"No strawman at all" and you continue with your strawman! Incredible! Because I oppose bad science and blindly accepting questionable claims of science yet to be proven, that contradict the creation account of the Bible, you launch the following diatribe with no basis:
"Tell you what..since you despise scientific discoveries so much, how about being faithful to that belief. Why not forbid giving your family vaccinations. Why not eschew modern tranportation such as automobiles and airplanes. They work on the principles of that godless science. Why not grow your own food, since science has created crops that are pest resistant by manipulation of their genetic code. That would be much more consistent with your position. To put down science while enjoying its fruits is hypocritical. Be consistant. Live by your beliefs."
It's called argumentum ad baculum = "argument to the stick:" that is, abusing someone instead of reasoning with them. If you cannot debate without the sensationalism, maybe you should stand down.
Adam & Eve's Children - Incest?
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by John Wells, Jul 5, 2003.
Page 3 of 7
-
-
Quite amazing really...a strawman would be holding up an argument that you are not making. You ARE making the argument that science is not trustworthy, and that your interpretation of the Bible supercedes scientific discovery. If I misunderstand your position, then clarify it! There is no intent to misrepresent your position. I think your own words have clearly laid it out. My position is quite clear...where a literal interpretation of Genesis contradicts solid scientific discovery, Genesis is either:
1. Not trying to convey scientific theory
or
2. To be interpreted allegorically
I see no sensationalism here at all. If I have not correctly understood your position vis-a-vis science, then tell me. Otherwise it appears you are just caught in a web of your own making and cannot find a way to extricate yourself. -
-
-
-
Back onto subject: I guess you did that because it hurts to think that you prefer your science god over the God of the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible hint or elude to its creation account being allegory or myth. That is simply the only choice you have when you abandon sound biblical doctrine!
I'm still waiting for your answer about the Luke genealogy! ;) -
On topic: The reason incest was accpetable in the beginning was because God said that it was, and the reason it is not acceptable now is because God said that it isn't. Everything else is simple conjecture as to the reasons God had for doing what He did. It is fun to speculate and worthwhile to try and understand but, it is not necessary. -
Are there any passages in the Bible that ARE alleghory? How do we know that they are alleghory?
-
This in itself is not productive to intelligent debate. Your own words have convicted you of being anti-science. You said you believe the Bible where it is contrary to science. I will accept that you claim you only believe science where it doesn't challenge your pet theological beliefs, however irrational IMO that view may be.
It is not rational for people today to believe literally in talking snakes & donkeys, dirt men, rib women, a deity who punishes his creation for eating from a tree he planted there and which gave them knowledge of good & evil, and sticks that turn into snakes. Pure mythology, and not that much different than the mythology of other cultures. You can gain many things from these stories, but a literal view of creation is not one of them. The divergent order of creation from Gen 1 to Gen 2 is enough to see that this is a melding of two distinct tellings of these accounts from at least two sources. The stars are not fixed upon a firm dome over the earth (firmament) with floodgates that allow rain to fall to earth. This all reflects an ancient cosmology and not knowledge of a civilization that has travelled to the moon. Which, BTW, should God not have swatted the Apollo capsules down for going even higher toward heaven than the Tower of Babel, to which he took great offense? Oh wait...maybe he DID try to do it to Apollo 13 by blowing up the service module. Never mind.
I suspect in your mind, one cannot be a Christian without being a fundamentalist, Biblical innerrantist. I assure you (if this is the case...don't want to bring up a strawman) that opinion is incorrect.
Bear in mind, I am NOT attacking the Bible...I am presenting a view that it is not to be taken literally in all areas.
So, once again, we have drifted off topic through creation / evolution to Biblical inerrancy. -
How sad! :( How very, very sad! :( :( :(
-
-
Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. (Matt 13:24)
He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.
(Luke 6:48)
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death-the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, 27 for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her. (Deuteronomy 22:23-27)
The Bible is clear when it is giving a parable or an example. -
Colorado,
The Bible is a revelation from our infinite Creator, and it is self-authenticating and self-attesting. I must interpret Scripture with Scripture, not impose ideas from the outside! When I take the plain words of the Bible, it is obvious there was no death, bloodshed, disease or suffering of humans or animals before sin. God instituted death and bloodshed because of sin—this is foundational to the Gospel.
The reason you don't believe God created in six literal days is because you are convinced from so-called 'science' that the world is billions of years old. In other words, you are admitting that you start outside the Bible to (re)interpret the Words of Scripture.
The fossil record is largely the graveyard of Noah’s flood. All man-made dating methods have been proven to be fallible and downright unreliable. I let God's Word speak to me, with the words having meaning according to the context of the language they were written in. Once I accept the plain words of Scripture in context, the fact of ordinary days, no death before sin, the Bible's genealogies, etc., all make it clear that I cannot accept millions or billions of years of history. Therefore, I would conclude there must be something wrong with man's ideas about the age of the universe.
I'm a revelationist, no-death-before-Adam redemptionist! ;)
[ July 07, 2003, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: John Wells ] -
How did penguins and koalas get to the middle east from Antarctica and Australia and then back? Koalas eat only specific euacalyptus leaves indiginous to Australia. Did they carry them in a cooler? The Noah account is another ancient myth. Can we learn any truth from it? Of course. But the truth has nothing to do with geologic history.
No death before Adam? Tsk tsk. The United Negro College Fund had it right with their slogan..."A mind is a terrible thing to waste."
You are entitled to your views, just don't try to pass them off as "creation science", when you honestly know, they are based upon the Bible, hence they are religious views and should not be taught as science in public schools.
OOPS!! Was that the sound of another can of worms being opened? -
No, it was the sound of a pitiful pastor with his pathetic theology! :eek:
-
-
Archaeologists have made a stunning discovery. Here is a picture of what is apparently the first man & woman and their family. Could this be how Adam & Eve looked?
-
“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces. (Matthew 7:6)
Yea, your doctrinal view is comical! :eek: -
John, I have never put anyone here on ignore, but you are close due to your continual name calling.
-
John,
I might add that saying I "slink"; that I need to "grow up", using scripture to beat me up, insinuating I am a dog or a pig means you have lost what very little credibility you have. I have never called you names, but apparently this is your M.O. You once referenced scholarly debate, but I see that is truly beyond your capabilities. You continually resort to ad hominems, hence you have lost the debate regardless of the merits of anything else you have to say.
You are a rude person, and certainly no gentleman. Not very Christlike at all.
Page 3 of 7