Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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:   Testing Theories of Origins
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 129 of 143 (694693)
03-27-2013 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Blue Jay
03-27-2013 10:02 AM


Re: Same stuff different day
And I still don't know what the "RTB Model" is.
You're not gonna like it
quote:
Reasons to Believe uses the term model in reference to our effort to summarize physical (observational) and biblical data relevant to creation into a coherent explanatory framework. The following foundational beliefs help shape how we interpret the data.
  • The Bible (including Genesis 1—11) is the error-free word of God.
  • The creation account of Genesis 1 follows a basic chronology.
  • The record of nature is also a reliable revelation from God.
  • The message of nature will agree with what the Bible says.
  • The Bible contains a selective summary description of God’s creation activity (e.g., no mention of dinosaurs, bipedal primates, quantum mechanics, or the existence of other solar system planets).
  • God gives humans the privilege to fill in the details, carefully, through patient, ongoing exploration and increased understanding of the natural realm.
We build our model by collating all that the Bible says about God’s creative work and integrating the individual accounts into a coherent picture. We then present this interpretation in the form of a scientific model, one that anticipates, or predicts, future findings. We can then evaluate its accuracy in light of scientific advances.
Step 1: The Bible is the error-free word of God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Blue Jay, posted 03-27-2013 10:02 AM Blue Jay has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Theodoric, posted 03-27-2013 11:41 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 137 of 143 (694773)
03-28-2013 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Theodoric
03-27-2013 11:41 PM


Re: Same stuff different day
The Bible (including Genesis 1—11) is the error-free word of God.
Which one?
Do any of them exclude Genesis? And if not, then why would it matter regarding a theory of origins?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Theodoric, posted 03-27-2013 11:41 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Theodoric, posted 03-28-2013 10:51 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 139 of 143 (694776)
03-28-2013 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by Theodoric
03-28-2013 10:51 AM


Re: Same stuff different day
Since different ones use different words, then they can not all be the "error-free word of God".
How different do the versions make the wording in Genesis? And how much does it impact the perceived errors?
This is not limited to a theory of origins but to anything in which people claim their bible is the "error-free word of God".
The big difference between the canons is the books they include, rather than the translation differences within the books. And those otherthings that don't have to do with origins are pretty irrelevant to this thread.
I am amazed you have any issue with what I posted.
What, an unoriginal and unimportant irrelevant quibble that doesn't add to the discussion? I always have issues with those.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Theodoric, posted 03-28-2013 10:51 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Theodoric, posted 03-28-2013 11:40 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 141 of 143 (694782)
03-28-2013 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by Theodoric
03-28-2013 11:40 AM


Re: Same stuff different day
All three of these cannot be error-free. One can be, or none can be.
Which parts, specifically, are mutually exclusive?
The RTB adherents and you have presented this as a topic. Of course it is relevant to the thread. If it was not relevant why did point it out and why would you question it?
Whether or not a Bible canon contains a particular book that is unrelated to origins is irrelevant to a Biblical model on origins.
Not at all irrelevant. You yourself have called out the claim that the bible is 'error-free word of God".
In order for this to be true there would have to be one bible. There is not one bible. The bible is not one tome, it is a ragtag collection of ancient writings with multiple canon and translations. Whether you feel so or not translation is important.
The Bible contains errors regardless of the fact that there are different canons. Everyone knows there's difference canons and there's really no good reason to bring it up here unless it has some impact on how a model of origins could be developed from "the Bible".
So which translation differences prevent a model on origins from being developed?
Calling into question RTB's assertion that there is one errror-free version of the bible is very relevant in order to discount their claims.
I didn't see them assert that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Theodoric, posted 03-28-2013 11:40 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Theodoric, posted 03-28-2013 1:58 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 143 (694793)
03-28-2013 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Theodoric
03-28-2013 1:58 PM


Re: Same stuff different day
Did I claim anything about mutually exclusive. I stated all three cannot be error-free. In order for that to be true they would have to have the same text.
I disagree. Whether it says that either god "moved upon" or god "hovered over" the face of the waters doesn't introduce an erroneous difference unless those things are mutually exclusive.
But Genesis does concern the Biblical model of Genesis and if they claim "the Bible" is error-free, then we must then determine what bible.
If we're considering Genesis, and all canons contain Genesis, then it doesn't matter which canon you pick (unless some translation difference causes some mutual exclusivity).
They claim the bible is error-free. In order to address that it is necessary to know what text they are claiming is "The Bible". According to the RTB model there are no errors. I agree with you that there are, no matter what version is used.
If there are errors no matter what version is used then we don't need to know what version they are using to say that it does contain errors.
The assertion of an error-free bible necessitates a particular version they believe is error free.
It doesn't necessitate limiting it to one version.
Also it is necessary to know what they mean by "error-free". There are many levels of inerrantists.
That being true; your claims that they have to be talking about one particular version, and that we have to know what it is, are rendered false. Perhaps they have some novel concept of "error free" that includes multiple canons of different translations.
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Theodoric, posted 03-28-2013 1:58 PM Theodoric 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