Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation, Evolution, and faith
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 171 of 456 (554690)
04-09-2010 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by PaulK
04-09-2010 2:55 PM


I wasn't referring to the Quaran...I was addressing Huntard's question about the Illiad.
By your post I get the impression that for the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, it probably should have said so in every single verse????
The Bible as we know it today? The NT was put together, all 27 books by 363 AD. Almost 1800 years ago. So since their writings, not a whole lot has changed with them. There's certainly more controversy surrounding the OT due to the amount of years since their writings but the NT has been a part of western culture since well, since the beginning of western culture.
Edited by Flyer75, : added last paragraph

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by PaulK, posted 04-09-2010 2:55 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Taq, posted 04-09-2010 3:19 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 192 by PaulK, posted 04-09-2010 4:29 PM Flyer75 has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 175 of 456 (554695)
04-09-2010 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Theodoric
04-09-2010 2:53 PM


Theodoric writes:
Letters? Do you mean Tacitus, written over 50 years after the event? This is no evidence for anything.
Well, I hate to use Huntard's argument on this, but I will. So letters written 200 years ago from John Adams to his wife Abigail aren't evidence of events that happened around them? Any historian shy of a conspiracy theorist counts these letters, over 200 years old, to be historically reliable.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 2:53 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 3:29 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 179 by Taq, posted 04-09-2010 3:30 PM Flyer75 has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 177 of 456 (554698)
04-09-2010 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Taq
04-09-2010 3:19 PM


Taq writes:
You do know that many books were excluded from the NT, and that groups pushing apocryphal texts were strongly persecuted by the Roman Catholic church, right? At a minimum there were at least two to three gnostic gospels that were excluded. The books that did make it in were voted on, and the vote wasn't unanimous.
Yes, I do know all this. Quite frankly, 3 books that are in the NT now were originally left out in 170 AD or around there in the first cannon...that's why I used the 363 AD date and not the earlier date.
Many people were persecuted over the cannon. During the reign of Emperor Diocletian from 284 to 305, the Bishop of Carthage, was ordered to hand over his books of the Bible and hid them instead, offering the authorities heretical writings instead. Persecution forced the church to be clear on the books that would be accepted as "scripture".
From 200 AD to the time of the cannon the Roman Catholic church as you call it was not the Roman Catholic church as we think of today. It was in it's initial stages but was the church that had been started on Pentecost. It had obviously become more organized and was starting to have politics creep in. There was no Reformed Church yet, no Methodist Church, no Lutheran Church as we have today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Taq, posted 04-09-2010 3:19 PM Taq has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 180 of 456 (554701)
04-09-2010 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Theodoric
04-09-2010 3:28 PM


You are correct. Tacitus and Josephus are the two earliest writings we have of Christ, outside of the Bible of course. Obviously you don't believe that Christ was the Son of God but if you don't believe he was actually a person, based on writings of Tacitus, who was not a believer then why do you believe that Galileo invented the telescope 400 years ago?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 3:28 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Taq, posted 04-09-2010 3:43 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 183 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 3:56 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 189 by nwr, posted 04-09-2010 4:15 PM Flyer75 has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 182 of 456 (554706)
04-09-2010 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Theodoric
04-09-2010 3:29 PM


Theodoric writes:
What a stupid argument. John and Abigail were writing about events contemporary to them. They were not writing about events 90-150 yeas in the past.
Fair enough. Let me put it this way. There are probably certain things that you believe about science that you have never actually proven yourself. You have probably never measured the speed of light yourself but you believe it to be true because of the first person who did hundreds of years ago. This information was passed on to one person, onto a next, written down, ect and we read about it today. I never measured it myself, but read about it in a book. I believe it to be true...I have no reason to believe it not to be.
Justin was a First century church leader. He was one generation away from being taught from the eyewitnesses who wrote the NT. I don't need all these independent sources. The Bible is sufficient for me. I could go into all the thousands of manuscripts that have been found, the Dead Sea Scrolls, ect but I won't for sake of brevity. The letters of Justin or whoever they might be, only solidify what I believe, but it's not their letters I put my faith in, it's the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 3:29 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 4:01 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 185 by Taq, posted 04-09-2010 4:04 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 193 by Percy, posted 04-09-2010 5:16 PM Flyer75 has replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 187 of 456 (554711)
04-09-2010 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Taq
04-09-2010 3:43 PM


I think at this point we're going in circles. I know that Tacitus and Josephus were not contemporaries of Jesus. I have the Bible, written by his contemporaries for that evidence, which leads us right back to square one in that logically I use other evidences for the Bible which is where this all started. You guys, which I refer to those posting in here, want me to scientifically prove my faith which I admitted numerous times cannot be done. I am saying that there is plenty of circumstantial evidence, of which adds up to a totality of circumstances for me, to believe the Bible. That is not blind faith. If it is, then we have a ton of people in jail now days based on blind faith of the jury.
Again, and sorry beating this like a dead horse but I'm not trying to debate the spiritual aspects of the Bible at this point. The Bible has many many evidences supporting it. Again, not Adam and Eve, ect. The Bible was written by 40 authors of 66 books over a 1,500 year period. The date range is really not in debate as even non believe scholars will tell us this. I get the feeling that some feel it's a grand conspiracy written by one author, or somehow 40 authors over 1500 years and lives on to this day. Is that a scientific proof? No.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Taq, posted 04-09-2010 3:43 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by subbie, posted 04-09-2010 4:14 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 190 by Theodoric, posted 04-09-2010 4:18 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 195 by Granny Magda, posted 04-09-2010 6:09 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 212 by hERICtic, posted 04-10-2010 10:33 AM Flyer75 has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 200 of 456 (554743)
04-09-2010 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by subbie
04-09-2010 4:14 PM


Subbie,
I've stated here time and again that I don't think that scientific evidence for science and the evidences for the Bible are one in the same. What more do you want me to say about it? How many more time should I say it? They aren't the same...there I said it yet again. I'm sorry if this isn't getting through here but I'm not arguing for science proving the Bible. I'm arguing for reason in logic in the biblical evidence.
Secondly, I don't think I've ignored the opposition. Quite frankly, I've been a punching bag here today, took a standing 8 count from Percy, and have tried to address 7-8 of you while there is one of me, at least until Slev addressed one issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by subbie, posted 04-09-2010 4:14 PM subbie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by Taq, posted 04-10-2010 10:02 AM Flyer75 has replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 201 of 456 (554744)
04-09-2010 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Percy
04-09-2010 5:16 PM


This will probably be my last response tonight in this debate, I need a breather...lol.
Percy, again, sorry for the lame analogy but my point wasn't to declare that there is something wrong with the theory and testing in the speed of light. I know the speed of light, I was taught the speed of light, and although I've never myself tested the speed of light, I still believe it. My example was for the layperson, not for the scientists of the board. How many soccer mom's load up their minivan with the rugrats, plug in the TomTom, and say, "hey look Johnny, this GPS is working at the speed of light" and then proceed to tell all the kids in the car what and how the speed of light works?. Answer, none of them say that, or even know it.
My point is, there are tons of people out here, millions in fact that can't tell you what the speed of light is but they believe it, not on blind faith, but on some sort of faith level. There are many self proclaimed evolutionists all around us who have zero ability to defend their positions, same can be said for Christians. I work with a guy who in passing disagreed with me on the age of the earth....yet, he had zero, and I mean zero clue, on how to defend that position, but he believed it...is that faith? I think it is. I'm not applying that example to this board as this board represents a fairly small sample of society.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Percy, posted 04-09-2010 5:16 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by nwr, posted 04-09-2010 9:10 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 203 by Percy, posted 04-09-2010 10:19 PM Flyer75 has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 248 of 456 (554980)
04-11-2010 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Taq
04-10-2010 10:02 AM


Hello Taq,
I have said over and over and over that there is MORE faith in religion then science. I still maintain that science has some holes to fill in that are currently filled in by faith. Some on your side have agreed to this already. I started this thread in regards to the very first step of evolution, or the origins of life....the answers I've gotten are faith answers such as it MIGHT have happened...or POSSIBLY this is what....or even, it doesn't really matter what started the process. To me, those are faith statements and the very first step that is unknown at this point cannot be replicated in a lab. Science changes on a regular basis. A text book that taught evolution 30 years ago is today obsolete. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree as to whether science involves any faith whatsoever because I'm convinced there is faith, to a certain extent, involved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Taq, posted 04-10-2010 10:02 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Taq, posted 04-11-2010 1:01 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 251 by Meldinoor, posted 04-11-2010 3:47 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 254 by bluescat48, posted 04-11-2010 11:09 PM Flyer75 has not replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 274 of 456 (555439)
04-13-2010 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by Meldinoor
04-11-2010 3:47 PM


Hi Meldinoor,
Thanks for the discussion and sorry for the delay.
Meldinoor writes:
Which holes are these?
Well, I wasn't think of a specific example, just what I had already said...the first step in the process and the ever changing landscape (or findings being a better word) of science. Scientists have faith, not blind faith, that if they can answer a "problem" such as this, New Study Contradicts Flower Fossil Dates | The Institute for Creation Research. Now, I don't think this article by any means brings down evolution but there is an admitted problem here by a scientist who certainly isn't a creationist. He thinks there is a problem here. The rest of the story not told is that he probably believes that an answer will be found at some point to this little problem so he has faith that this doesn't impact his thoughts on evolution.
Meldinoor writes:
Thank goodness science classes stay clear of 3000 year old accounts then.
My point was, science is changing at an enormous pace. What students were taught 25 years ago even is not what would be taught today, at least some of it. What YEC believe about the Bible and 3,000 years ago won' t change, it hasn't changed and it won't. That's all I was referring to as far as that point goes.
Take care,
Flyer

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Meldinoor, posted 04-11-2010 3:47 PM Meldinoor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Huntard, posted 04-13-2010 4:50 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 277 by onifre, posted 04-13-2010 5:19 PM Flyer75 has replied

Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2423 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 278 of 456 (555455)
04-13-2010 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by onifre
04-13-2010 5:19 PM


Hi Onifire,
No I'm not saying that at all. I'm not saying that just because evolution can't explain everything that it should be discredited. I'm saying that since it can't explain everything, at this point, that there is some faith involved. I'm trying to keep the theme of faith here...not blind faith, but faith nonetheless. I for one, believe that some forms of evolution do take place...we'll part ways as to what extent that is but I do believe it occurs (in my limited knowledge of the subject).
Well guys, at this point I'll probably step away from this thread until a new one pops up I can participate in. I've enjoyed this discussion. I will probably try to start a thread in a few days, maybe Thursday when I have 4 kids and a wife out of the house for the day, I would like to discuss the topic that this headed into and that is Christianity and "blind faith". I think there is still much to discuss about this subject that we haven't touched on. Thanks again for the many responses in this thread.
I suppose if Kb, PaulK, Taq, and others wish to continue the foray here they can...its been enlightening and at times entertaining.
Edited by Flyer75, : misspelled word

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by onifre, posted 04-13-2010 5:19 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by onifre, posted 04-13-2010 6:02 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 282 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-14-2010 2:19 AM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 285 by Taq, posted 04-14-2010 9:50 AM Flyer75 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024