Creationism and abiogenesis
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-10-2016, 12:01 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(13-10-2016 11:50 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(13-10-2016 11:35 AM)Aliza Wrote:  Because some theists take a translation of a translation of a translation of a book (that's Hebrew to Greek to Latin to King James English), disregard the author's notes, and believe it in the most literal sense of the word.

The bible doesn't state the mechanism by which the universe came into existence. It's open to interpretation, and it makes no sense what so ever to assume that the evidence found all over the place which points to a slow evolution is somehow planted there to trick us. If the universe was poofed into existence in a very short period of time, and it was really important for us to believe that, then all signs would point there.

Right. I'm mostly aiming my argument at fundamentalist Christians who insist that their literal reading of a 3rd or 4th generation translation is the only way to read it. Even when I was a Catholic, I found this view ridiculous. I don't have any real problem with the concept that God may have created the universe -- but if so, he did it in a way that's consistent with the evidence.

RE: translations, my brother once tried to tell me that the translation that his church (some evangelical Protestant sect) used was "the best one". Never mind that the concept of a "best" translation is problematic in any case -- I asked him how he could possibly know that this translation was "the best". Well, because his pastor said so! I guess that settles it...

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

I have Christians in my life who maintain that the KJV is the "inspired" translation by Jesus, and therefore it is just as valid (more valid!) than the Hebrew original. That makes no sense at all, but that's their justification for not learning to read Hebrew. And of course their church doesn't want them to learn Hebrew, because the Hebrew contradicts their message.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
13-10-2016, 12:37 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(13-10-2016 12:01 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(13-10-2016 11:50 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Right. I'm mostly aiming my argument at fundamentalist Christians who insist that their literal reading of a 3rd or 4th generation translation is the only way to read it. Even when I was a Catholic, I found this view ridiculous. I don't have any real problem with the concept that God may have created the universe -- but if so, he did it in a way that's consistent with the evidence.

RE: translations, my brother once tried to tell me that the translation that his church (some evangelical Protestant sect) used was "the best one". Never mind that the concept of a "best" translation is problematic in any case -- I asked him how he could possibly know that this translation was "the best". Well, because his pastor said so! I guess that settles it...

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

I have Christians in my life who maintain that the KJV is the "inspired" translation by Jesus, and therefore it is just as valid (more valid!) than the Hebrew original. That makes no sense at all, but that's their justification for not learning to read Hebrew. And of course their church doesn't want them to learn Hebrew, because the Hebrew contradicts their message.

As a Texas politician once said in opposition to bilingual education: "If English was good enough for Jesus, it should be good enough for them!" (This is probably apocryphal/urban legend, but it's such a good quote, I couldn't resist).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
13-10-2016, 12:45 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(13-10-2016 12:01 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(13-10-2016 11:50 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Right. I'm mostly aiming my argument at fundamentalist Christians who insist that their literal reading of a 3rd or 4th generation translation is the only way to read it. Even when I was a Catholic, I found this view ridiculous. I don't have any real problem with the concept that God may have created the universe -- but if so, he did it in a way that's consistent with the evidence.

RE: translations, my brother once tried to tell me that the translation that his church (some evangelical Protestant sect) used was "the best one". Never mind that the concept of a "best" translation is problematic in any case -- I asked him how he could possibly know that this translation was "the best". Well, because his pastor said so! I guess that settles it...

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

I have Christians in my life who maintain that the KJV is the "inspired" translation by Jesus, and therefore it is just as valid (more valid!) than the Hebrew original. That makes no sense at all, but that's their justification for not learning to read Hebrew. And of course their church doesn't want them to learn Hebrew, because the Hebrew contradicts their message.

It is interesting to note that while the KJV has a great deal of beautiful language in it, it is one of the very least accurate translations.
It is based on a very small number of texts, most of them mediocre Latin translations.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
01-03-2017, 04:03 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
They really don't like answering the "Where did God come from" question.

They LOVE to ask where the first life came from and proclaim a deity had to create it; but ask them where God came from and they proclaim he's always been.....and the protest when you say "but you just said life had to create life, so something had to create God".

It's amazing how dishonest it all is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like ResidentEvilFan's post
07-03-2017, 02:16 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(11-10-2016 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Tell them to read Dawkins' The Greatest Show On Earth and learn something about evolution before running their fucking mouths.

> I tried that on some Jehovah's Witnesses one time. They replied that they didn't have to read stuff like that because they already knew that they were right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gwaithmir's post
07-03-2017, 03:15 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(07-03-2017 02:16 PM)Gwaithmir Wrote:  
(11-10-2016 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Tell them to read Dawkins' The Greatest Show On Earth and learn something about evolution before running their fucking mouths.

> I tried that on some Jehovah's Witnesses one time. They replied that they didn't have to read stuff like that because they already knew that they were right.

Laugh out load

Intellectual honesty at work. Rolleyes

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2017, 07:25 PM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(13-10-2016 12:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is interesting to note that while the KJV has a great deal of beautiful language in it, it is one of the very least accurate translations.
It is based on a very small number of texts, most of them mediocre Latin translations.
Ah, but the KJV Only folks will go on about it just exactly like creationists go on about evolution. They believe the Textus Receptus, on which the KJV is based, was divinely preserved, and that Wescott and Hort and subsequent manuscript collections are corrupt counterfeits.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2017, 03:41 AM
RE: Creationism and abiogenesis
(13-10-2016 11:16 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(11-10-2016 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Tell them to read Dawkins' The Greatest Show On Earth and learn something about evolution before running their fucking mouths.

First they have to be able to read something besides the Bible. Facepalm

you assume they read the bible and aren't just parroting cherry picked parts thrown out by apologists ? ?

The more one asserts their own unquestioned preconceived beliefs, the more demanding I will be for empirical evidence for I will accept nothing else in place of it
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: