lol, you don't get it do you? If you succeed in trying to make the argument be the bible against science then you will destroy Christianity.
It may all be good with you, but somewhere down the line of your kids or grandkids or great grandkids, they are going to look back and see all the foolishness your religion brought. The beginning of the end of Christianity... (if you succeed that is)
That is only true if you make the issue the Bible vs all science.
The issue is Scripture vs junk science and data manipulated by atheists and agnostics looking for "proof" that there is no Creator.
That is only true if you make the issue the Bible vs all science.
The issue is Scripture vs junk science and data manipulated by atheists and agnostics looking for "proof" that there is no Creator.
lol, and somehow you imagine YEC isn't junk? Is that because it's conclusion meshes with your beliefs or because its scientific claims mesh with reality?
lol, you don't get it do you? If you succeed in trying to make the argument be the bible against science then you will destroy Christianity.
It may all be good with you, but somewhere down the line of your kids or grandkids or great grandkids, they are going to look back and see all the foolishness your religion brought. The beginning of the end of Christianity... (if you succeed that is)
Thanks frogger. And that is why I tend to be passionate about this. The YEC are destroying the Christian faith.
Their inept attempts at "science" are embarrassing and foolish and ultimately leads them to lie and deceive. Read this testimony from Glenn Morton. Glenn's a Christian who used to actually work with the Institute for Creation Research. Then his "day job" at Atlantic Richfield exposed him to some troubling evidence for his YEC beliefs.
Glenn asked around and got no where with his questions. So he wrote a paper for an ICR symposium. The rest became history and was widely reported at the time and featured in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer. The "John Morris" who is identified here is the son of ICR's founder Henry Morris and was president of ICR at the time. Henry is the "father of Young Earth Creationism."
Fortunately Glenn faith survived the YEC assault against his faith. And that's just what it was - An attack against a man's faith in the veracity of the Bible by YEC zealots. He went on to become one of the chief contributers to the legenday TALKORIGINS FAQ, along with fellow Christian Mark Isaak.
Thanks frogger. And that is why I tend to be passionate about this. The YEC are destroying the Christian faith.
Their inept attempts at "science" are embarrassing and foolish and ultimately leads them to lie and deceive. Read this testimony from Glenn Morton. Glenn's a Christian who used to actually work with the Institute for Creation Research. Then his "day job" at Atlantic Richfield exposed him to some troubling evidence for his YEC beliefs.
Glenn asked around and got no where with his questions. So he wrote a paper for an ICR symposium. The rest became history and was widely reported at the time and featured in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer. The "John Morris" who is identified here is the son of ICR's founder Henry Morris and was president of ICR at the time. Henry is the "father of Young Earth Creationism."
Fortunately Glenn faith survived the YEC assault against his faith. And that's just what it was - An attack against a man's faith in the veracity of the Bible by YEC zealots. He went on to become one of the chief contributers to the legenday TALKORIGINS FAQ, along with fellow Christian Mark Isaak.
Excellent article.
Now I understand (OK, I understood before... this just drives it in) why Russel Humphreys continues to avoid debating Hugh Ross before an audience of peers, fellow physicists. They simply will NOT let themselves be challenged by the underlying science.
So in other words...you believe the parts of the bible you believe and think the others are meaningless or just symbollic? Therefore you can conclude that in your opinion Genesis is a bunch of lies, but you like the Jesus part so you're cool with that?
YOu claim YEC is foolishness because of your studies. I and a whole lot of others say the same thing about OEC. One of us has a Bible that says God did it in 6 days. I think I will stick with the Bible.
Technically, we both have a Bible wherein the word "day" can be translated to mean a 24 hour period or simply a period or passage of time. If we are to believe Psalm 19:1-4, then we have to believe that the heavens declare the glory and knowledge of God. If that is the case, then the heavens definitively declare towards an old universe.
You can't say that Genesis declares 6 literal days, because it does not. Conversely, we can also cannot say that it declares billions of years, because it does not. However, when taken into context with other scriptures, and with what the heavens declare, there is little doubt towards an OEC viewpoint.
Technically, we both have a Bible wherein the word "day" can be translated to mean a 24 hour period or simply a period or passage of time. If we are to believe Psalm 19:1-4, then we have to believe that the heavens declare the glory and knowledge of God. If that is the case, then the heavens definitively declare towards an old universe.
You can't say that Genesis declares 6 literal days, because it does not. Conversely, we can also cannot say that it declares billions of years, because it does not. However, when taken into context with other scriptures, and with what the heavens declare, there is little doubt towards an OEC viewpoint.
James Barr was a Professor of Hebrew. He says pretty bluntly that neither he nor any other serious Hebrew scholar sees any reason in the text to take "day" in Genesis as anything other than a true 24 hour day. So yeah...there is plenty of reason to declare Genesis is a literal day.
James Barr was a Professor of Hebrew. He says pretty bluntly that neither he nor any other serious Hebrew scholar sees any reason in the text to take "day" in Genesis as anything other than a true 24 hour day. So yeah...there is plenty of reason to declare Genesis is a literal day.
And I have read of scholars that say just the opposite. Wanna pit your scholar against mine???? We can have them battle to the death!
So in other words...you believe the parts of the bible you believe and think the others are meaningless or just symbollic? Therefore you can conclude that in your opinion Genesis is a bunch of lies, but you like the Jesus part so you're cool with that?
YOu claim YEC is foolishness because of your studies. I and a whole lot of others say the same thing about OEC. One of us has a Bible that says God did it in 6 days. I think I will stick with the Bible.
No, "in other words" I believe that the Bible tells me truth - pretty much like you do if you'd admit it. I use reason and the facts thats I glean from the world around me to make sense of that information and to understand the truths.
When the Gospel of Matthew says that Jesus "saw a man" standing at the receipt if custom... how do you know that this was a "man" and not angel? (See Matthew 9:9).
Daniel also claims to have seen "a man" (Daniel 10:5), but theologically, we have a considerabley different opinion about this "man." Why?
Q: Are you just going to pick and choose what passages of Scripture you interpret one way, and which you interpret another?
A: You already do, Nitehawk. You already do.
And that's not a bad thing either. It's necessary. Why do you take Matthew 5:27, literally but you "spiritualize" Matthew 5:29-30?You're a "cafeteria Christian," Nitehawk. You pick and choose what is literal and what is not.
And when you say "a whole lot of others" you do know that you're talking about a very tiny fraction of the world's population, don't you. Whenever you use the "look at all the YEC believers" argument - that same argument can be used to point out that you're part of a tiny and vocal minority that refuses to accept reality.
Your argument will have more weight with the rest of us when you start taking the whole Bible literally. Begin with Matthew 5:29-30, and the Sermon on the Mount.
Still waiting to hear the explanation for all those huge meteoric impact craters found around the globe and when they would have occurred in recorded human history.
Of course I ask this on every thread where this subject is brought up.
Hybrid Mode
