Summations Only

Probably fits best here.The following quote describes immensely well the integrity of biblical literalists.

quote:

---

Lets now discuss Joshua’s long day. Certainly this is going too far, to actually think that the sun stood still that long, in spite of the totally predictable, finely balanced and very complex pattern of movement of the heavenly bodies. But on the other hand, how much do we know about the options that an infinite God has at his disposal? And maybe that sun trick wasn’t so disruptive after all. If I try to imagine how it could be done if I had no physical limits, but was not allowed to influence the movement of the sun or moon or the earth, here is a speculative suggestion. A system of giant mirrors could be used to deflect the sun’s image, so that from a human perspective the sun did stand still. Then later the mirrors could slowly move the sun back into its normal schedule. Did God do it that way? Of course we have no idea (God is certainly much more creative than us), but this scenario just illustrates how utterly futile it is for finite humans to think we can decide what God can or cannot do. He created the laws of nature and he knows how to use them to accomplish his will.

---

How deep does your head need to be inside your a$$ to even consider something like that. I mean, really. How rotten does your belief have to be to retort to such innovations? :|Unfortunately the entire creo/ID side is based on willful ignorance and deception. It has zero integrity and every single proponent of creo/ID is either intelligently negligent or downright evil. I see nothing even remotely admirable in that.That quote was copied from PZ Myersblog.Shaving with a baseball bat

quote:

---

The trouble is that the quote you use only points out the mental contortions that some go through when they try and turn the Bible into something it was never intended to be. Frankly however that example is harmless.

---

I guess you are somewhat right but to me that quote by Leonard Brand (Leonard R. Brand - Wikipedia) is a brilliant example of how far people are willing to go to try and twist facts to make the Bible/God look good. He is not the only one - it is just that quite a few people believe in the Flood and are willing to distort truth accordingly, even more believe in literal Genesis and...Harmless it may be but it portrays the same lack of integrity as the Wedge-strategy.

quote:

---

I don't think he is being dishonest, I just think that he has started off with a false premise.

---

Im sorry but I really think that you are being too kind to Mr Brand and his ilk.Mr Brand holds a degree in biology so he cannot be a total ignoramus. Thus he has to be a decepter by choice. I see absolutely nothing worth explaining or tolerating in their doings.If they would just tell these stories to each other in some huts it would be tolerable as far as the society is concerned but no...they build Creation "Museums" and Ark Experiences and politicians are polite towards them when in fact they should be ridiculed and mocked to no end.And to top that all, it is generally understood to be impolite or disrespectful to require them to prove their stories or tell them that creation science is an oxymoron. The public would be done the greatest service when the spade is called a spade and their lies would be exposed bigtime.