|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Could asteroids lead to the extinction of YECism ? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
All I see in this barely plausible scenario is the desperation of these men in the face of the science of the day that they were unable to criticize.
That's a pretty good description of creationism in general. I agree in general with this. The turn of science to antibiblical assertions put Bible believers in a difficult position. Having always admired science, and thinking it a gift from God, many scrambled to accommodate their beliefs to what the scientists were saying. I believe this was a fatal error, understandable though it is. By coming up with accommodating ideas like Gap Theory they avoided the conflict and appeared to find common ground sufficient to let them continue in their faith and preach their faith to their congregations. But the conflict is inevitable and can't be avoided. Gap theory is a wild speculative solution that ends up being no solution. Same with the other ways the Bible was compromised to accommodate science. I hadn't known until kbertsche demonstrated it that so many of the greatest preachers had succumbed to this kind of solution, and it was quite startling because those men preach solidly Biblical sermons, the best of the best. I had no idea there was a rotten spot in the floorboards as it were, that could bring the whole house down. That's the problem with ALL compromising efforts. It's the same problem with the modern Bibles. Christians can go along for years trusting in those Bibles and then suddenly grasp the implications of the untrustworthiness of the Greek texts that underlie them, and their lack of knowledge of the history of these things, and the corrupted nature of those texts, then cause many to lose their faith and leave them with a bitter cynicism about Christianity. Those great preachers who gave into the Old Earth and tried to make the Bible conform to it have built a house of cards that subsequent generations can blow down with a breath, leaving them with very flimsy grounds for their faith. I appreciate that they didn't have the time, and it wasn't their calling either, to try to answer the claims of science, but a strong stand on the Bible against the science they couldn't understand might have served us all better in the end. Others might have been inspired to learn more science earlier, might have seen through the purely interpretive and speculative and unprovable nature of the claims that were being presented as Fact for one thing, might have stayed on top of the claims down the decades instead of being lulled to sleep by a false reconciliation at the expense of the Bible. Hey I like this post. I think I'll post it on one of my blogs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
It isn't evidence at all, as I will keep asserting against your assertion, it's nothing but speculating, hypothesizing and interpreting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
Right, Gap Theory is an obviously wrong interpretation of Genesis 1, so is Day-Age theory, so is Theistic evolution. Just as geocentrism is not in the Bible, neither are these theories.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Actually the evidence is just as much on the side of creationist interpretations as evolutionist and old earth interpretations. Since the evidence IS open to interpretation and really doesn't support your conclusions as you think it does. Evidence such as the fossils for instance, the strata for instance, junk DNA even, mutations too. All a matter of how they are interpreted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The part you are missing is that interpretations can be, and often are, wrong. Not missing this at all. Of course some interpretations are wrong, that's the whole point. It's the establishment interpretations I judge to be wrong.'
If we continue this train of thought, there is no god since millions of atheists interpret the evidence to there not being a god. Do you still want to use this rationale? But I haven't used any rationale that says all interpretations are equal. Far from it. I've simply pointed out that the establishment interpretations of the unknowable past are simply that, interpretations and not proven fact though they are claimed to be. And I believe that at least some of the opposing creationist interpretations are the correct ones, but I can't prove those either. We can only argue the case back and forth. And the atheists are looking at the wrong evidence.
Just because you choose to view data through a certain lense doesn't make it correct. Never said it did.
Data and reality aren't protected like your faith is. Just because you are just as right in your interpretation of the bible as Catholic Scientist and Devilsadvocate are doesn't mean you can do the same with actual facts, data and reality. Sorry, this is rather garbled logic. No idea what you mean by "protected" and there's no such thing as contradictory views being "just as right" as each other. Facts data and reality are just as subject to interpretation as the Bible is. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You know what would be really really nice of you, and fair and honest and so on, is if you'd include in your periodic restatement of this accusation an acknowledgement of my periodic restatement of my answer to you in which I say how wrong you are? Wouldn't that save a lot of stress and wasted energy?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Christians do not reject science, REAL science, FAR FROM IT, only the fantasy sciences of the unobservable past.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I would have thought it clear enough that the unobservable past is what the evolutionists and OE people think they are dealing with. They make their assertons about what happened in a past they know nothing about. They certainly deny what we think we know through the Bible, deny it with every theory they have about dates of civilizations and events and the works. The past IS unobservable to them and yet they feel free to declare what happened during it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
But as HBD said, I don't have an unobservable past to deal with, I have an observed past that tells me when some things happened so I can place the Flood in history for instance while secular science ignores all the evidence for it and goes on making up stuff that has NO verification whatever. But I'm still otherwise in the same position of having to interpret things that weren't reported on.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024