The proposition for debate is that when one takes the tales of Genesis literally, one becomes intellectually disabled, at least temporarily. Taking Genesis literally requires one to reject biology (which includes evolution) and other sciences in favor of 'magic.' Geology and radiometric dating have to be rejected since the Earth formed only about 6000 years ago, during the same week the Earth was made (in a single day).
Much of the debate in the topic of Science and Religion consists of theists who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis rejecting basic science. Most of the resulting debates are not worth engaging in.
The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Moderator: Moderators
- Diogenes
- Guru
- Posts: 1353
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
- Location: Washington
- Has thanked: 895 times
- Been thanked: 1306 times
The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #1___________________________________
“Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves”
— Confucius
“Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves”
— Confucius
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6019
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6747 times
- Been thanked: 3234 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #671[Replying to dad1 in post #669]
Nothing in that rant equates to any evidence for creation or for God. Why should anyone believe in the biblical version of it? You keep ignoring the fact that science has nothing to say either way about your creation story. Trashing science without actually refuting anything does nothing for your case at all. So, where is your evidence?
Nothing in that rant equates to any evidence for creation or for God. Why should anyone believe in the biblical version of it? You keep ignoring the fact that science has nothing to say either way about your creation story. Trashing science without actually refuting anything does nothing for your case at all. So, where is your evidence?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #672All origin claims such as the big bang and the theory of evolution.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #673Nothing you choose to admit or accept. Nothing in science confirms or denies it. Evidence is not limited to what so called science dictates. Neither need the beliefs of science be foisted onto evidences.
Because the bible checked out in a multitude of other ways, so we can believe it for what we cannot check out as well.Why should anyone believe in the biblical version of it?
Why would I not do so?You keep ignoring the fact that science has nothing to say either way about your creation story.
There is nothing from science to refute regarding Genesis.Trashing science without actually refuting anything does nothing for your case at all.
Let's start with where the evidence is NOT! That is science. So, I use evidence like plate movements of the past, history, the fossil record etc. I also use evidence like Scripture! Since it is proven in so many ways, it counts as evidence also for what man cannot know on his own.So, where is your evidence?
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2575 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #674I'm debating claims you represent, by challenging those claims.dad1 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 2:22 amNot sure what you are 'debating' about then if you do not agree with the claims of science and make no effort to support them?JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 9:47 pm Site rules indicate I'm not responsible for claims I don't make.
As to any claims that may be proposed by science, it's my contention I don't even need those claims in order to show you can't support your own claims to a scientifally acceptable standard, as you have yourself agreed.
So I'm left to ponder what it is you seek to debate.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #675I would challenge that claim! Here is on for you then, let's see your challenge. Science does not and cannot cover God or creation.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 3:12 am I'm debating claims you represent, by challenging those claims.
There is no science that covers creation. The only science standard seems to be anything but God beliefs that are dressed up in a science dress.As to any claims that may be proposed by science, it's my contention I don't even need those claims in order to show you can't support your own claims to a scientifally acceptable standard, as you have yourself agreed.
Not sure what is left when science is KOed, and you appear unable to deal with it.So I'm left to ponder what it is you seek to debate.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2575 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #676So trying to support such claims of gods existing, and gods creating, is a goofy thing to try to do in a science forum.dad1 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 3:18 amI would challenge that claim! Here is on for you then, let's see your challenge. Science does not and cannot cover God or creation.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 3:12 am I'm debating claims you represent, by challenging those claims.
I've also yet to find any truth that covers it. Can you put you any truth to creation claims?dad1 wrote:There is no science that covers creation.JK wrote: As to any claims that may be proposed by science, it's my contention I don't even need those claims in order to show you can't support your own claims to a scientifally acceptable standard, as you have yourself agreed.
That's a problem for those who seek to make unscientific claims in a science forum.dad1 wrote: The only science standard seems to be anything but God beliefs that are dressed up in a science dress.
Lol. Science is far from KOed by your inability to support your unscientific claims.dad1 wrote:Not sure what is left when science is KOed, and you appear unable to deal with it.JK wrote: So I'm left to ponder what it is you seek to debate.
If all you can do is continue to cry about how science can't help you support your claims, maybe it'd serve you well to reconsider those claims.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6019
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6747 times
- Been thanked: 3234 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #677No. There was literally nothing in that post that represented any evidence for creation or for God. You have made no case whatsoever for your position. All your ranting against what science has achieved is totally irrelevant.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6019
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6747 times
- Been thanked: 3234 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #678And yet you are at a complete loss when it comes to refuting any of it. You are not debating anything. You have presented no case whatsoever. Just repeating that science can't disprove creation is empty rhetoric. Prove creation is true. That burden is on you and so far you have failed.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- otseng
- Savant
- Posts: 20680
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 206 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
- Contact:
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #679Moderator Comment
Please be more civil about describing things in a negative generalization.
Please review the Rules.
______________
Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #680Sometimes it is unavoidable when people of other beliefs, like so called science realize that science does not deal with creation and ask what OTHER evidences exist.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 4:00 am So trying to support such claims of gods existing, and gods creating, is a goofy thing to try to do in a science forum.
Truth has no meaning when used as a preference of beliefs. Science is in no position to know truths about God or creation. So if the word truth is used in science, it is a very relative term and about as meaningful as saying 'this is true inside the box'.I've also yet to find any truth that covers it. Can you put you any truth to creation claims?
No. Only for those pretending science is involved in anything to do with the spiritual, or that it could be. A proper use of the phrase unscientific claim, is a claim about something science can and does cover. For example, if I claimed that on earth gravity meant that if we fell off a skyscraper, we would only descend at a uniform speed of 3 mph, that would not be a scientific claim. It also would be wrong and 'unscientific'. If you claimed that there was a cockroach living 17 billion light years away on a snowball, that would a belief based claim. Even if you tried to say that snow could exist there according to science, or that a cockroach might survive for awhile on a snowball according to scientific evidence etc. That would not make it a scientific claim. If you claim there is no God or creation, that is not a scientific claim. If you say there is a God, that is not a scientific claim either. So anyone asking for evidence for or against God or creation could not be referring to evidence from a science that has no possible clue and no knowledge or power to test or observe etc.That's a problem for those who seek to make unscientific claims in a science forum.
I agree. If I had such an inability (which I don't) that would not be what knocks science out of the ring. What KOs science is it's own inability and limits and scope to be able to fight in a ring with God.Lol. Science is far from KOed by your inability to support your unscientific claims.
Science can make no claims about creation and if it did, it could not support them. Therefore when an OP claims that believing the record of God about creation of life and the world is somehow wrong and bad, that is unscientific!If all you can do is continue to cry about how science can't help you support your claims