Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8950 total)
43 online now:
DrJones*, GDR, Hyroglyphx, jar, JonF, PaulK, ringo, Tangle, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (9 members, 34 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,022 Year: 22,058/19,786 Month: 621/1,834 Week: 121/500 Day: 18/61 Hour: 5/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Using the Bible as fact...
compmage
Member (Idle past 3493 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 1 of 113 (7892)
03-27-2002 1:23 AM


I have asked this question before, though not on this forum, and not recieved a real answer. Maybe I'll get on here.

How can anyone argue using the Bible (or any other holy book) as fact when;

a) They can't provide evidence that there is a god of any sort.
b) Even assuming a, they would need to show that this god is the one that they worship
c) Even assuming a and b, they would still need to show that their holy book comes from their god or at least is sanctioned by him/her/it.

Maybe someone can give me an explanation?

------------------
I have conquered worlds...


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by TrueCreation, posted 03-27-2002 11:47 AM compmage has not yet responded
 Message 25 by Peter, posted 04-26-2002 8:12 AM compmage has not yet responded
 Message 26 by Brad McFall, posted 05-14-2002 11:43 AM compmage has not yet responded
 Message 81 by William E. Harris, posted 07-20-2002 12:58 AM compmage has responded
 Message 110 by kowalskil, posted 08-11-2011 3:18 PM compmage has not yet responded

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 3493 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 65 of 113 (13033)
07-08-2002 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Peter
07-08-2002 5:09 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:

FACT is something observable, where the observer's opinion
is not involved.

THEORY is a consistent interpretation of data.


This is why I can't understand most creationists.

Evolution (as in change in allele frequency within a population over time leading to speciation etc) is a fact.

The ToE (as in the mechanisms that drive this change) is a theory.

Many creationists attempt to argue against the fact of evolution instead of the theory. Go figure.

------------------
compmage


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Peter, posted 07-08-2002 5:09 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Peter, posted 07-08-2002 10:28 AM compmage has not yet responded

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 3493 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 82 of 113 (13923)
07-22-2002 2:22 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by William E. Harris
07-20-2002 12:58 AM


quote:
Originally posted by William E. Harris:

Now that I have laid that groundwork (and you will have to guess where I am going with this), I will would ask if you would change your mind about the bible as history, it the ARK was actually discovered on Ararat?


Unfortunately it is not that simple. If you provided sufficient evidence, I would have no option but too 'belief' in the flood story (provided that there are no remaining impossabilities). However, that does not mean the the WHOLE bible is suddenly true.

------------------
compmage


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by William E. Harris, posted 07-20-2002 12:58 AM William E. Harris has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019