, there were many species that could survive the flood without an ark.

Really ?
Name some. Take into account fresh water
and salt water, few can survive in both.
No land plant or animal could survive a year
in the water.

As for the 99 percent-https://www.discovery.com/nature/99-Percent-Of-The-Earths-Species-Are-Extinct
Its good not to just say things as if you
know them, dont you think so?

 

[Astrid]

When your using a cubit as a method for measurement you can only expect the accuracy to be within about 18 inches or so. So a .08” difference is hardly something that needed to be included in the description of Saul’s pool. I’d be willing to bet that if someone were to buy a swimming pool and the measurement of the pool was .08” bigger than advertised no one would think twice about it.

Your precise 0.08" inches is made up of course but
I am glad to see you agree the numbers are not accurate-
but I hoped we were past that.
If you believe the bible is literal truth, what do you
do when the numbers are not true?
Brush it off with talk of swimming pools?

 

[AV1611VET]

If you believe the bible is literal truth, what do you
do when the numbers are not true?

Look at the shape.

Isn't that what they teach in geometry?

Brush it off with talk of swimming pools?

Sure, why not?

 

[BNR32FAN]

So why do you defend the accuracy of the measurements?

I was defending the mathematics. You were implying that the Bible contained incorrect mathematics.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then why did you make such an egregious error here:
Could it be that your attitude towards Genesis 1 being mythical, coupled with your attitude that certain terms are "pseudoscience," that it has clouded your thinking?

Could be I made no error. After all, a real educator would have explained the error had it existed.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Your precise 0.08" inches is made up of course but
I am glad to see you agree the numbers are not accurate-
but I hoped we were past that.
If you believe the bible is literal truth, what do you
do when the numbers are not true?
Brush it off with talk of swimming pools?

Every system of measurement me have today is rounded to some extent. No system of measurement is precisely what it claims to be. An inch mark on a ruler isn’t exactly 1 inch it’s off by an extremely small fraction. Even the most expensive micrometers have a tolerance rating. So personally a piece of string with knots in it to measure cubits being accurate within .008” per cubit is pretty impressive in my opinion considering the technology during that era.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No it doesn't.

Not if the point is whether the bread was created ex nihilo or ex materia.

According to Valentine, it was created ex nihilo.

According to me, it was created ex materia.

Break the tie.

Where did I say that, AV?

If you can't quote me honestly, don't bother doing it at all.

 

[AV1611VET]

Could be I made no error.

No.

 

[AV1611VET]

Where did I say that, AV?

Ya ... my bad.

How would you answer someone who wanted to know how, if creation ended after six days, God fed the four thousand without doing any act of creating?

Wouldn't it be a better use of time to figure out how on Earth Red Riding Hood didn't recognize a freaking WOLF dressed up as her own grandmother?

That's what can happen when you get answer like this to good questions.

 

[ottawak]

I was defending the mathematics. You were implying that the Bible contained incorrect mathematics.

I was implying that the Bible passage in question does not contain any mathematics at all that should be subject to an exacting standard of mathematical correctness. You are struggling to justify a figure of 3.0 when it really does not make any difference.