Re: Virginia: Chesterfield School Board takes up debate on different theories of life.

On Jun 11, 10:35 pm, "Steven J." <steve...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 11, 2:27 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Jun 10, 5:50 pm, "Steven J." <steve...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 10, 6:34 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

-- [snip]

Imagine that; an Atheist arguing that the source for Creationism
actually supports Evolution instead?

No, I am arguing that the source of creationism is as compatible with
evolution as it is with heliocentrism or modern meteorology. An
interpretation that sees the order of creation in Genesis 1 as
compatible with modern astronomy, or can interpolate billions of years
between Genesis1:1 and Genesis 1:2, is no harder to reconcile with the
plain sense of the text than is one compatible with common descent.

You are demonstrably confused (that is the best we can do you). It's
either that or I remind everyone of your worldview (Atheism) and all
is explained instantly.

Ray, confusion is the best you can do for anyone; it is apparently a
talent you learned from your mentor and idol, Gene Scott. But feel
free to show me wrong: why does having the sun created *after* the
Earth (and plants, but let that pass) not imply that the sun goes
actually physically goes around the Earth? Why do the passages in the
Psalms that speak of the Earth being fixed in place not mean what that
the Earth is, well, fixed in place? And why are the geocentric
passages of the Bible to be taken as figurative or reflections of the
views of less scientifically sophisticated bronze-age people, but the
creation account in Genesis must be taken literally as science?
Pointing out what you see as my theological beliefs doesn't explain
these issues at all.

Is Steven J. confused, stupid or deliberately misrepresenting the
prose of Genesis?

The "prose of Genesis" implies that the sky is a solid dome with
hatches in it, and that the sun moves *inside* the dome. It also
implies that if one breeds cattle in front of striped or spotted rods,
one ought to get striped or spotted offspring. I assume you are not
insisting on either of those points.

Bible "interpretation" by Atheist, now it "makes sense."

Ray, what are the "windows of heaven" spoken of in Genesis 7, and in
many other Old Testament passages? Why was Jacob praised for his
cleverness in breeding cattle on the assumption that markings seen by
the mothers when they conceived could be passed on to the offspring?
What is the creationist "interpretation" of these passages?


How is it that this Atheist can figure out when Darwin is speaking by
metaphor attempting to explain reality but the same ability is somehow
crippled and disabled when the Bible employs simple metaphors and
analogies to explain reality and God's actions?

Of course, said question is rhetorical.

Natural selection is the most complicated and convoluted scientific
principle anyone will find anywhere at anytime. Harvard Professor of
Science History, Janet Browne, has admitted how complicated natural
selection really is. We know that Darwin, when attempting to explain
how nature was produced by natural selection, apart from Divine
guidance, used antonymic intelligence (artificial breeders choosing
desired traits) as a metaphor comparable to what Nature does without
any intelligence involved. Yet Steven J. has no problem figuring this
out. But when the Bible uses any type of metaphor or symbolism or
typology or analogy, he suddenly has no ability to understand what is
being said. He, in fact, "thinks" *windows of heaven* literally means
that God installed those things that are built into our houses, into
the house of heaven. How can he not see that the phrase, in whatever
context, is talking about an act of God into reality and not the silly
rendering he has "honestly" put forth?

We explain the ability and the inability by pointing out the obvious:
Steven is an admitted Atheist; he has every motive to pretend that he
is attempting to convey what the Bible says by asking "genuine"
questions which are really rhetorical points of a made up mind;
attempting to misrepresent the enemy (Bible) of his worldview
(Atheism). Since he has no trouble deciphering Darwin's antonymic
metaphors we know he is not stupid but has a needed level of
intelligence. Since the same ability does not exist when the subject
is the Bible we can only conclude that his Atheism is the cause.

If any other person would like to take up Steven's cause and discuss
things with me, or if Steven were to suddenly obtain the same ability
when he reads Darwin, and be able to understand the prose of the
Bible, then please create a message. I love discussing the Bible and
Evolution and related things.

But we know Steven J. must now produce another long winded post acting
like he does not know what I am talking about. He must do this, if
not, he would, in essence, be silently admitting to deliberate
corruption of Biblical prose under the guise of "genuine discussion."

Ray


SNIP more "genuine" Bible "questions" and "arguments".....



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Response to Augrays rebuttal of Chuck Colsons letter
    ... Evolution is only postulated because ... it contradicts Genesis. ... God does not create ex nihilo,.... ... the world) is incompatible with atheism, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Dr. John Harshmans embarrassing "literalism" claims
    ... I don't see the relevance of Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 3. ... As I've explained to you many times, the appearance of design does not imply ... Atheism is most logical: it explains your handling of Genesis 3. ... a logical fallacy. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Why is my son an atheist?
    ... Genesis was literal history. ... Christian and be an evolutionist; ... is one reason the church is losing its children to atheism. ... evolution and it won't affect their salvation, but it does affect the next ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Virginia: Chesterfield School Board takes up debate on different
    ... Ray, where in Genesis does it make the claim of "special creation"? ... do you even know what the term "metaphor" means? ... evolution beyond anything that science allows for). ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A question for the group
    ... The rise of literal interpretations of Genesis starts, ... The discovery of deep time occurs in the context of Genesis-inspired age ... universe was ancient even in the middle ages. ... He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, ...
    (talk.origins)