Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8936 total)
22 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, jar, RAZD (4 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume: Total: 861,614 Year: 16,650/19,786 Month: 775/2,598 Week: 21/251 Day: 21/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the creation/evolution debate taboo in our churches?
Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 3062 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 34 of 51 (531444)
10-18-2009 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Arphy
10-17-2009 11:36 PM


Re: About the question posed to the non-religious
Arphy writes:

If something is written in a historical narrative style, that is because it is historical narrative.

And you know this because...?

Arphy writes:

YEC's let the bible speak for itself and then interpret evidence in that framework.

Tell me. How is "interpreting evidence in that framework" following the scientific method?

Respectfully,

-Meldinoor

PS. I'd be happy if you responded to my latest post in the "what is a kind" thread. We were getting so close to figuring out what a kind is, I'd hate to see you leave that thread.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Arphy, posted 10-17-2009 11:36 PM Arphy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Arphy, posted 10-18-2009 11:55 PM Meldinoor has responded

    
Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 3062 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 43 of 51 (531592)
10-19-2009 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Arphy
10-18-2009 11:55 PM


Re: About the question posed to the non-religious
Arphy writes:

How is it in disagreement with the scientific method?

You're right, Arphy. The scientific method at its core doesn't address biased observations. Forget I said that.

Perhaps I can rephrase myself by saying that scientists strive for objectivity. To say that they must "interpret" the evidence within a biblical framework implies that you must start by assuming that the Bible is right, and then look at the evidence.

Can an objective scientist not find evidence for YEC? Do they really have to start by interpreting the Bible, and then applying their interpretation to the evidence?

Arphy writes:

ok we assume it is, because it is written in the style of a historical narrative. So unless the author is being deceptive, then it seems like a good assumption to make. Same goes for a work of fiction. If it is written in a fictional style then we presume that it is fictional.

This is curious, because in my experience many stories are written in what I'd consider a historical narrative style. This isn't necessarily because the writer is being deceptive, it's just that he tends to use that style.

More importantly, I wonder what prompts you to label Genesis as "historical narrative". Is there any telltale sign that gives it away as such?

I won't be able to post much in the next few days, but I think it would make for a good discussion in another thread, if you'd care to start one.

Respectfully,

-Meldinoor

Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Arphy, posted 10-18-2009 11:55 PM Arphy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Arphy, posted 10-19-2009 4:59 AM Meldinoor 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