Spirituality
12 May 12
31 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywill
That's a nice summary of your views. But I didn't see anything which "flatly and totally" contradicts Genesis chapter 1. Now if you were talking about the earth not being on the backs of four giant turtles, then I might say that that flatly contradicts some pagan cosmogony, but not the Bible.[/b]
Dinosaurs, though not part of our present world, may have been hinted at in Genesis. And your molten earth possibly also could be alluded to when it says that the earth was waste and empty - generally not fit for life and human beings to yet thrive upon.
This is rediculous and evasive. In order to preserve your position in the face of argument, you rely on such a narrow and vague version of the Biblical account of the origin of the Earth and its living species as to be empty. In your account, for example, while there may indeed be some aversion to Dinosaurs, it is so indirect and obtuse that without other information we would be totally uninformed. That information comes from and can only come from science.
If this does indeed enable you to insist that science does not prove the Bible wrong or false, then by the same token how does it manage to demonstrate that not only is the scientific account wrong, but it is proven to be wrong by the Bible? At the very least, you leave open the obvious necessity for science to establish the existence of dinosaurs, and therefore to describe them, categorise them in a coherent way and account for them scientifically. This cannot be done using the bible which is silent on the subject to all meaningful intents and purposes. Once you agree that dinosaurs are not a figment of the scientific imagination, as you just did above, then you must engage with the science and not simply reject its work out of hand. The reality that the science cannot proceed in any useful direction by adhering to the Biblical account does not, in itself, demonstrate that it is atheistic let alone that it is false. You would not be able to do any useful mathematics by relying on the bible but that is because the Bible is silent on the matter, not because mathematics is inherently atheistc and false.
The Bible has nothing useful to say about the history of the Earth or Natural History generally and it is not a basis for either rejecting or even criticising scientific work. It does not support, in particular, the position of the Creationists whom you keep referencing, bearing in mind that Creationism is not the belief that God created the world, but a modern, very right wing political programme centred in the USA.
31 May 12
Originally posted by finneganDinosaurs, though not part of our present world, may have been hinted at in Genesis. And your molten earth possibly also could be alluded to when it says that the earth was waste and empty - generally not fit for life and human beings to yet thrive upon.
This is rediculous and evasive. In order to preserve your position in the face of argume ...[text shortened]... hat God created the world, but a modern, very right wing political programme centred in the USA.
This is rediculous and evasive. In order to preserve your position in the face of argument, you rely on such a narrow and vague version of the Biblical account of the origin of the Earth and its living species as to be empty.
No, I call it God havng priorities in revelation which may differ from your priorities. I call it God being economical about what it is that He wants to reveal to all the human race.
It should be pretty obvious from the writing of Moses, describing the priesthood, measurements of the tabernacle, utinsels, and manner of the Levitical service, that the writer was intelligent enough to develop minute detail if he had to.
The God who is revealing Genesis is revealing the things most crucial to human salvation and eternal purpose. You feel incredulous because you think God's only priority should have been to satisfy every item of human curiosity. There is a limit to the contents which have no other purpose than to inform our curiosity for its own sake.
In your account, for example, while there may indeed be some aversion to Dinosaurs, it is so indirect and obtuse that without other information we would be totally uninformed. That information comes from and can only come from science.
Dinosaurs were not an interest to mankind until around the 1800s when the industrial revolution called for the digging into the ground. Then these bones were found and people paid attention to Dinosaurs.
Four hundred years from now, WHAT other things of which we have no concern today, may show up and capture our attention ?
The question is, should God include exhautively everything that He knows in the creation account ? Or should He include what is crucial to the most amount of people who will live from generation to generation ?
What mysteries still await man ? What completely unknown artifiacts are still out there to be discovered ? Much of human history knew nothing of Dinosaurs. Much of human history today knows nothing of possible artifiacts yet to be uncovered on earth, in the sea, or even in outer space perhaps on other planets.
God's book must speak to all generations. He speaks economically with a focus on His eternal purpose and His plan of salvation. I don't take this economy for naivete. I don't take the simplicity for ignorance on God's part. I think God knows all the facts, period.
If this does indeed enable you to insist that science does not prove the Bible wrong or false, then by the same token how does it manage to demonstrate that not only is the scientific account wrong, but it is proven to be wrong by the Bible? At the very least, you leave open the obvious necessity for science to establish the existence of dinosaurs, and therefore to describe them, categorise them in a coherent way and account for them scientifically.
I leave open the possibility that not only dinosaurs may be added to our knowledge but many other things that our children will deal with. And they may include things of which we are as unaware of today as the intelligent people were of Dinosaurs 2,000 years ago.
I am all for science discovery. But I believe God has spoken. I am not eager to assume God has not or that He does not exist. I believe He has spoken through a Book, the Bible, which generations cannot make obsolete.
Now I cannot look at the rest of your comments now. I have to suspend writing.
This cannot be done using the bible which is silent on the subject to all meaningful intents and purposes. Once you agree that dinosaurs are not a figment of the scientific imagination, as you just did above, then you must engage with the science and not simply reject its work out of hand.
There are about 200 billion GALAXIES out there. God knows what is in every single one. He has the stars numbered. Its child's play to God. We should humble ourselves and not be so arrogant.
When man is ready to know what is in every single one of the 200 billion galaxies each with billions of stars and perhaps the Father will tell us.
And that brings me to another issue. Why do we want to know all these things anway ? It is because we SEARCH for a better way to improve our lives on earth. What is the tecnology all for ? It is to improve our lives.
How about we give some attention to the book which reveals God's plan of salvation for the world ?
Have to go.
01 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by wolfgang59You cannot present another 11 chapters of any human writing which covers in as much space so many critical pieces of information about man's existence on this earth.
You can call the Bible many things but economical it aint!!!
Have you plodded through the OT?
Want to try it ? Go to your handy list of creation of the world mythologies or early world history mythologies. Find as many crucial items about human history as are covered in the several thousands words comphrising Genesis 1 - 11.
Hey, if scientist Stephen Hawking can write a best seller called A Brief History of Time then why cannot a prophet of God, Moses, also write a "brief history of time" - The book of Genesis ?
01 Jun 12
1 edit
Once you agree that dinosaurs are not a figment of the scientific imagination, as you just did above, then you must engage with the science and not simply reject its work out of hand.
Do you expect me to accept this as a genuinely accurate charge ?
Where did I say dinosaurs were a figment of imagination ?
Quote me.
I said the opposite. The bones found in the earth obviously prove some animals lived long ago which apparently are no longer living. I never said they were imaginary.
I said:
Dinosaurs were not an interest to mankind until around the 1800s when the industrial revolution called for the digging into the ground. Then these bones were found and people paid attention to Dinosaurs.
01 Jun 12
Originally posted by jaywillyou are right.
You cannot present another [b]11 chapters of any human writing which covers in as much space so many critical pieces of information about man's existence on this earth.
Want to try it ? Go to your handy list of creation of the world mythologies or early world history mythologies. Find as many crucial items about human history as are covered in the s ...[text shortened]... God, Moses, also write a "brief history of time" - The book of Genesis ?[/b]
and while we are on the subject, j.k.rowling also wrote some bestsellers. should we start investing in research of magical devices based on that? after all, like moses, harry potter never stops and says to hermione "i am fictional". so if we don't ask rowling, how do we know harry potter is a work of fiction?
01 Jun 12
Originally posted by jaywillI am afraid that only makes sense if you start with the assumption that the Biblical account is factual.
You cannot present another [b]11 chapters of any human writing which covers in as much space so many critical pieces of information about man's existence on this earth.[/b]
01 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadI don't suddenly make the "assumption" it is factual. Far from it.
I am afraid that only makes sense if you start with the assumption that the Biblical account is factual.
I got convinced, eventually, that the people involved in its writing had integrity, could be trusted, and were speaking about a God which is entirely belieavable once certain self centered, sin loving protection mechanisms were discarded with.
And it also helps to dispel for one's self the myth of the Atheist's "objectivity". Knowing that such skeptical "objectivity" was nothing but vested interest preserving egoism, it was not too hard.
Don't waste too much time trying to persuade me of your atheistic, detached objectivity. I saw through that tissue of lies years ago.
01 Jun 12
Originally posted by Zahlanzi
you are right.
and while we are on the subject, j.k.rowling also wrote some bestsellers. should we start investing in research of magical devices based on that? after all, like moses, harry potter never stops and says to hermione "i am fictional". so if we don't ask rowling, how do we know harry potter is a work of fiction?
and while we are on the subject, j.k.rowling also wrote some bestsellers.
jump to conclusions quick, don't you ?
should we start investing in research of magical devices based on that?
jump to concl;usions quick, don't you ?
after all, like moses, harry potter never stops and says to hermione "i am fictional". so if we don't ask rowling, how do we know harry potter is a work of fiction?
When you get a nation with a history around it going back as far as the Jews around Harry Potter, then you can come back touting comparisons.
No comparison, smart guy. No comparison between Harry Potter entertainment and the solid historical riddle of the existence of the JEW.
01 Jun 12
5 edits
Originally posted by wolfgang59
You can call the Bible many things but economical it aint!!!
Have you plodded through the OT?
You can call the Bible many things but economical it aint!!!
Have you plodded through the OT?
Money where mouth is please.
Go to your myths. There is a collection of them on the Internet from all over the world and multiple ancient cultures. There is at least one site that has them all together.
Show me one you think is as revealing about as many crucial matters of human existence on this earth in as many words as Genesis 1 - 11.
That is a genuine challenge. See if you can meet it. I mean ONE document and not a conglomeration. They should tell us something of ie.
1.) Origin of heaven and earth.
2.) Origin of life.
3.) Origin of First human WEEK.
4.) Purpose of MAN's design.
5.) Origin of agriculture.
6.) Origin of first Marriage.
7.) The history of First human family.
8.) Origin of sin and moral wrong doing.
9.) Origin of human DEATH.
10.) History of first marriages.
11.) History of first religious worship.
12.) History of first murder.
13.) Origin of first human city.
14.) Origin of poligamy
15.) First examples of twisting God's words
16.) Origin of metal work.
17.) Origin of shepherding.
18.) Origin of first musician.
19.) Example of universal judgment.
20.) Example of divine salvation from judgment.
21.) Origin of human govenrment.
22.) Origin of different human languages.
23.) Origin of spread of nations over the earth.
We're up to about Genesis 11.
Now get on your little horse and find one ancient document of mythological cosmogony which covers as many critical items of universe and human history.
Money where mouth is please.
01 Jun 12
Originally posted by jaywillGenesis IS a conglomeration. The fact that people have published it as one 'book' does not change the fact.You can call the Bible many things but economical it aint!!!
Have you plodded through the OT?
Money where mouth is please.
Go to your myths. There is a collection of them on the Internet from all over the world and multiple ancient cultures. There is at least one site that has them all together.
Show me one you think ...[text shortened]... vers as many critical items of universe and human history.
Money where mouth is please.
So, since we can use conglomerations if they have been printed as a single book, I submit Aesop's Fables.
01 Jun 12
3 edits
Originally posted by SwissGambit
Genesis IS a conglomeration. The fact that people have published it as one 'book' does not change the fact.
So, since we can use conglomerations if they have been printed as a single book, I submit Aesop's Fables.
Genesis IS a conglomeration. The fact that people have published it as one 'book' does not change the fact.
Genesis is ONE BOOK. It has been so for a long long time.
Care to document when it was regarded as more than one book ?
JPED - Documentary Hypothesis is a theory dude.
So, since we can use conglomerations if they have been printed as a single book, I submit Aesop's Fables.
Come on. Could you name me the place, location of the events of one of ANY of the fables of Aesop?
"East of Eden" is geography. The mentioning of Euphrates and Tigres rivers is geography. The mention of Ethiopia and Assyria in the first two to four chapters of Genesis is far from "once upon a time in a far off land".
Any geneologies in Aesop's fables ? ? ?
Hmmm.
01 Jun 12
Originally posted by jaywillCome on wolfgang. Where's your rebuttal ?You can call the Bible many things but economical it aint!!!
Have you plodded through the OT?
Money where mouth is please.
Go to your myths. There is a collection of them on the Internet from all over the world and multiple ancient cultures. There is at least one site that has them all together.
Show me one you think ...[text shortened]... vers as many critical items of universe and human history.
Money where mouth is please.
I know "speed kills" but this is ridiculous!
I thought this would be a five minute slam dunk for you for sure.
Ten Minutes ?
Twenty ?
01 Jun 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitThat's funny even if it is absurd. ha ha 😀
Genesis IS a conglomeration. The fact that people have published it as one 'book' does not change the fact.
So, since we can use conglomerations if they have been printed as a single book, I submit Aesop's Fables.