Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8790 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-24-2017 8:54 PM
363 online now:
Chiroptera, Coragyps, edge, halibut, JonF, Percy (Admin), RAZD (7 members, 356 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Upcoming Birthdays: Tempe 12ft Chicken
Post Volume:
Total: 819,366 Year: 23,972/21,208 Month: 1,937/2,468 Week: 30/416 Day: 30/24 Hour: 5/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
8182
83
8485
...
88Next
Author Topic:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Taq
Member
Posts: 7141
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 1231 of 1311 (816447)
08-04-2017 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1230 by Faith
08-04-2017 3:55 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
Faith writes:

Except those inspired by God.

It is humans who claim that writings were inspired by God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1230 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 3:55 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1232 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 4:37 PM Taq has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1232 of 1311 (816448)
08-04-2017 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 1231 by Taq
08-04-2017 4:25 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
It is humans who claim that writings were inspired by God.

It is humans inspired by God who claim that writings were inspired by God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1231 by Taq, posted 08-04-2017 4:25 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1234 by DrJones*, posted 08-04-2017 5:05 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1235 by Taq, posted 08-04-2017 5:07 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5069
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 1233 of 1311 (816450)
08-04-2017 4:54 PM


Of course god could have written the bloody thing himself and avoided 3,000 years of conflict and confusion.

Why didn't he?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1679
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.3


(1)
Message 1234 of 1311 (816451)
08-04-2017 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1232 by Faith
08-04-2017 4:37 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
It is humans inspired by God who claim that writings were inspired by God.

Fallible humans who claim to be inspired by God claim that the writings were inspired by God.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1232 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 4:37 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7141
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 1235 of 1311 (816452)
08-04-2017 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 1232 by Faith
08-04-2017 4:37 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
Faith writes:

It is humans inspired by God who claim that writings were inspired by God.

So claims a human.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1232 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 4:37 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3962
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1236 of 1311 (816456)
08-04-2017 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 1230 by Faith
08-04-2017 3:55 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
That's your fallible interpretation.

Might be right.

Might not be right.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1230 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 3:55 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1237 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 7:25 PM JonF has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1237 of 1311 (816459)
08-04-2017 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1236 by JonF
08-04-2017 5:41 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
Weird. Do you think everything everyone thinks about anything at all, including yourself, is so fallible you can never decide if you are ever right about any of it?

Of course not.

I'm right.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1236 by JonF, posted 08-04-2017 5:41 PM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1238 by JonF, posted 08-04-2017 7:56 PM Faith has responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3962
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 1238 of 1311 (816460)
08-04-2017 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 1237 by Faith
08-04-2017 7:25 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
No, of course not.

You can decide, obviously you have. You cannot prove your decision correct without more evidence.

"I've decided" is not enough. "A lot of people have decided" doesn't work either.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1237 by Faith, posted 08-04-2017 7:25 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1241 by Faith, posted 08-05-2017 3:17 AM JonF has responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2956
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 1239 of 1311 (816468)
08-05-2017 12:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1207 by Dredge
08-04-2017 2:58 AM


Re: seven "assumptions"
God arranged to have his Word recorded in written form to preserve its accuracy down through the centuries. An oral method wouldn't work as it would be very prone to mistakes when being passed from one person to the next. Plus there would be no way of checking if the contemporary version of the story is faithful to the original.
The Jews went to extreme lenghts to ensure that each and every word was accurately copied from one Bible copy to the next.

OK, I actually had a class in Rabbinic Literature. Yes, the standards for transcribing the Torah itself were placed extremely high, but what of the rest of Scripture? BTW, for you religious idiots, the Torah is the first five books of the Old Testatment.

But then your "Bible" includes the "New Testament", which falls outside of the Jewish tradition, so you are completely and utterly screwed when you try to claim Jewish tradition in preserving the alleged integrity of your "New Testatment" passages. Do your continuous attempts to deceive really have no boundaries?

Have you ever studied Greek? That is no non sequitur, because the New Testament was written in Greek, even though some of the source manuscripts were in Aramaic.

I did study Greek, Koine Greek, the Greek of the New Testament. For two semesters. We used the Bruce Metzger New Testament. For each and every passage in the New Testament, all the various variations from the many source manuscripts were presented. And they showed your traditional interpretations to be a lie.

There are many different manuscripts for each verse, very few of which agree with each other. Some differences, like Luke 2:14, completely change the meaning. Even Revelation 22:18-19, which promises great punishment to anyone who would add to, delete from, or change that revelation, has differences in its manuscripts (testimony to how little the early Christians cared about the Scripture they were creating?). So who decided which versions to use? Fallible Man.

Furthermore, some manuscripts are in Aramaic and some in Greek, so the Aramaic manuscripts had to be translated to Greek. And then there was yet another chain of translations before it got into your own hands. Do you have any idea what's involved in translating from one language to another? You read the source language and you then try to express what you think it says in to target language. IOW, at the core of translation is the act of interpretation by a fallible human. And if that fallible human is biased by his religious beliefs, then there's the chance of even more error slipping in.

Every step of the way we see fallible Man constantly poking his pudgy fingers into the Bible, injecting error at every turn. And then we have the theologians and preachers who take that finished product and twist and interpret it to mean whatever they want it to mean regardless of how far they have to stretch it.

There are many aspects of Christianity that I just simply cannot believe, but the one that I really cannot believe in is their central belief in the infallibility of Man.


True story; even though it's sure to go right over your head, lurkers may even get a laugh out of it. An activist creationist posted it in his newsletter.
Some theologian had tried to explain away the Resurrection by claiming that Jesus had a twin brother -- ridiculous on several levels, including the fact that it's just a story so there's nothing to explain away, plus why would a Christian want to explain away the central foundational myth of his own religion? Anyway, this creationist cited the wisdom of a child who pointed out that the Bible says that Mary was "with child", not "with children." Well, first off, there's no such expression in English as "being with children" and "with child" would indeed be used properly for twins, triplets, etc. Second, that's not what the Bible says. In the Greek, it says that she "had in belly". No explicit mention of any children. Similarly, I've seen "sun" and "son" being conflated (including on Star Trek:TOS, "Bread and Circuses") and an interpretation of "atonement" as meaning "at one-ment", all of which can only possibly work in English and would be completely meaningless in the original language.


From Mein Bester Feind (2011), Moritz Bleibtreu as an Austrian Jewish art dealer just before the Anschluß showing to his life-long Christian friend a Michelangelo sketch with an oddity due to a misinterpretation of the Bible (translated from memory):

quote:
Christians have no idea how to read the Bible.

How very true.

Edited by dwise1, : "There are many different manuscripts ... "

Edited by dwise1, : Fixed a couple details in the movie reference

Edited by dwise1, : Left out one letter


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1207 by Dredge, posted 08-04-2017 2:58 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1280 by Dredge, posted 08-06-2017 2:04 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 575
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 1240 of 1311 (816471)
08-05-2017 2:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1216 by herebedragons
08-04-2017 8:46 AM



HBD writes:

Do you know what an internet troll is?
An internet troll is someone who posts just to provoke an emotional response from other members. Is that what you are doing?

If so... stop! It's nonsense, unproductive and unbecoming of a professing Christian.

HBD, the party-pooper.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1216 by herebedragons, posted 08-04-2017 8:46 AM herebedragons has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1241 of 1311 (816473)
08-05-2017 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1238 by JonF
08-04-2017 7:56 PM


Re: seven "assumptions"
I don't feel any need to try to prove it. It remains a fact that if God inspired the writers the writing has no errors and should be taken as God's own communication. My opinion is irrelevant, as is yours.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1238 by JonF, posted 08-04-2017 7:56 PM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1242 by Riggamortis, posted 08-05-2017 3:52 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1243 by PaulK, posted 08-05-2017 4:23 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1246 by JonF, posted 08-05-2017 8:10 AM Faith has responded

    
Riggamortis
Member
Posts: 167
From: Australia
Joined: 08-15-2016
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1242 of 1311 (816474)
08-05-2017 3:52 AM
Reply to: Message 1241 by Faith
08-05-2017 3:17 AM


Re: seven "assumptions"
Faith writes:

It remains a fact that if God inspired the writers the writing has no errors and should be taken as God's own communication.

Bold added, I agree 100%. It's a big if though, don't you think?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1241 by Faith, posted 08-05-2017 3:17 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13125
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 1243 of 1311 (816475)
08-05-2017 4:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1241 by Faith
08-05-2017 3:17 AM


Re: seven "assumptions"
quote:

It remains a fact that if God inspired the writers the writing has no errors and should be taken as God's own communication.

That's not a fact. God doesn't have to do things the way you want. God can let the writers make errors if he chooses not to prevent it. Doesn't the fact that not one book of the Bible presents itself as a direct communication from God count for something ? Isn't it a good reason to think that the Bible is largely a human creation and fallible ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1241 by Faith, posted 08-05-2017 3:17 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18972
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 1244 of 1311 (816478)
08-05-2017 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1204 by Dredge
08-04-2017 2:24 AM


Re: seven "assumptions"
... But using the "starting point" of a young earth is no worse than using evolution as a starting point, which is what most atheists do.

Yes it is, because there is objective empirical evidence that the earth is way older than all the YECie assumption filled "calculations" combined.

AND it is, because there is objective empirical evidence that evolution occurs, has occurred, and continues to occur.

We can also use astro-physics to show an old world and geology to show an old world and paleontology to show evolution and chemistry to show how biology works and biology to show how evolution works -- in other words there are other fields that provide consilient evidence for both an old world and evolution.

There are no other supporting systems for a young earth.

Any rational open minded but skeptical unbiased person coming to the information from a state of complete ignorance of all the information, who then weighed the information before deciding which position was more valid, would choose the positions backed by evidence.

Thought experiment: if you eradicated all bibles and all memories of the bible from the minds of all humans, would it be recreated by anyone interested in finding "truth" about reality?

If you eradicated all science books and all memories of the science from the minds of all humans, would it be recreated by anyone interested in finding "truth" about reality?

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1204 by Dredge, posted 08-04-2017 2:24 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15917
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 1245 of 1311 (816479)
08-05-2017 7:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1217 by CRR
08-04-2017 8:55 AM


CRR writes:

The quote is fair.

Sure it is. That's why Ruse said creationists are "more interested in using my words for their own ends rather than for understanding what I am really trying to say."

Ruse's criticisms of Dawkins and Gould were used as examples of one end of the spectrum while weaving a complex story, which is why Ruse described the question as "varied, interesting and insightful."

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1217 by CRR, posted 08-04-2017 8:55 AM CRR has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
8182
83
8485
...
88Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017