• In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 616 on Thu Jan 18, 2024 7:47 pm

Creationism vs. Evolution - A Culture Divided

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

johnson1010 wrote:Star,

Do you still stand by the bible being inerrant?

Many of your arguments to explain away the obvious errors we have pointed out are explanations of how things could have gone wrong, such as errors in translation, which is as much as admitting that the errors are indeed errors.

Do you not recognize that these translation errors are... errors...in the bible?
It looks as though you will have to backpedal and say that no, bibles aren't inerrant, only the original text is inerrant.
There are two versions of the Bible. The Original and the Alexandrian. The King James version translated between 1604 and 1611 was taken from copy's of the original scrolls. The copy's I speak of were taken from all over the world. Every single one of them with the exception of names and places were identical letter for letter, and was translated word for word. The Alexandrians when they translated it they left out and re wrote and edited to suit there own needs. This is where you get the NIV, Good news and other various versions. I am not saying that they aren't good bibles just that you might find discrepancies in those. Please tell me which errors so I may inform you on my opinion of what is being said. If you don't know of any then please refrain from making accusations without direct knowledge.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

Interbane wrote:Jnd: "Just an observation but the most brilliant minds in the world and the majority believed the earth was flat. They also believed the sun revolved around the earth."

Is that a failure of those brilliant minds, or of the limitations of observation and evidence at that time? I'm a bit too tired to google it, but I've read of there being some old Roman guy who measured shadows of upright sticks at the same time of day in different cities(using a helper perhaps?). His conclusion was that the Earth was round. This was around 600 BC. In what forms would resistance to such an observation take? His finding seemed to have been tossed to the wayside quite easily. Sometimes there are people who control the flow of information who don't also agree with some of the items under their purview. We've advanced a bit, and information is far less restricted. Unfortunately we're still shackled with the biases of our evolutionary heritage; our personal filters are now the bottleneck to the spread of true ideas.
I see your point and need to consider it, but I think you missed mine. The point I was trying to make is you need to make up you own mind. Do your own research and make up your own mind. The quote I was refering to would be "Actually, there isn't much of a debate any more. There may seem to be from your perspective, but the dust has settled and religion is seen as false by brilliant minds the world over." This quote at least from my perspective says that you are going with the majority and letting other people tell you what to think. I am not saying that you are however one could very easily imply that from your statement.
User avatar
Interbane

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Unread post

Jnd: "The point I was trying to make is you need to make up you own mind. Do your own research and make up your own mind."

Stick around for a while, you'll see that I have. The quote you pulled was little more than a barbed riposte to Star's unwavering conviction, and isn't used as evidence to support my beliefs.

Jnd: "Please tell me which errors so I may inform you on my opinion of what is being said. If you don't know of any then please refrain from making accusations without direct knowledge."

You've entered the discussion a bit late. The errors he speaks of are in various posts scattered across this site. With that said, we're trying to consolidate the creationism discussion to a single thread so no cross posting or derailing occurs.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

I have been reading a few of the back posts. It might be a little quicker if someone told me what had been talked about, and some of the open issues in this room.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

johnson1010 wrote:I have just read a few of the responses, and i have problems with them.

as i stated earlier, you do not need to try to refute the list in it's entirety. These posts will balloon to completely unmanageable size in no time if we continue to go back and forth re-quoting the list.

The purpose of posting so many items in my original post was to demonstrate the ease of finding errors in the bible, which you claim is inerrant.

I do appreciate you taking the effort to counter the list, or at least to string words together in opposition of the points. Lets boil this down to just a few points, to make discussion more fluid.

We have already begun discussion on this topic:

Bats are not Birds. Error.

LEV 11:13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,
LEV 11:14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind;
LEV 11:15 Every raven after his kind;
LEV 11:16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind,
LEV 11:17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,
LEV 11:18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle,
LEV 11:19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.

Stahrwe I answered this one at length in previous posts.
No you certainly have not.

If you did, please direct me to this answer and accept my apologies. I have seen nothing in our discussions that answers this.

This answer interests me as well. In regards to slugs/snails melting.
stahrwe: my Bible says slug melteth. This is Psalms, which is poetry and is not intended to be taken literally.
Psalms is not part of the bible? Perhaps you would like to outline specifically which parts of the bible you are saying are inerrant, and which you exclude, and on what basis?
Is a Bat a Bird

Is there really such a things as a sunrising or a sunset? We know that neither is literally true. The sun does not circle around the earth, rising and setting. Why then were these descriptions used? It deals with appearance. Early in the morning, we see what looks like the sun rising in the east. Late in the evenings, we see what looks like a sunset in the west. The Scriptures have used accommodative language. In much the same way, Moses referred to the bat as a bird, for so it appeared to the people.
Just as a Whale is a Fish.

Snails Melting

The snail does not "melt" as it were, but it certainly leaves the appearance of melting. Also, the questioner should understand that the Psalms are filled with poetic language, which is often abstract and figurative, not necessarily to be taken literally.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

[quote="Interbane"]I would still like to know if dinosaur bones were placed in the ground for us to find, and if the light from distant stars was created partially enroute to Earth.

To me, the discussion of the bible is a waste of time. Religious advocates don't seem to understand that rationalization does not equal support of a position. I once talked to a person who had rationalized belief in the thousand and oneth dimension to the point where I had no argument against it but to laugh.

If they will engage in discussion about how their beliefs don't conform to reality without using the ultimate cop out of "god did it", then we've made progress.[/quote

Yes I believe that the bones and such were left by God for us to find as a reminder that we will be judged.

And yes I sometimes use the cop out God did it. Because I believe. The idea that Nothing Exploded into Something for no reason at all and that I came from a rock is absurd to me. There is no proof. Just as you claim there is no proof of God. Both take faith to believe. Therefore both are religions. If there was no God, How would we decide right from wrong? No one has been able to answer this question for me.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

stahrwe wrote:Interbane,

I suggest that you ask God why Ostrich meat was considered unclean. My personal opinion is that it was an obedience issue, a mark of separation between the Jews and others. There are people who argue in favor of heath concerns, but that arguement falls flat when we read in the NT that the previously unclean things could now be eaten. Nothing had changed in terms of food preservation or disease control so the only explanation remaining is that of social separation similar to circumcision. Now before you get yourself all reved up, I am well aware that cultures other than the Jews practiced circumcision, but for the Jews it was a sign of the covenent. A sign with was no longer required for Christians though it continues to be a common practice.



Regarding your mustard seed question, you will have to remind me what it was.

I will return to the bat question presently.

It is my interpritation that an Ostrich could not be eaten as well as the others because they eat animals which are unclean, as well as the other birds mentioned in the verses.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

Here is a few questions to get back to the Creation v Evolution debate verses God or no God. I have more but this should get the Debate back on track.

1) Why is the Great Barrier Reef only dated at around 5000 ?
2) With the rate the sun is shrinking billions of years ago it would have overrun Mars
3) Why were there Dino footprints found next to human footprints?
4)Is it possible that the Neanderthal is a really old person? say about 900
5)How is it that trees are standing upright through the geologic columns different time periods?
6) How was the Grand Canyon Formed?
7) Does Carbon Dating Work?l
8) Explain how the Geological column dates fossils, but you date the column by the fossils in it?
User avatar
stahrwe

1I - PLATINUM CONTIBUTOR
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4898
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:26 am
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 166 times
Been thanked: 315 times

Unread post

Hey guys, take me apart, but please be gentle with jndnwy.
jndnwy
Almost Comfortable
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:05 pm
14
Location: Texas

Unread post

stahrwe wrote:Hey guys, take me apart, but please be gentle with jndnwy.
1 Peter 3:15
But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”