Evolution vs. Creationism |
Post Reply | Page <1234 29> |
Author | |||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:35 | ||
^ lol! Well, I was a dedicated Christian for my whole life up until this year, so I really did try to accept EVERYTHING about that story; not just its scientific contradictions.
I hope you can forgtive me my sinful ways and still consider yourself my friend, though. ''Refulgance'' still stands on my top most anticipated albums list. |
|||
someone_else
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: May 02 2008 Location: Going Bananas Status: Online Points: 24287 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:38 | ||
Basically I am a creationist. It is too hard to believe for me that more developed life forms are evolved out of simple ones or that human beings are the offspring of some sort of monkey. Even a look in the mirror cannot change my mind .
|
|||
|
|||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:41 | ||
Yes, because somebody snapping their fingers to bring everything into existence without any scientific support is SO much more logical. |
|||
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:53 | ||
We certainly aren't offsprings of monkeys ... it would be more accurate to say that humans and monkeys share a common ancestor. But read the book that I linked to on the previous page ... Dawkins presents all the evidence anyone should need to understand how all this could happen. |
|||
Epignosis
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32524 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:55 | ||
I appreciate that. By the way, I am fairly convinced that the sun standing still business is meant to be read idiomatically. |
|||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:57 | ||
Don't bother trying to explain how evolution actually works to this man. He obviously has never had a true science class in his life. |
|||
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 12:59 | ||
^ If little by little everything the bible says is meant to be read idiomatically, it's longer a religion ... it's myth. Which is exactly how I see it.
Edited by Mr ProgFreak - November 28 2009 at 12:59 |
|||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:01 | ||
I know, Robert. I used to try and explain away all the Bible's contradictions as well, but after years of cherry-picking which passages shpuld be taken literal, which passages were being misinterprerated, etc. I realized that I was trying to justify something that was unjustifiable. Or at least . . . that's how I feel these days. Who knows . . . ''pray for me'' and maybe I'll find my way back. Until then, let's just all enjoy the beauty of Prog, nomatter how it got here. |
|||
Epignosis
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32524 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:02 | ||
If little by little everything in the newspaper is meant to be read idiomatically, it's not longer news. Some things in the Bible are literal, some are figurative. Just like pretty much every piece of writing ever made. |
|||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:08 | ||
This. The more science contradicts the Bible, the more Christians will re-interperate it as allegorical, metephorical, etc. Just so they can continue believing in it for a little while longer. Talking snakes no longer a possiblity? All of a sudden 'the serpant' becomes a title rather than a physical form Satan took on. Too many species of animal discovered by this point to possibly fit in a boat? That's okay, because some bible scholars are now saying that the entire book of Gnesis is allegorical. *phew!* that was close! Not possible to part an ocean? Cool! Because don't ya know, the ''Red Sea'' was actually mistranslated! Now they're saying Moses and crew most likely crossed the ''Reed Sea'', a very shallow river of sorts that will evaporate into mist sometimes. See? It's still the infallable word of God! We just f**ked around with its meaning a lot in order to keep it making sense in modern times. No big deal. Edited by p0mt3 - November 28 2009 at 13:09 |
|||
Vibrationbaby
Forum Senior Member Joined: February 13 2004 Status: Offline Points: 6898 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:13 | ||
You guys are deep
|
|||
Epignosis
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32524 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:24 | ||
But you see Micah, people go about things backwards. I'm fairly sure there wasn't a big discovery down the line that told us that serpents don't speak words. The Bible is Middle Eastern literature. As such, it is riddled with hyperbole, heterosis, personification, etc, etc. EW Bullinger's greatest contribution to biblical study is his index of figurative language (which is over 1100 pages). But figurative language doesn't disrupt the flow, coherence, or reliability of a narrative among people sharing the same culture. Think of how frustrating it is when someone who is not a native English speaker on the forum here becomes confused over an idiom you have used (poor Marty McFly...I really must watch myself around him ). I've said this a hundred times...the Bible is removed from our culture by the span of centuries and many miles. If a person thinks he will understand it just by reading it through the lens of his own cultural and linguistic background, he will come away with an erroneous interpretation. Sadly, that's what most folks do. From time to time, people tell me that I misunderstand the tenets of evolution, and so they want to refer me to some books- I can accept that. I have not spent much time studying the subject. I have spent over a decade studying the Bible and its culture, and would appreciate that folks don't immediately "poo poo" the Bible simply because of a few difficult passages or erroneous interpretations from "scholars." I have a few books these people should read. And say, don't evolutionists change their opinions and beliefs all the time to reflect new discoveries? What's wrong with that? |
|||
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:27 | ||
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/specious BTW: I thought the bible was more than just a "piece of writing"? |
|||
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:30 | ||
Spoken like a true snake. For one, evolution is neither opinion nor belief. It is a theory. Which is again an ambiguous word, as explained by Richard Dawkins in the first chapter of the book I linked to. And while it is true that scientific theories sometimes need to be amended as new discoveries are made, evolution as a theory has not been changed since the days of Darwin. |
|||
Epignosis
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32524 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:34 | ||
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/red+herring http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/composition/ |
|||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:35 | ||
Interesting. And here I thought the authors of the Bible were trying to spread the word of God. Seems to me if you're on that important of a mission, you would be very exact and straightforward so as to avoid confusion. But I guess telling the good news in a literal sense was too boring, so they riddled the infallible word of God with culture-specific hyperbole and personification. I'll be damned. |
|||
Vompatti
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: October 22 2005 Location: elsewhere Status: Offline Points: 67407 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:36 | ||
The problem with modern science is that it accepts a materialistic view of the world without any scientific proof. It's no wonder that some of the things in the Bible seem unbelievable when people are trying to squeeze them into their narrow, "scientific" view of the world.
|
|||
Epignosis
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32524 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:36 | ||
Wait, so if I failed to understand something (even something as pedantic as saying "opinion" instead of "theory,") it's okay to recommend me a book? I'll do you one better. Here's two: http://www.amazon.com/Social-Science-Commentary-Synoptic-Gospels-Malina/dp/0800634918 http://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Exodus-Scientists-Discovery-Extraordinary/dp/0060582731/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259436957&sr=1-1 |
|||
JLocke
Prog Reviewer Joined: November 18 2007 Status: Offline Points: 4900 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:37 | ||
Are you for real? |
|||
Vompatti
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: October 22 2005 Location: elsewhere Status: Offline Points: 67407 |
Posted: November 28 2009 at 13:37 | ||
What makes you think I'm not? |
|||
Post Reply | Page <1234 29> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |