Faith and other YEC: why even bother taking part in the discussion?

This of course being the logic of a Dutch person who lives in a land where, at least in 1997 when I lived there, they had the unusual situation where roundabouts (circles of varying diameters around which you drive to take one of a number of choices of exits) could be dealt with in one of two ways:a) The motorist approaching the roundabout had right of way and the person on the roundabout had to yield right of way to themb) The motorist on the roundabout had right of way and the person approaching the roundabout had to yield right of way to those navigating itIn order for the motorist to know which one was which he had to keep his eyes peeled approaching the roundabout for a sign as to which type he was encountering (and hope that the local hooliganary hadn't twisted the sign edge on so as to make accurate forecasting as speculative as is evolution science)Somehow, I think the Brits (and the Irish) had the more logical of the two systems...

I guess it would be more accurate to say that the most dangerous part is our inability to discern flawed human wisdom from the divinely inspired.It would be easier if the really divinely inspired wisdoms had a quality label or something ;-)

Well done, Ian. You got me there.But at least we have now adopted the same practice as elsewhere in Europe, where roundabouts are concerned. Which is more than can be said for driving on the left, still practiced in some remaining patches of the British Empire.Anyway, speaking of hooligans, I am sure you know that the word 'hooligan' originally stems from Ireland, where it seems to have been a family affair once. So, I ask you, what were you tayto munchers think you were doing over here, banjanxing our road signs an' all, eh? Are you Ian 'ooligan, by any chance?

Not just at this forum, but all YEC's are sad and lonely, and deluded. It isn't ad hom because I say so.I already gave you the criteria for this debate, how difficult can it be?Brian.

I only say cheers when I have a drink in my hand Give me half an hour You mean you get sadder and lonelier Brian.

Hmmm... may I press a little further on the relative merits of Dutch/UK reason in asking whether you still employ that peculiar toilet design which is seemingly unique to Hollandia? (For those who have never been a (somewhat stomach-churning) description follows)Externally, the typical Dutch toilet looks remarkably similar to UK/US versions. That is until you lift the lid. If you are used to seeing the steeply sloped sides of the bowl culminating in a 5"x3" target into which solid deposits can be dropped only to be instantly and effectively smothered by an odor-encapsulating volume of water then a surprise you will surely get.In place of the water-target/efficient odour trap, the Dutch, for reasons best known to themselves, have provided a platform. A raised platform. A large raised platform, well above the water-line in fact. The water trap itself is cunningly positioned well out of the target area and to the front. I say cunning, because no matter which way you contort yourself you cannot deposit anywhere but onto the platform. Thus you are forced to undergo the appalling odour that would otherwise remain unknown to you as pull neck muscles in a frantic attempt to reach behind you from the sitting position to trigger the even more cunningly designed press-to-flush button. I say cunning here, because to a Dutch toilet-designer, the word 'flush' means flush-mounted - ie: don't let the device protrude from the suface in such a way as to make it easy to locate.If you find yourself in a Dutch w/c you will often see a box of matches in there too. For good reason. The Dutch have found a partial solution to a problem of their own making. Striking a match and waving it around clears (although I never figured out how) the odour and leaves the toilet smell-free for the next poor unfortunate visitor.p.s. Tayto are going to the wall. The mighty Walkers Crisp from England are taking over the market - survival of the fittest style. Guinness Dublin however have vanquished the English sister-brewery in return. The draught Guinness in Holland tasted like the English stuff (awful) so if you like an odd pint of it you can look forward to some at a pub near you soon...

---

Romans 10:9-10: " if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved....."

I know one person who will never visit Holland!

I dunno, but maybe it's partly because that father had thousands upon thousands of descendants before he died. He couldn't even have known them all. And don't you think it's human nature to explore new turf? In those days there was plenty of new turf to explore.

That's a very loose definition of "literal.""We" refers to a group of individual souls. A lot of souls were not present "in" Adam--literally. Souls are not equivalent to genetic lineage.The word "literal" is a slippery term.

Yeah, but only when people get too literal about it. I simply meant that all descendants are physically potential in the ancestors, and the Bible says that souls are too.

"Literal" to me means the opposite of figurative but perhaps you have a different definition.

OK. But being "in the loins of" an ancestor doesn't read as figurative to me, especially when the text goes on to say that the unconceived descendant "paid tithes" when the ancestor did. Sounds like a spiritual reality being referenced there, so that the tithes really were in some sense paid by the unborn. Figurative would be more of an "as if" they were paid than I get out of the text.Perhaps there's something between figurative and literal? There's plenty in the Bible that IS figurative only I'm drawing a blank at the moment.

Not wrong about anything crucial in the Bible, which is what is implied by having the Holy Spirit.

It seems to me that there is some inconsistency in the method of some literalists. Of course, there are cases in which the author or speaker intended the passage to be figurative--an obvious case is Jesus' parables. But there are many passages in which it is by no means clear if we are meant to interpret something literally or figuratively. The story of Jonah and the whale strikes me as a fable, illustrating that we cannnot escape from God's will--but who knows what the author had in mind?More importantly, there have been those who affirmed that the coming of Christ is "prefigured" in the Old Testament, and then they proceed to interpret some passage in the OT figuratively, whilst elsewhere espousing literalism.

There are many others, many turns of speech here and there, but my head is fogged up from a terrific cold, if that is any kind of excuse, and nothing much is getting through at the moment. I disagree, it is not at all unclear in the case of Jonah. A literalist reads it as historical, not figurative, because there is nothing in the text to suggest that it was intended as anything else. It "strikes" people as a fable only because it violates their OWN preconceptions, but the text itself is not at all ambiguous -- it's clearly presented as straight historical narrative. Besides that, it is grouped with the other prophets, all of whom are regarded as historical persons reporting God's word and historical events as well (that is, it could have been grouped with the "wisdom literature" instead, like Proverbs and Ecclesiastes etc); and Jonah is referred to by Jesus, who in no way demotes it from historical status. Well, but this is a problem with outsiders or unbelievers imposing their own notions of what "literal" means on literalists. Literalists don't read figurative passages literally. Literalists know the difference between poetry and history. Literalists know the Bible has embedded meanings -- {Edit: Or nonexplicit implications that must be ferreted out} -- and that there are fascinating connections to be found between the OT and Jesus that aren't in the surface text in any obvious way.A purely intellectual approach to the Bible without believing it will not yield any of these insights however. It all begins with believing it.This message has been edited by Faith, 09-15-2005 03:10 PM