Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2015, 03:07 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 02:51 PM)jennybee Wrote:  Thanks for explaining your views. Smile I am just curious about the 974 generations prior to Adam. These generations were thought to be soulless? Also, what about the animals and plant life--there were 974 generations of people living before animals and plants came into existence? I am genuinely interested in the Jewish view on this. I love learning about different cultures and religions. I really appreciate your taking the time to explain this.

Working strictly from the Talmud here, the 974 generations of mankind that live prior to Adam are not in the "image of G-d". We do take that to mean that they didn't have souls, yes. There could have been MANY proto-humans who walked the Earth before mankind. No clear Talmud discussion is taken up on the subject that I'm prepared to discuss, though there is some notion that around 300 civilizations prior to Adam were scrapped before the template of Adam was finally settled upon.

The 974 generations prior to Adam fit into the sixth "yom" or "day" in Genesis but there is no reason to conclude that those 974 generations make up the entirety of the sixth day.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aliza's post
23-08-2015, 03:12 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
^^ See now, *that* looks like a pretty unscientific belief to me and I don't get why you'd adopt it... but... each to his own I guess.

Next you'll be telling me that "Yom, Kippur" isn't a traditional Jewish exclamation on being served fish.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
23-08-2015, 03:15 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 03:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  ^^ See now, *that* looks like a pretty unscientific belief to me and I don't get why you'd adopt it... but... each to his own I guess.

Next you'll be telling me that "Yom, Kippur" isn't a traditional Jewish exclamation on being served fish.

I was asked for a religious account.... I gave a religious account. Big Grin Unlike some theists, I am capable of separating the two views and holding them to be mutually exclusive.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Aliza's post
23-08-2015, 03:18 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
We use "day" (the Hebrew word "yom" is almost entirely synonymous with our word) in both the literal, 24-hour sense, and as a metaphoric use:

"In the dinosaur's day..."

"Back in my day..."

"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
23-08-2015, 03:23 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 03:18 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  We use "day" (the Hebrew word "yom" is almost entirely synonymous with our word) in both the literal, 24-hour sense, and as a metaphoric use:

"In the dinosaur's day..."

"Back in my day..."

The word "Yom" means a period of time going from darkness to light. This term has been used in the Talmud to describe a period of years where people went from a position of less understanding to a position of more or new understanding. It is not exclusively and strictly used to describe a 24 hour period of time, though it certainly can (and primarily does) describe that as well.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
23-08-2015, 03:47 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 03:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  Next you'll be telling me that "Yom, Kippur" isn't a traditional Jewish exclamation on being served fish.

Augh, I just got the pun. "Yum, kipper!"

Damnit! How did I miss that? Facepalm

Funny!

"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
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
23-08-2015, 03:50 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 12:40 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 12:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  The Catholic Church supports its version of evolution, not the scientific theory.

I don't know about that Chas, it's more like they see no conflict between evolution and the bible. (the average catholic, not the whole whacky group). They don't think a day is a literal day but one that could last a billion years. And each "day" doesn't even have to be same length of time.

The baptist upbringing (school) was in direct conflict with what our regular parish was teaching. The baptist school I attended told me dinosaurs didn't exist at all and were a trick. They believed firmly the earth was a few thousand years old.
  • Believing that God designed evolution is not part of the Theory of Evolution.
  • Believing that God set up evolution is not part of the Theory of Evolution.
  • Believing that God guides evolution contradicts the Theory of Evolution.

The Roman Catholic Church supports theistic evolution. Theistic evolution is not a scientific theory.

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
23-08-2015, 03:59 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 12:57 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  They know that it is an origin myth written by their Bronze-Age ancestors
Yes, written by men as opposed to being a word of god.
I would think that this realization in itself is a good enough reason to doubt the whole concept of god. At least it would be for somebody who is approaching this matter with an open and critical mind.

(23-08-2015 01:54 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 10:44 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  Oh, I am not questioning you being a theist, I just found it strange that somebody can reconcile two, in my opinion irreconcilable things.

Jenny's example will work just fine. I hope that you don't need me to go to a specific lines in the story of creation? But if you do , how about Earth existing before the sun does. How can there even be "day one, two..." before there is sun?

So in short, science says that Sun is (billions of years) older then the Earth and your religion claims the opposite.

What of the two claims you hold to be the truth?

Disclaimer: Just for the record, I didn't come to an atheist forum to spout my religious doctrine. This is not an unsolicited request for my viewpoint.

The Christian people reject the Talmud for a variety of reasons… but maybe if they had it, they wouldn’t be so opposed to the idea of evolution. And before I continue, I want to clarify that there ARE Jews out there who absolutely are convinced that evolution is bogus. That’s their problem. I'm giving you a very brief explanation of how I feel that I can be both a Jew and an aspiring scientist. I have to watch myself or I'll give you a 10 page "summary" of the Jewish position on the first sentence of Genesis. So if this isn't detailed enough for you, you're welcome to PM and I'll try to be more specific.

VERY BRIEFLY:

The Hebrew calendar begins after the creation of Adam. When Christians insist that the world is 6,000 years old, they’re forgetting that they stole our bible from us and mistranslated it, and refused to consider our Talmud, which is an essential companion to the scripture. Your idea that the religious community uniformly believes that the universe was created 6,000 (or more specifically 5775) years ago is really exclusively a Christian one. ALL learned Jews, regardless of their denomination or their position on evolution, agree that the creation of the universe, earth and mankind occurred outside of the Hebrew calendar. The clock starts ticking once Adam is created.

http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askra...rstart.htm

The Talmud tells us that Adam was not the first human… only the first human in G-d’s image. Adam is said to be the first person with a soul, but according to the Talmud, there are 974 generations of man before him. We can see this being alluded to in Genesis because Adam has to find a partner, but he can’t find anyone who makes him happy. We Jews don’t think he was looking for a partner among the rabbits and the goats. We believe that he was looking for a wife from the population of existing people who were living on earth.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso...ution.html

The Talmud and the Torah are equally important in Judaism. Christianity may only read their poorly translated copy of the Hebrew Scriptures, but we have a much larger resource at our fingertips. One really cannot read the Torah without the Talmud and hope to understand the Jewish position. I would argue that without the Talmud, the nuances of the Hebrew language will be lost. Then all you have is a flat definition for the word “yom” to mean a 24 hour “day”, and nothing else.

If I understand your post correctly, Christian version of the Book of Genesis is just a poor translation of the Hebrew scriptures?
Ok, let me ask a very simple and direct question: by Judaism, with correct understanding of the Talmud and the Torah, is the Earth older then the Sun or not?

And btw, my questions are not an attack on you , and your viewpoint is obviously solicited . I am genuinely interested in your beliefs ( I know very little about Judaism ) , even tho it is very likely that I will disagree with them.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
23-08-2015, 03:59 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
(23-08-2015 03:07 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 02:51 PM)jennybee Wrote:  Thanks for explaining your views. Smile I am just curious about the 974 generations prior to Adam. These generations were thought to be soulless? Also, what about the animals and plant life--there were 974 generations of people living before animals and plants came into existence? I am genuinely interested in the Jewish view on this. I love learning about different cultures and religions. I really appreciate your taking the time to explain this.

Working strictly from the Talmud here, the 974 generations of mankind that live prior to Adam are not in the "image of G-d". We do take that to mean that they didn't have souls, yes. There could have been MANY proto-humans who walked the Earth before mankind. No clear Talmud discussion is taken up on the subject that I'm prepared to discuss, though there is some notion that around 300 civilizations prior to Adam were scrapped before the template of Adam was finally settled upon.

The 974 generations prior to Adam fit into the sixth "yom" or "day" in Genesis but there is no reason to conclude that those 974 generations make up the entirety of the sixth day.

Why 974? Consider

Note that 974 generations isn't compatible with the evidence from paleontology; it's not enough time.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
23-08-2015, 04:01 PM
RE: Eric Hovind provides evidence for creationism
One of the other members of one of the other field teams who sometimes went out with me when my field team partner (and best friend) at the KDHE was unavailable, was a Catholic.

I know it doesn't stand in for all Catholics, as they have widely-varying ideas, but he showed me the Pope's 1996 encyclical (or whatever it's called) about evolution and told me that he thinks it means that God does not need to meddle in evolution or natural selection, etc, because God designed the world to allow things to come to be by natural processes, and that that is what is meant by theistic evolution, not a need to meddle to keep things "on course", but knowing the course from the get-go.

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: