Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The Bible Thumper · 03-01-2005, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowley

Since we are on the topic of creation myths, have you ever read the Silmarillion? Now that is a shit cool creation myth. Hell, it even includes Satan (Melkor) in it.

You would think that if a prophet was receiving a divine vision from which to write the story of creation it could have been more interesting and accurate than what a man using his senses and his reason could come up with. Yet, there is nothing in Genesis that would indicate that the author was anything other an uneducated man writing a creation myth based on his peoples' beliefs and his own limited understanding of the Universe. If he had received a divine vision he could have been given the words to use even if he did not fully understand it all. In this, we woud have a god offering illumination and knowledge rather than exposition and ignorance. But this does not seem to have occurred.

Instead, we are given a creation myth built in days, a non-sensical order to the creation events, and the idea that we humans are created in the image of a god who has no known substance. If god is indeed, three beings in one who can operate independently and yet still be one entity, how does that relate to me? While people sometimes argue that I seem like a different person before and after coffee, I doubt you are willing to agree that this would correspond to the holy trio. I have a physical body and require food and air to live. Does your god require these things? How could he be omnipotent if he did? How could he have existed prior to the creation of the Universe? How then could we be created in his image?

(Personally, I believe the author included the 'in his image' bit because the Jews of the time, like most tribes and cultures, had their gods and they were trying to demonstrate that they were mighty people because they were modeled after the image of their god.)

This psychotic, schitzoprenic post has been sent to the moderators for appropriate action.

cjack · 03-01-2005, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper

Adding details (like the "little critters") won't help your case any, plognark. The Holy Book leaves out many details. Critters, continental drift, dinosaurs, e.t.c.

Thus, by disregarding insignificant developments such as dinosaurs (large in size but small in significance from the Creation standpoint) and "critters", we see that the Basic Instructions still proves to be uncanny in it's accuracy and integrity.

Okay...come on, admit it...you're yanking our chains with this crap.

"Oh, sure, the Bible leaves out little details like, say, three and a half billion years of Earth's history, and a dozen or so billion years prior, but beyond that, its amazing how right it is!!!"

Monad · 03-01-2005, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper

This psychotic, schitzoprenic post has been sent to the moderators for appropriate action.

???????????? :huh:

(can't find a pot/kettle/black emoticon)

Howard · 03-01-2005, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowley

I have a physical body and require food and air to live. Does your god require these things?

Personally, I'd like to find out why God had himself circumcised, and who did it.

The Bible Thumper · 03-01-2005, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjack

Okay...come on, admit it...you're yanking our chains with this crap.

"Oh, sure, the Bible leaves out little details like, say, three and a half billion years of Earth's history, and a dozen or so billion years prior, but beyond that, its amazing how right it is!!!"

Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, you expect Genesis to read something like, "1:4 After God made Heaven and Earth, nothing happened on Earth. 1:5 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:6 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:7 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:8 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:9 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:10 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:11 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:12 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:13 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:14 STIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL, nothing happened.
1:15 Then God created vegitation and saw that it was good."

scigirl · 03-01-2005, 10:48 AM

The Bible Thumper -

The point is - all texts written by men back in the day had some insights into human behavior, biology, physics, astronomy and so on. The Egyptians were bad-ass astronomers and had very good anatomic knowledge. The Incas discovered "zero" and a bunch of other cool stuff.

Your theory would have more support if you showed that the Bible has more enlightened knowledge/better science predictions than the other ancient peoples running around on the earth at that same time. And it is going to be tough to do, at least from what I know about Egyptian, Greek, and South American cultures.

Oh and by the way, it's schizophrenic, not schitzoprenic. And Crowley meets zero criteria for the DSM-IV diagnosis of this mental disorder.

scigirl

Monad · 03-01-2005, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland98

Heya. You know the drill. Don't make me get out my jackboots.

Thanks,

Roland98
E/C mod

I'm sorry but I still don't see what he said that was out of order? (assuming you are referring to Crowley's post and that it hadn't been edited before I read it)

DudeAlmighty · 03-01-2005, 10:52 AM

scigirl · 03-01-2005, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monad

I'm sorry but I still don't see what he said that was out of order? (assuming you are referring to Crowley's post and that it hadn't been edited before I read it)

I believe he is referring to TBT's rebuttal: calling Crowley's post an utterance of a schizophrenic on a psychotic episode. Which is of course silly - I've dealt with psychotic episides on my psych rotation, and Crowley's post certainly wasn't anything like one.

Back to the original op, I wonder what TBT thinks of the Qu'ran's description of fetal life, and if it is as valid as the Bible: Click here.

In addition, Kathleen Hunt wrote about this topic at talkorigins: the Bible does not do even a decent job in explaining the origins of animals:

Quote:

Standard "young-earth" creationism
Creation of separate "kinds" in the order listed in Genesis, in six days, followed by a cataclysmic flood.

The Flood model is completely falsified, since the fossils appear in a different order than can be explained by any conceivable "sorting" model. Note that this is true not just for terrestrial vertebrates, but also for aquatic vertebrates, pollen, coral reefs, rooted trees, and small invertebrates. For example, ichthyosaurs and porpoises are never (not once!) found in the same layers; crabs and trilobites are never found in the same layers; small pterosaurs and equal-sized modern birds and bats are never found in the same layers. In addition, countless geological formations seem to be the result of eons of gradual accumulation of undisturbed sediment, such as multi-layer river channels and deep-sea sediments, and there are no indications of a single worldwide flood. In addition, the Flood Model cannot account for the obvious sorting by subtle anatomical details (easily explained by evolutionary models), or for the phenomenon that lower layers of lava have older radiometric dates. These are only a few of the problems with the Flood Model. See the flood FAQ for further information.

Creation in six "metaphorical" days is also falsified, since the animals appeared in a different order than that listed in Genesis, and over hundreds of millions of years rather than six days.

"Separately created kinds", but with an old Earth.
Literal creationism won't fly, but could the concept of "separately created kinds" still be viable, with the creations occurring over millions of years? This would require the following convoluted adjustments:

First, if every "kind", (species, genus, family, whatever) was separately created, there must have been innumerable successive and often simultaneous waves of creation, occurring across several hundred million years, including thousands of creations of now- extinct groups.

Second, these thousands of "kinds" were created in a strictly correlated chronological/morphological sequence, in a nested hierarchy. That is, virtually no "kind" was created until a similar "kind" already existed. For instance, for the reptile-to-mammal transition, God must have created at least 30 genera in nearly perfect morphological order, with the most reptilian first and the most mammalian last, and with only relatively slight morphological differences separating each successive genus. Similarly, God created legged whales before he created legless whales, and Archeopteryx before creating modern birds. He created small five-toed horse- like creatures before creating medium-sized three-toed horses, which in turn were created before larger one-toed horses. And so on. This very striking chronological/morphological sequence, easily explained by models 1, 2, and 3, is quite puzzling in this model.

Third, God did not create these kinds in a sequence that obviously progressed in any direction, as discussed briefly under model 3. This is not necessarily a fatal flaw (mysterious are the ways of God, right?), but it is another puzzle, another unexplained aspect of the fossil record.

Fourth, what about those species-to-species transitions? They appear to show that at least some species, genera, and families arose by evolution (not necessarily all, but at least some.) How can a creationist model be reconciled with this evidence?

From http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-...rt2c.html#conc

scigirl

Plognark · 03-01-2005, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper

Adding details (like the "little critters") won't help your case any, plognark. The Holy Book leaves out many details. Critters, continental drift, dinosaurs, e.t.c.

Yeah, it does leave out details, thanks for agreeing with me there

Quote:

Thus, by disregarding insignificant developments such as dinosaurs (large in size but small in significance from the Creation standpoint) and "critters", we see that the Basic Instructions still proves to be uncanny in it's accuracy and integrity.

Where was that again? Where the sun, moon, and stars were made after we already had plants and a cool, wet planet? Mmmkay.

Quote:

Genesis was written long before the Grecian empire came to rise, plognark (further proof that many on this message board denounce the Bible without doing a lick of research about the Bible. Their ignorance regarding events and timelines astounds me. Not as much now as it did when I first came to this message board, however.

Um, buddy, I hate to break it to you, but that's not what i was implying.

Greeks figured out the earth was round in 'around' 500 BC.

So why did the greeks figure this out 2,500 years ago, but this supposed "perfect account" couldn't even have a simple revelation to lend it some authenticity like awareness that the earth is round? I mean, frankly, it just looks like they ran with what they knew of the world, and there really wasn't too much revelation or anything. It's just another creation myth among many, just using what they knew or could make up with the information on hand.

Quote:

This messae board has made me immune to ignorance).

Well, not quite yet. It does appear to have made you completely immune to civility and humility, however...although I imagine you were probably like this long before showing up here. :wave:

Quote:

When Genesis is unquestionably accurate, you attribute it to luck. Where there's doubt, you say, "Yeah, but what about all the little critters? Why doesn't the Bible mention the little critters that were made before the birds?" The 'luck' quote is above. Here's the 'doubt'

So really, you just want us to forget the misses and remember the hits? I thought that was the realm of psychic con artists...

I mean, hell, even a stopped clock is wrong twice a day.

Quote:

To expand on the littel critters, folks, here's a quote:

Like what? Algae mats? Trilobites? What? The only significant events that took place before the dinosaurs are listed in Genesis 1:1-6.

I don't know, those early critters seem rather important to me, especially considering they were creeping around for hundreds of millions of years before the dinosaurs. You may not be impressed by them, but your incredulity stemming from ignorance and smarmy attitude has no bearing on the importance of early cartilaginous fishes, trilobites, amonites, or any of the other significant organisms that predate the dinosaurs. :wave:

It also doesn't change the fact that the genesis account screws up the ordering, or that you're just wrong about everything. You should work on your misdirections better; they don't really work, and they make you look bad. You should actually address all of the objections rather than getting definsive and trying to switch topics. You'd fare much better around here.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-01-2005, 10:48 AM	#46
scigirl Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Seattle Posts: 4,261	The Bible Thumper - The point is - all texts written by men back in the day had some insights into human behavior, biology, physics, astronomy and so on. The Egyptians were bad-ass astronomers and had very good anatomic knowledge. The Incas discovered "zero" and a bunch of other cool stuff. Your theory would have more support if you showed that the Bible has more enlightened knowledge/better science predictions than the other ancient peoples running around on the earth at that same time. And it is going to be tough to do, at least from what I know about Egyptian, Greek, and South American cultures. Oh and by the way, it's schizophrenic, not schitzoprenic. And Crowley meets zero criteria for the DSM-IV diagnosis of this mental disorder. scigirl

03-01-2005, 10:52 AM	#48
DudeAlmighty Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Trapped in DaFoe's Mansion Posts: 719	<nevermind>

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.