Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
699 online now:
dwise1, kjsimons, PaulK (3 members, 696 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,203 Year: 6,315/6,534 Month: 508/650 Week: 46/232 Day: 23/23 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biblical Eugenics - being wrong about how to colorize your goats
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 95 of 185 (706725)
09-16-2013 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by New Cat's Eye
09-12-2013 10:39 AM


I think this passage provides another example of how the Bible gets things wrong and I don't think its been discussed here before.

It's probably been discussed within the Catholic faith before. Have you ever asked a priest your question?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-12-2013 10:39 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by NoNukes, posted 09-16-2013 8:58 PM marc9000 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 99 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-16-2013 9:35 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 155 of 185 (707029)
09-20-2013 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by New Cat's Eye
09-16-2013 9:35 PM


marc9000 writes:

It's probably been discussed within the Catholic faith before. Have you ever asked a priest your question?

I haven't asked a priest about it, I'd bet that the answers would vary between them.

I'm not Catholic, but my guess is that they might vary somewhat, but not clash.

Here's what I found in the Catholic Encyclopedia:

"Jacob's relations with Laban's household form an interesting episode, the details of which are perfectly true to Eastern life and need not be set forth here."

While that sentence specifies only Jacob's "relations", I think it could also sum up the belief that scientific details from Biblical times could have been different from scientific details that are observed happening today. Of course the scientific community believes that any natural law they discover hasn't changed in any way for millions of years, but much of what is recorded as happening in Biblical times doesn't agree with that, the really long lives of people such as Moses, Abraham, Isaac, many others as only one example.

Even the scientific community has to admit that things used to be different on this planet than they are today.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-16-2013 9:35 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Coyote, posted 09-20-2013 9:37 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 157 by NoNukes, posted 09-20-2013 10:33 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 159 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-21-2013 11:03 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 160 of 185 (707071)
09-22-2013 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by Coyote
09-20-2013 9:37 PM


Re: Evidence
marc9000 writes:

...but much of what is recorded as happening in Biblical times doesn't agree with that, the really long lives of people such as Moses, Abraham, Isaac, many others as only one example.

So, where is the scientific evidence for those long lives?

There's no scientific evidence for a lot of events that are recorded in the Bible. There's also no scientific evidence for a lot of secular events that have happened since the Bible was written. In addition to not being the only source of knowledge, science isn't the only source of evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Coyote, posted 09-20-2013 9:37 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by Coyote, posted 09-22-2013 2:46 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 161 of 185 (707072)
09-22-2013 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by New Cat's Eye
09-21-2013 11:03 AM


marc9000 writes:

I'm not Catholic, but my guess is that they might vary somewhat, but not clash.

You'd be surpised.

Maybe I would be, if I was shown any proof at all of your claim.

But how would that work anyways? You're saying that back in the day you could affect the offspring with pieces of colored wood, but now today you cannot? When did the change take place and why?

The change took place about 90 A.D. (when the Bible was completed) God can do things any way he wants, and if he chose to be more visibly involved with biological things (or anything else) during Biblical times than he is today, the Bible tells us that can be quite possible, and logical.

That's because the Bible gets some things wrong.

Just some things, or everything, according to you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-21-2013 11:03 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-23-2013 9:59 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


(1)
Message 163 of 185 (707084)
09-22-2013 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Coyote
09-22-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Evidence
I'll stick with science.

Yes, science, and as we see, emotion. One thing's for sure, if you only use those two and toss out things like written history, tradition, and morals, liberals love you!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Coyote, posted 09-22-2013 2:46 PM Coyote has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 165 of 185 (707130)
09-23-2013 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by New Cat's Eye
09-23-2013 9:59 AM


What? How would you have me show you proof of what some priests told me when I asked them this question?

You said earlier that you hadn't asked any priests, and I suspect it's because you don't know any priests. If you just quoted me two conflicting answers from two different priests, I'd probably believe you, especially if I could confirm what they said by doing internet searches to find similar patterns within Catholic beliefs.

marc9000 writes:

The change took place about 90 A.D. (when the Bible was completed) God can do things any way he wants,

I see. I would've been nice if he told us and didn't lead us to think otherwise.

"Lead us to think otherwise" - how? By listening to atheist scientists, who reach conclusions first, then find "evidence" that leads to them?

So, to recap: Your position is that when this story took place, you actually could affect the offsping of your animals by having them mate in front of colored wood. But, as of today, we cannot do that because God changed the world in 90 AD when the Bible was completed. Is that about right?

That's pretty close. The period of time (1500 or so years) that scripture was being written was a different ~age~ than the time after the book was closed on it. As the final few verses of the book of Revelation clearly states, it is important that scripture not be added to, or subtracted from. From about 90 A.D. to now, has been the age of God's silence, to guard the record and the truth. If atheists choose to mock it, oh well. Satan did some mocking in Biblical times too, must be a coincidence.

Now, if what an animal is seeing during mating used to affect how their offspring came out, don't you think that would have a drastic effect on the animals' evolution?

No way to tell, because I don't know how you're defining the term "evolution" in this particular case.

Why has God hidden all the evidence of it from us?

I have no idea, but (as scripture says) his ways are sometimes beyond human understanding. I know that's laughable to atheists, their ingenious method of dealing with a God that they don't fully understand is to declare that he doesn't exist, similar to a child hiding from thunder and lightening under a bed.

Well, I mean, it says some right there in what you quoted

Well yes that's what you said in that one particular case, but I was just skeptical because of the bigger picture, like so many of your other atheist friendly messages throughout these forums, and your 9.9 member rating on an almost total atheist forum.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-23-2013 9:59 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Coyote, posted 09-23-2013 9:37 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 167 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-24-2013 10:03 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 168 of 185 (707514)
09-27-2013 8:31 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by New Cat's Eye
09-24-2013 10:03 AM


marc9000 writes:

You said earlier that you hadn't asked any priests, and I suspect it's because you don't know any priests.

Oh, well I do.

And I went throught 12 years of Catholic schools, so I've met many priests over the years... even some of those spec-op Jesuits that some protestants are on to.

Their beliefs vary by a significant amount, to the point that "clashing" is inevitable. Outsiders of Catholicism seem to think we're all just programmed drones or something. We actually have a decent amount of diversity.

I believe there's a lot of diversity within the Catholic church, but I'd like to see how much diversity there is on only this particular issue, that is, if the Bible is wrong in this particular case, concerning only Genesis 30; 37-40.

Well I already quoted and linked you the Catholics position on the matter, so I don't really see any reason to interview priests.

Yes, back in message 99, where you said that this particular issue wasn't addressed at all;

quote:
They just don't touch on the "eugenic" part of the story. I suppose they'd lean towards it being God's will and the carved wood not having anything to do with it, but we've never been that big on taking things super-literally.

So I was wondering what priests would say when directly confronted with the eugenic part of the story. If you don't want to check on it that's fine, let's just go with what you said above (message 99) if they would say it was just God's will and the wood didn't have anything to do with it. Isn't that much different than saying the Bible is wrong? What I'm wondering is if we have some strong evidence that you were programed out of your religious education as a child by an atheist bent science education as an adult?

No, by listening to Christian scienctists who arrived at that conclusion after following where the evidence lead.

So some Christian scientists believe that the Bible is subject to being authenticated by human scientific endeavors? They didn't find this in the Bible of course. I"m also wondering where non-Bible believing Christians get their information about Christianity, if not from the Bible.

We have empirical evidence that suggests that no such change took place, and we don't have any empirical evidence at all that it did. That leads us to think that it didn't happen. If it really did happen, then we've been hoodwinked, and that wasn't very nice.

So Moses parting of the Red sea - hoodwinked? Jonah spending some time in the belly of a whale - hoodwinked? Christ's virgin birth - hoodwinked? Christ's resurrection - hoodwinked? All these things are not scientifically "possible" according to today's scientific community.

I'm talking about how the animals have changed over time. All of our evidence suggests that the changes have been due to genetic mutations that are random with respect to the fitness of the animal. That is, that what the animal is looking at during mating does not have an affect on its offspring. We also lack any evidence that such thing is even possible, and no conceivable mechanism on how such a process could work.

So your belief is that God can do something only if scientists can understand it?

The only way that it could have actually happened, was in a way that has been deliberately hidden from us.

So you have a requirement of God that he makes sure not to hide anything from us? Where does this requirement come from?

So then do you conceide that your position in this debate has God tricking us into thing that the Bible is wrong in this case?

No, my position is that atheist scientists have tricked you into becoming one of them. Since you believe the Bible is wrong in some cases, do you think that God is a trickster?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-24-2013 10:03 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-30-2013 10:33 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1314
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 170 of 185 (707898)
10-01-2013 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by New Cat's Eye
09-30-2013 10:33 AM


It is. A priest who wanted to maintain an inerrant Bible would probably go that route, but one who wanted to be honest about it would probably admit that its just an error.

I don't think "honest" is the right word, when a priest compromises so much of what scripture says, to the point where he places more trust in the words of men than in the word of God.

How does typing about what priests might say provide evidence for me being programmed? That line doesn't fit there at all. Did you throw that in there later, or something?

Typing that the Bible is wrong is what provides me evidence that you may have been programed. It fits.

Absolutely. It'd be silly to just assume that it [the Bible] got everything right and then not ever bother checking to make sure.

Once Christianity is reduced so far that it's subject to scientific approval by humans, (prohibited at several places in the Bible) then there's no source of absolute truth, because human opinions of just what's right about it and what's wrong about it are never going to agree, especially when enthusiastic atheists are part of the process.

marc9000 writes:

They didn't find this in the Bible of course. I"m also wondering where non-Bible believing Christians get their information about Christianity, if not from the Bible.

From out in the real world.

That's what Catholic-scientist Kenneth Miller says. On page 258 of his book "Finding Darwin's God", he says this;

quote:
"...only those who embrace the scientific reality of evolution are adequately prepared to give God the credit and the power He truly deserves."

He's actually claiming that nature shows us more about God than the word of God does, yet atheist scientists like Dawkins, Stenger, and many others claim that the same nature that Miller studies shows us that there is no God. It's logical that these two views would really be at odds with each other, that there would be a flurry of debate between these two beliefs. Is there, of course not, these two views UNITE against some political views of creationism, even though neither of them have complete scientific explanations for the origins of life. If Miller (and you) have the most basic knowledge of the seriousness of the conflict between science and religion, the importance of what God (through the teachings of Jesus) expects his followers to do concerning setting examples, spreading his word, and opposing Satan, then your zeal for downplaying the importance of scripture just doesn't pass the smell test.

We can test the information in the Bible to find out what works and what doesn't. Helping others works. Selling all your stuff doesn't.

You'll even find Bible-believing Christians that figured out that they aren't going to make it very long if they get rid of all their stuff. So they don't.

The "sell all your stuff" reference was Jesus talking to ONE man, a way of showing that even following the 10 commandments doesn't make a person perfect. It wasn't a requirement of all people in all situations.

There is a lot of difference in interpreting scripture to determine the best way to behave individually, versus putting actual Biblical history "to the test" (Matthew 4: v7)

Certainly an almighty God can do all sorts of "impossible" things. When the Bible says that God was directly involved in a particular miracle, I have no problem going along with the story.

Different non-Biblical Christians seem to have different problems about what to believe, with only nature as their guide, militant atheists always seem to be anxious to help them.

But in this particular case with Jacob, not only is God absent from direct involvement, the story tells us why the outcome was achieved: its a purely materialistic explanation where the stripes on the wood are what caused the offspring to be different.

That's why its an interesting case. If you want to say that God was involved, then the story is misleading. If you don't want to say that God was involved, then the explanation in the story is just plain wrong.

Of course he was involved - if you think that's misleading, it's because you're making the mistake of putting it to a secular test. Science sometimes thinks too highly of itself.

No, but doing things to the world leaves behind evidence. Your claim about what God did would have left evidence of it happening. The only other option is God purposefully hiding it from us. And that is deception.

So humans have the authority to dictate to God what he reveals to us? Maybe this is something that you and Miller find in nature, but you won't find it in the nature and personality of God, which is revealed to us in scripture.

marc9000 writes:

So you have a requirement of God that he makes sure not to hide anything from us? Where does this requirement come from?

From the idea that he's generally a pretty good guy. A guy that wouldn't lie to us about what he's having us see.

His one perfect plan is so far above and beyond human understanding, we can't even come close to judging his actions that are leading to it. That's something that I'd say even Catholics would agree with Protestants on.

I think people have put to much weight into his "authorship".

An all-knowing God, who was also honest, wouldn't tell us that you can colorize your goats by making stripes on wood and having them mate in front of it.

That's as far as we can go on it, I just think things were different in Biblical times.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-30-2013 10:33 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-02-2013 11:42 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022