Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
23 online now:
(23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Happy Birthday: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,822 Year: 16,858/19,786 Month: 983/2,598 Week: 229/251 Day: 58/59 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Using the Bible as fact...
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 113 (11229)
06-09-2002 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by TrueCreation
03-29-2002 1:32 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by TrueCreation:

"5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:"

--Odly, this seems to imply that the bible may cooperate with an old universe, though a young Earth, hmmmmm...

***Interesting, I used a similar approach in another thread to imply that the earth must be exceedingly old, the argument being that in order for us to be able to observe light from stars and galaxies that are multiplied thousands of light years away, the earth must be extremely old. No one bit! Perhaps there were no YECs, perhaps they missed the subtle inferences that I made. Now do not misunderstand my point of view. I am indeed an OEC. I believe that there is Biblical evidence for this, even as a YEC must believe that there is Biblical evidence for their position. I just happen to be one of those OECs who believe that the earth was destroyed by a great flood between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. I realize that EVOs are fond of using the argument that YECs and OECs apparently interpret certain scriptures differently. I see it differently. I accept it as a difference of opinion and not interpretation. I believe the Bible interprets itself without any help from men. The interpretation always remains the same, only the opinions concerning that interpretation are different. At any rate, I put the bait out there and not even one person took a nibble, not even the EVOs, and I thought they would at least try to use it as a justification for their belief in a universe that is billions, and an earth that is millions of years old. Go figure! Sometimes the fish just don't bite! They're still hungry, they just want different bait to nibble on.

------------------
"KNOWLEDGE IS POWER! FEED YOUR BRAIN!".....................Jet

"The scientist's pursuit of the past ends in the moment of creation. This is an exceedingly strange development, unexpected by all but the theologians. Now we would like to pursue that inquiry farther back in time, but the barrier to further progress seems insurmountable.

It is not a matter of another year, another decade of work, another measurement, or another theory; at this moment it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the mystery of creation.

For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by TrueCreation, posted 03-29-2002 1:32 AM TrueCreation has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Peter, posted 06-11-2002 7:17 AM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 113 (11349)
06-11-2002 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Peter
06-11-2002 7:17 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
Would you care to elaborate the difference between 'an opinion
on the meaning of a text' and 'the interpretation of a text' ?

***Sure! I would be glad to!

Interpretation: Explanation of what is obscure; A translation from one language into another. [New International Dictionary]

Opinion: That which is opined; belief stronger than impression, less strong than positive knowledge. [New International Dictionary]

I hope that helps!

Shalom

Jet

------------------
Please limit signatures to at most a couple hundred characters. --Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Peter, posted 06-11-2002 7:17 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by John, posted 06-11-2002 10:52 PM Jet has responded
 Message 34 by Peter, posted 06-12-2002 8:28 AM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 113 (11398)
06-12-2002 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by John
06-11-2002 10:52 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by John:

.......These come to mind long before the senses of "translation" or "transliteration"

***And that in itself is a matter of "opinion".***

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming.”

Professor Paul Davies


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by John, posted 06-11-2002 10:52 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by John, posted 06-12-2002 2:04 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 113 (11399)
06-12-2002 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Peter
06-12-2002 8:28 AM


Sounds like semantics to me. Did I miss something?

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming.”

Professor Paul Davies


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Peter, posted 06-12-2002 8:28 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Peter, posted 06-12-2002 4:27 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 113 (11484)
06-13-2002 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by John
06-12-2002 2:04 PM


John says:
Yes, it is. But words carry with them more than their strict definitions.

***I agree! Unfortunately, many EVOs abandon this line of reasoning when it comes to "definition". If a strict definition is necessary for their prodigals, then strict it is. However, it a broad definition is required, then adherence to those previous guidelines is abandoned in order to support their assertion. I do not necessarily imply that you fall into this category, as it seems from this post at least, that you do not.***

John says:
You are technically correct. I can't argue that. It just seems that you'd choose a word less likely to cause misunderstanding.

***I admit to the expectation of reason and understanding within those to whom I may choose to reply. This, unfortunately, is not always the case. As a youth, one of the many principles greatly impressed upon me was the necessity of developing a great power of reason. I can thank my father, and my grandfather, for that. Perhaps, at times, I require and expect too much from some individuals. The power of reason is not an automatic consequence of physical maturity. Some, like myself, have worked at truly developing it, and others have not. Mores the pity!***

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by John, posted 06-12-2002 2:04 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by John, posted 06-13-2002 2:35 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 113 (11491)
06-13-2002 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Peter
06-12-2002 4:27 PM


Peter says:
In the context within which you used them, I cannot see any different
content ... and asked you to elaborate that difference.

You haven't ... you have provided isolated dictionary defintions ...
selected out of the large number of possible definitions for each
word.

This leads me back to the topic of this thread.

You have found debate and differing opinions over two, very simple
looking phrases.

How then can you claim the Bible as fact, when it contains much more
complex textual content, which itself has been translated across
many languages (not to mention blatantly changed for
political ends).



***Aside from simply stating your personal opinion on specific matters, matters with which I happen to disagree, you simply recycle an already answered question, the answer to which, you either did not, or could not understand and/or accept. So allow me to clarify my position as to my expectations when discussing and debating with others. For your convienence, I have chosen to cut-n-paste rather than refer you to the post in which this statement originates.

"I admit to the expectation of reason and understanding within those to whom I may choose to reply. This, unfortunately, is not always the case. As a youth, one of the many principles greatly impressed upon me was the necessity of developing a great power of reason. I can thank my father, and my grandfather, for that. Perhaps, at times, I require and expect too much from some individuals. The power of reason is not an automatic consequence of physical maturity. Some, like myself, have worked at truly developing the power of reason, and others have not. Mores the pity!"

If the reply that I gave was not satisfactory for you, then I am sorry. The above statement is a reasonable expectation. For those who cannot meet that expectation, I suggest they refrain from responding to my posts with the expectation of receiving a reply. TURN THE PAGE!

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstein

[Fixed too long line of asterisks. --Percy]

[This message has been edited by Percipient, 06-13-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Peter, posted 06-12-2002 4:27 PM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Percy, posted 06-13-2002 3:28 PM Jet has responded
 Message 44 by Percy, posted 06-13-2002 3:34 PM Jet has responded
 Message 54 by Peter, posted 06-14-2002 3:35 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 113 (11493)
06-13-2002 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by John
06-13-2002 2:35 PM


John says:
Of course, humans being human there are going to mistakes, slips of the tongue, whatever, and there are outright deception at times.......What I don't see is intentional equivocation on a grand scale.

***Beauty, or rather in this case, Honesty, is in the eye of the beholder. Agreement to disagree is a cornerstone of debate.***

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by John, posted 06-13-2002 2:35 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by John, posted 06-13-2002 5:05 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 113 (11589)
06-14-2002 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Percy
06-13-2002 3:34 PM


Percy says:
So your answer to Peter's point that the dictionary definitions you supplied don't fit the context is that you have greater reasoning powers?

***You seem to have a fondness for putting words into peoples' mouths. Perhaps you would do well to simply take a statement at face value, thereby avoiding spurious interpretations of what you assume someone means. Or perhaps this is merely one of the debating tactics learned in EVO 101?
Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!***

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Percy, posted 06-13-2002 3:34 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Percy, posted 06-14-2002 1:49 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 113 (11590)
06-14-2002 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Percy
06-13-2002 3:28 PM


Sure, no problem.

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Percy, posted 06-13-2002 3:28 PM Percy has not yet responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 113 (11591)
06-14-2002 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by John
06-13-2002 5:05 PM


I suppose that would depend upon the intellectual level of the person that I am responding to.

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by John, posted 06-13-2002 5:05 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by John, posted 06-14-2002 1:01 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 113 (11597)
06-14-2002 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by John
06-14-2002 1:01 PM


And thanks for your support!

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by John, posted 06-14-2002 1:01 PM John has not yet responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 113 (11600)
06-14-2002 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Percy
06-14-2002 1:49 PM


Originally posted by Percipient:
This is supposed to be discussion and debate about evolution and creation, something you seem to have forgotten.

--Percy[/B][/QUOTE]

It seems that it is not I who have forgotten. It is you, Peter, and others who have insisted that this thread go wandering off into endless clarifications and sub-clarifications of word definitions that have little to do with the overall topic of discussion. It seems some have not yet learned how to "agree to disagree". If you people dislike, or disagree with, my responses, you should learn to simply say so, state your reason, and move on. Continuous belabouring of any single issue, contentious or otherwise, is fruitless. Turn The Page!

Shalom

Jet

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Percy, posted 06-14-2002 1:49 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Percy, posted 06-14-2002 3:24 PM Jet has responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 113 (11604)
06-14-2002 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Percy
06-14-2002 3:24 PM


Turn The Page!

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Percy, posted 06-14-2002 3:24 PM Percy has not yet responded

  
Jet
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 113 (11605)
06-14-2002 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Peter
06-14-2002 3:35 PM


Turn The Page!

------------------
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?”

Prof. George Greenstei


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Peter, posted 06-14-2002 3:35 PM Peter 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