Doubting Didymus

Well, here we are. I have to say I have not yet noticed any questions thare are more suited to E/C than to Biblical Criticism.

That is, if you meant these questions:

1) You copied out the Gen 5 genealogy. But did you actually read it? Surely, you noted a statistically significant pattern? Did you?

2) You referred to the Lk 3 genealogy in attempting to defend you fundamentalist hermeneutic. But did you actually read it? Surely, you noted a classic Semitic feature? Did you?

Those are clearly more to do with biblical criticism than with evolution V creation. I am more interested in your suggestions that atheists pervert the theory of evolution. What do you think we have wrong, exactly?

pz

I guess the GRD mods don't want this stuff either, and vomited it back our way.

It was not censorship, but merely an attempt to put the discussion in a more appropriate place. I do not consider Biblical exegesis to have anything to contribute to any discussion of evolution. You seem to agree, since your position appears to be a denial of the appropriateness of a literal interpretation of Genesis...and I don't see any way you can recover any account of value to us materialists otherwise.

I would also add that in the social and political struggle over evolution, our foes are literalist/fundamentalist dingleberries. We aren't too worried about liberal scholars of theology, since you guys aren't campaigning to legislate idiocy. They are.

Goober

What the hell is he talking about? What perversion of evolution?

Is this guy here to argue, or assuage his ego? Look at his posts.

Oh no, its too long and tedious and contains substance, rather than short, handwaving assertions about how nobody understands hermeneutics.

:boohoo:

Way to characterise all atheists. Of course, you've never met all atheists but you're just soooo intellectual you can psychoanalize them all anyway.

Denis Lamoureux

Hi,
Pursuant to my last post and comment regarding people in this forum "reading & believing what they want to."

Note that I said the following:
"No suprizes with all the passion you express. This aligns well with Terror Management Theory (check the professional psychological literature). Atheists like you NEED a strawman hermeneutic. It's the only way you can survive."

Did I say ALL atheists? This statement was directed at one individual, and SOME atheists.

Get some reading skills.
Denis

Nic Tamzek

What the heck happened to this thread? It started out as a discussion of ex-YECs, which is fine, and then shifted into whether or not YECs prefer a 6,000 or 10,000 year old earth, which is also fine since it's not always clear. In this context the geneologies were raised, because YECs use them to get the age.

Denis Lamareux was cited as an admirable example of an anti-creo, which he is (see the book "Darwinism Defeated?" where he takes apart Phil Johnson). Whether he is an ex-YEC specifically wasn't established IIRC.

But, Denis, something made you come in with guns blazing! I can't quite figure what, perhaps you misinterpreted something? Sure, you're going to get the occasional pro-atheism remark in this forum since its and II forum (though not everyone is an atheist), but most of us in E/C have a primary interest in the biology, geology, etc. and how creos of various stripes etc. get it wrong. If you're in a mood for a religion-related slugging match I'm sure you could find them in the God or BibCrit forums (I hardly ever read them myself).

RufusAtticus

Moderator's Note:

I've had to split of the theological discussion again to the "Theology et Evolution" thread. Please refrain from discussing biblical interpretation in this thread. This thread is for ex-creationists. If you want to discuss bibilical interpretation with respect to creation, use the "Theology et Evolution" thread.

Thank you.

RufusAtticus
E/C Moderator

Advocatus Diaboli

The threads I start usually die pretty quick, or turn into off-topic. But I don't mind...