Anyone doubting the legitimacy of evolution NEEDS to watch the second episode of COSMOS
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
I would, actually. If God is omni-present and omnipotent it would have to be wouldn't it. And to my manz posting scriptures, i know why you posted that. But I don't think I was given a brain to just mate and build things. In the same way that I wouldn't stone a woman in the way Leviticus instructs me to, I'm not about the stoning life.
I don't condemn nor do I not understand your stance, I see HOW they could differ. What I don't see is WHY. If what we understand and know God to be then it would have to be a part or wholly these systems that govern our universe. We can argue up and down about who's right or wrong, but it gets us nowhere. To me God exists in the margins, in the texts and in the appendix of science books. God is everything we do AND don't understand. Call me a heretic or whatever, i just know i'm a human that was given the power of critical though and analysis so while I see why people question God, i have NO clue whatsoever why people argue against what has been empirically proven (i.e. gravity, evolution, the stars) Only an absolute FOOL would not believe in science. While ONLY faith can make you a theist.
Which is why its pointless to continue this conversation. You've just admitted you don't really have a stance.
Since you're not talking about anything thats defined, then we're not talking about anything.
2manyFCKNrappers
mentally i measure kilos
2manyFCKNrappers
mentally i measure kilos
All you nikkas sure know a lot about the history of everything.
Evolution and creationism are one and the same.
The problem arises when you have a shallow knowledge of each and the other.
Evolution explains what happened.
Genesis 1 explains how it happened.
The scriptures expounds upon the underlying "force" that imposes itself upon creation causing these things to come to pass in divers even infinite forms.
Science defines and segments these processes, while good, it does nothing but give a man a meal of fish.
Understanding the parallels drawn from Genesis to Revelation enables a man to draw fish from the waters. And this is an ability that cannot be taught in a book.
The problem arises when you have a shallow knowledge of each and the other.
Evolution explains what happened.
Genesis 1 explains how it happened.
The scriptures expounds upon the underlying "force" that imposes itself upon creation causing these things to come to pass in divers even infinite forms.
Science defines and segments these processes, while good, it does nothing but give a man a meal of fish.
Understanding the parallels drawn from Genesis to Revelation enables a man to draw fish from the waters. And this is an ability that cannot be taught in a book.
Even the Pope believes in Evolution
Still, without time.....(I'm not even gonna go there again
)
Still, without time.....(I'm not even gonna go there again
)
dennis roadman
nuclear war in my bag
i'd just like to say that i was once on a track to become a religious scholar, and achieved a degree of success in the field before i gave it up.
the "bible as allegory and/or metaphor" line of thinking has not only been discarded, but is derided by strident ex-christians "source material" guys like bart ehrmann and believing theologians like justo gonzalez alike. not that they are an absolute authority (
irony), but that idea is considered in all credible circles exactly as @Napoleon has described it here: shying from conflict to avoid incongruity with ever-developing scientific understanding.
so when i realized that even believers (like the esteemed Augustin, for example) didn't fully believe in literal interpretation and also rejected it as an allegory for humanity, i threw it in the bushes. i'm not anti-religion and think it can do good things (although the bad seems to have consistently outweighed the good if we're being honest), but i'm evenly critical of it, and the truth is that theology and interpretation of scripture boils down to trying to figure out how many angels can simultaneously dance on the head of a pin.
the facts are in evidence, not faith. faith is nice and it's comforting and can be inspiring but it's not sufficient.
also: abrahamic religion and science do not derive from the same intent, religion was as political as it was moral, and as punitive as it was explanatory
science simply seeks to explain wtf is going on. perhaps much of (abrahamic) religion's weakness lies in its wide breadth and lack of depth
the "bible as allegory and/or metaphor" line of thinking has not only been discarded, but is derided by strident ex-christians "source material" guys like bart ehrmann and believing theologians like justo gonzalez alike. not that they are an absolute authority (
irony), but that idea is considered in all credible circles exactly as @Napoleon has described it here: shying from conflict to avoid incongruity with ever-developing scientific understanding.so when i realized that even believers (like the esteemed Augustin, for example) didn't fully believe in literal interpretation and also rejected it as an allegory for humanity, i threw it in the bushes. i'm not anti-religion and think it can do good things (although the bad seems to have consistently outweighed the good if we're being honest), but i'm evenly critical of it, and the truth is that theology and interpretation of scripture boils down to trying to figure out how many angels can simultaneously dance on the head of a pin.
the facts are in evidence, not faith. faith is nice and it's comforting and can be inspiring but it's not sufficient.
also: abrahamic religion and science do not derive from the same intent, religion was as political as it was moral, and as punitive as it was explanatory
science simply seeks to explain wtf is going on. perhaps much of (abrahamic) religion's weakness lies in its wide breadth and lack of depth
Word?
Really? With all these contradictions?
Oh, so god is just going to violate his own laws of physics?
fukk outta here bible boy.
precisely.i'd just like to say that i was once on a track to become a religious scholar, and achieved a degree of success in the field before i gave it up.
the "bible as allegory and/or metaphor" line of thinking has not only been discarded, but is derided by strident ex-christians "source material" guys like bart ehrmann and believing theologians like justo gonzalez alike. not that they are an absolute authority (
so when i realized that even believers (like the esteemed Augustin, for example) didn't fully believe in literal interpretation and also rejected it as an allegory for humanity, i threw it in the bushes. i'm not anti-religion and think it can do good things (although the bad seems to have consistently outweighed the good if we're being honest), but i'm evenly critical of it, and the truth is that theology and interpretation of scripture boils down to trying to figure out how many angels can simultaneously dance on the head of a pin.
the facts are in evidence, not faith. faith is nice and it's comforting and can be inspiring but it's not sufficient.
also: abrahamic religion and science do not derive from the same intent, religion was as political as it was moral, and as punitive as it was explanatory
science simply seeks to explain wtf is going on. perhaps much of (abrahamic) religion's weakness lies in its wide breadth and lack of depth
All this "metaphor" talk is a recent development cause they HAVE to find new ways to reinterpret the bible.
Its the only way theists can be relevant.
Even the Pope believes in Evolution
Still, without time.....(I'm not even gonna go there again
The catholic church didnt forgive galileo until 1995
fukk the catholic church FOREVER.
dennis roadman
nuclear war in my bag
nah that's the thing tho. it's not recent. it's been around since medieval academies (and presumably before that) and increased parallel to literacy rates with the renaissance and beyond that. so you had guys like tertullian (a church father - theologians of the patristic era), aquinas and augustin saying that its NOT an allegory, but when asked what it was exactly were essentially saying "well you see what had happened was...".
it's just a matter of interpretation and changing course of belief and concept to make things fit with pre-ordained faith.
that's why the allegory/metaphor argument TODAY is dripping in apologist BS, because it's already been pondered and thrown out by even the most faithful centuries before darwin.
like i said, it's nice and all, and wildly intriguing (which is to say the study of religion is an incredible channel of insight into human psychology and sociology) but as a credible science
Well let me take this time to say FUUUUUUUUUUUUCK William Lane Craignah that's the thing tho. it's not recent. it's been around since medieval academies (and presumably before that) and increased parallel to literacy rates with the renaissance and beyond that. so you had guys like tertullian (a church father - theologians of the patristic era), aquinas and augustin saying that its NOT an allegory, but when asked what it was exactly were essentially saying "well you see what had happened was...".
that's why the allegory/metaphor argument TODAY is dripping in apologist BS, because it's already been pondered and thrown out by even the most faithful centuries before darwin.
like i said, it's nice and all, and wildly intriguing (which is to say the study of religion is an incredible channel of insight into human psychology and sociology) but as a credible science
have you seen his debate with Sean Carroll?
shyt was embarassing.
Here you have Sean Carroll...an accomplished astrophysicist and hard fukking working man...and WLC...a two-bit "theologian" (aka magician) trying to interpret science WAY above his pay grade
"
◄ 2 Peter 1:20 ►
Parallel Verses
New International Version
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things.New Living Translation
Above all, you must realize that no prophecy in Scripture ever came from the prophet's own understanding,English Standard Version
knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation.New American Standard Bible
But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,King James Bible
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.Holman Christian Standard Bible
First of all, you should know this: No prophecy of Scripture comes from one's own interpretation, International Standard Version
First of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, NET Bible
Above all, you do well if you recognize this: No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet's own imagination,Aramaic Bible in Plain English
While you first know this: No prophecy is its own exposition of the Scriptures.GOD'S WORD® Translation
First, you must understand this: No prophecy in Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation.Jubilee Bible 2000
understanding this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.King James 2000 Bible
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of one's own interpretation.American King James Version
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.American Standard Version
knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.Douay-Rheims Bible
Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. Darby Bible Translation
knowing this first, that [the scope of] no prophecy of scripture is had from its own particular interpretation,English Revised Version
knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.Webster's Bible Translation
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.Weymouth New Testament
But, above all, remember that no prophecy in Scripture will be found to have come from the prophet's own prompting;World English Bible
knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation.Young's Literal Translation
this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,"
Word?
Really? With all these contradictions?
Oh, so god is just going to violate his own laws of physics?
fukk outta here bible boy.
Exactly my point.
Everything I wrote in that post flew far and above your head friend
Your bible allows for plants to exist before the sun????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/