Biblical contradictions.

Jet to RedVento:

---

You failed ancient history, didn't you! Otherwise you couldn't possibly have your facts so screwed up. History man, history! Take a refresher course. You desperately need it!

---

This is an odd tack to take given that you restated pretty much what RedVento had already said while at the same time claiming he was wrong. You only differed about decorating the tree, and I think most people are familiar with the supposed Germanic origins of that tradition, while I've never heard of the tradition being coincident with early Christianity.I guess we all need a refresher course in "History according to Jet." --Percy

Jet writes:

---

RedVento is wrong, and if you carefully read what I posted you will see that I stated as much.

---

What you and RedVento said was pretty much in agreement. Early Christianity picked up pagan practices, making it more appealing to pagans. It was a two way street. Christianity influenced the pagans, and the pagans in turn influenced Christianity.

---

Also, I stated that "this practice of decorating a tree was a well established pagan ritual ""long before Christ"" was even born."

---

I'll bet no one's ever heard of this pagan ritual, while we *have* heard of the supposed Germanic origins of tree decorating. You can read about this almost anywhere on the web. For example, at newhampshire.com it says, "Germany is also credited with starting the Christmas tree tradition in the sixteenth century when devout Christians brought decorated trees into their homes."Maybe the popular account is wrong, maybe there *is* more to the story, but so far all you've done is declare, "I'm right, read your history." You've mastered the bluster, now how about some actual information. You have to show not only that such a pagan ritual existed, but also the line of descent from then to today.You seem to have missed my message 194. No need to reply if you're tired of the issue, but you were trying to make the point that evolution is rooted in religious beliefs and is actually pagan in origin.

​

--Percy

Jet writes:

---

It seems that some individuals have never read the Isaiah Scrolls. It would probably be wise for them to do so before making foolish and inaccurate statements concerning Hebrew teachings, and thereby making fools of themselves in the process.

---

The Isaiah 7:14 prophecy ("...a virgin shall conceive...") isn't unequivocal in interpretation. The Hebrew word almah has two definitions: young woman and virgin. Which definition of the term was meant is uncertain. It's a popular topic widely addressed on the net, for example A Virgin-Birth Prophecy? arguing for "young woman" and The Virgin Birth of Christ arguing for "virgin".

​

--Percy

Jet writes:

---

Oh how you must love the strawman and truly adore the tinman. First you blatantly attempt to misrepresent my point of view by perverting what I actually posted.

---

You seem to be having difficulty tolerating different points of view. No need to blow your top, simply restate what you actually meant. This is a discussion/debate board, not a "Jet declares the truth and that's the end of it" board.

---

Then you imply I did not respond to the "evolution is rooted in religious beliefs" conversation, which you know full well that I did.

---

I politely suggested that you might have missed my message 194. Click on the link, Jet. Now read. Notice that there are no replies to message 194.

​

---

While I have your attention, I would just love for you to point out the scripture(s) that supports your statement under your picture of the week.

​

Your statement reads as follows:
"If the universe is actually billions of years old, then why would God describe it in the Bible as only thousands of years old."

​

Please offer the chapter(s) and verse(s) that supports your statement regarding Gods' description of the age of the universe.

---

​

It is the interpretation of YECs that according to the Bible the world can only be thousands of years old. This YEC belief is the foundation of the entire Creation/evolution debate.

​

---

Oh, and as for your tree decorating dilema, may I suggest that you read the book of Jeremiah.

---

​

The entire book? You want to narrow it down a bit for me there, Jet?

​

I wasn't disputing whether pagans decorated trees. What I was questioning was whether this was the origin of decorating Christmas trees. Religioustolerance.org discusses the Jeremiah 10:2-4 reference (will I always have to dig out your Biblical references for you?), but still says, "The Christmas tree tradition dates back to Western Germany in the 16th century."

​

The world isn't black and white, Jet. Rail against all the subtle shades of meaning and interpretation if you like, but you're tilting with windmills.

​

--Percy

Jet writes:

---

Actually, the most widely recognized, and grammatically accurate translation is "Young Maiden" and not young woman. And if you do an honest word study, (heavy emphasis on "honest"), you will have to agree that the term "Maiden" always means "Virgin" and can never mean a non-virgin.

---

Really? First definition in my desk dictionary:

1a) a girl or young unmarried woman

Second definition:

1b) a virgin

Gee, virgin didn't even get top billing!--Percy

As I've already said, in order to make your point you must show how the early developers of evolutionary thought, such as Darwin, drew upon the ideas of those you mention and incorporated those ideas into evolutionary theory. So far you're still in "I'm right, you're wrong" mode, long on pontificating and short on actual information.--Percy

No one's trying to misrepresent you, Jet.Though other cultures have decorated trees and bushes, the modern Christmas tree decorating tradition is widely understood to have a Germanic origin. You seem to be having trouble accepting that there are viewpoints other than your own.If you'd like to suggest an alternative wording for the home page, please be my guest. All help is appreciated.--Percy

Like I said, if you'd like to suggest an alternative wording, please be my guest. Advice is cheap, I get it free all the time. Write what you think it should say and I'll give it a look.--Percy

The article you're referring to is a few years old. Since that time scientists have again revised estimates of the age of the universe, and 12 billion years would probably be a lower limit.--Percy

Jet writes:

---

Here is a simple solution. Get a better dictionary.

---

I suggest you take it up with Webster's. Or maybe you could try http://www.yourdictionary.com/, which places the origin of "maiden" back in the 14th century and defines it the same as Webster's.

​

But the real issue isn't the definition of maiden. Rather, it's your habit of declaring anyone who disagrees with you wrong, or a liar, or a misrepresenter, or a strawman inventor, etc. You don't really seem interested in discussion as much as declaration and aspersion. Are you sure you really want to be here?

​

--Percy

Alright, that's enough. We've all had a chance to vent our frustrations at each other, including me, now let's get back to the actual topic.I'm going to edit future posts to remove personal non-constructive comments in this thread. Anyone that's particularly persistent in this way will get a 24-hour suspension of posting privileges (including me, call me on it if I get out of hand).--Percy

I don't know if Jet would tell us if he's read Jastrow's book God and the Astronomers, from which his quote is taken, but I have, and the quote is simply an ironic and thought provoking word picture with which Jastrow chose to close his book. It is not a summary of his own personal viewpoint.--Percy

Hi Jet,A 300 word quote is spam, not a signature. Please fix your signature now.I'm becoming more and more concerned about your behavior here. I shouldn't have to enumerate every possible way to be obnoxious in the forum guidelines. If you want to continue to participate here then you must change your behavior now.--Percy
EvC Forum Administrator

Jet writes:

---

It never ceases to amaze me how some evolutionists feel free to express the "personal viewpoint" of someone they have most likely never met or even had the opportunity to speak with.

---

I never attempted to say anything about Jastrow's views. I only said the quote is not a summary of his personal viewpoint.Now that you've provided the fuller quote we can see that Jastrow isn't saying that theologians have been ahead of scientists in general, but ahead only about the origin of the universe.

---

Rather than make further attempts to respond to this odious individual, an endeavor that is not only fruitless, but a total waste of my typing skills, I prefer to respond to individuals like Percy who, although he too can be somewhat odious on rare occasions...

---

Jet, the guidelines are quite explicit about refraining from becoming personal. I'm sorry to debate with you and act like an administrator at the same time, but it can't be helped.I caution other debaters not to follow Jet's example. This means treating your fellow debaters, no matter how frustrating you feel them to be, with politeness and respect. Keep in mind that they may find you as frustrating as you find them.--Percy

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jet:

---

Another in-character contribution by the Christian. I guess you don't go in much for that "turn the other cheek" and "lamb of God" stuff.--Percy