The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #1

Post by Diogenes »

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.
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #581

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:06 pm
DrNoGods wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 9:19 pm We know from geology that it never happened,
No you don't
"We know from geology that it never happened" is based on the millions of observations and pages of documents from hundreds of thousands of known people carrying out research and verification all over the world for many decades adding to the accumulated wealth of knowledge about our world.

"No you don't" is based on just a few verses of unknown provenance, produced by anonymous authors and consisting of nothing more than unverified claims in a compendium of religious propaganda.

That you place more weight on the latter to inform what you accept as reasonable says more to religious indoctrination than it does to the application of critical thinking.
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.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #582

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 12:54 am If a woman was great with child, that is calling it a child! Even in Genesis we see this.
Nope. It was just an early way of saying that a woman was pregnant. If it was really a child then surely it would be included in the census.
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.

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #583

Post by dad1 »

DrNoGods wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:32 pm That's your response to everything ... but never any backup.
If you make the claim you need to back it up. If I point out that you can't that goes toward showing you had the chance to back it up, but failed.
Then no point in arguing the point in a science and religion debate forum, since your only rebuttals are to quote the bible or preach.
Great so don't mention the flood as you did! You claimed, did you not there was no flood? Firstly the flood comes from the bible so you are using the bible. Next, you have NO scientific evidence that any of the main components of the flood were not real (windows of heaven etc). Why mention things here as claims that come from the bible for which you have zero evidence either way??
This is just more of "the past was different" nonsense without (as always) any justification for how that could be.
You do not know what the forces and laws on earth were like so why talk? Make no claims either way, same or different.
The total amount of water in the Earth system (planet and atmosphere) has been very close to fixed for many millions of years now.


Imaginary faith based time doesn't count. Your dates are 100% faith based.
Asteroid impacts over that time are negligible in terms of changing the H2O levels, and volcanic eruptions are the main method of material exchange between sub-crust and atmosphere.
The water was brought here by God in the bible. You have no science to address or refute that. Why bring it up?? You thought it was 'sciency' to simply make baseless claims?Why would anyone expect water to be here now from the flood?? We were told God took care of that and took it away. Again you have no science on this why even talk about it?
The idea that 4500 years ago there was somehow vastly different amounts of water available for a global flood, again, has no basis in reality.
If the water was brought here, how would anyone expect it to have been here already?
But there was radioactivity, so that statement is meaningless.
Your proof for that claim? (remember do not try to use faith based dating)
Plus, for only 4500 years ago and Noah's flood, there are many other ways to date things besides radioactive dating. There are trees older than that (a Great Basin bristlecone pine known as Methuselah is 4,853 years old),
Nope. Trees grew according to the bible record in weeks back then, tree rings are useless! Once again, you are trying to apply the nature and rates we see today to the unknown past. That is belief only.
and humans had invented writing so there are written records, civilizations existed, etc.


Of course civilizations existed. As for writing, perhaps that was something that came after the tower of Babel, because before that, all men spoke the same language. Not a great need for writing. Now when the languages suddenly were all different, yes, men needed other ways to communicate. The early writing was basically drawing little pictures to get a message across!!?
There is no evidence that civilizations were wiped out in a global flood only 4500 years ago. It is a myth.
There is no evidence they were not! Especially when we realize that in a different nature man and most animals probably left no remains (which is why they are not in the fossil record!)
Of course not ... science does not deal with gods and the supernatural. If my tax dollars went to fund studies of whether gods communicated with animals I'd be very upset.
Great, so make no claims that God did not tell a cow to carry the ark. All you can say is that you do not know.
The bible doesn't support any claims here, basic or not.
Are you saying that the bible does not mention different heavens?
But now we have a third heaven? Again, how many heavens are there? Birds fly in the atmosphere, not heaven.
It is part of the heavens.
The sun and stars are in space outside of the Earth's atmosphere, so also not in heaven.
Yes space is also part of the heavens.
Where is this third heaven?
"Sometime the word heaven is used symbolically in Scripture. When used of an actual place, Scripture speaks of three heavens.

1. The first is the atmosphere above us.

2. The second heaven is the stellar heaven, the sun, moon, and stars.

3. The third heaven is where God resides, above the other two regions. "

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don ... rt_151.cfm
I didn't ask where is the sky, I asked what is the sky (or what you think it is). Rayeigh scattering is why we see a "sky" and why it is blue. Nothing whatsoever to do with heaven(s).
Who knows what the sky looked like pre flood? But even little children know what the sky is. Ever heard one ask 'why is the sky blue'?

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #584

Post by dad1 »

brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:13 am
"We know from geology that it never happened" is based on the millions of observations and pages of documents from hundreds of thousands of known people carrying out research and verification all over the world for many decades adding to the accumulated wealth of knowledge about our world.
False. None of that says there was no flood.

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #585

Post by dad1 »

brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:18 am
dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 12:54 am If a woman was great with child, that is calling it a child! Even in Genesis we see this.
Nope. It was just an early way of saying that a woman was pregnant. If it was really a child then surely it would be included in the census.
Nope. A child was in there.
Genesis 16:11
And the angel of the Lord said unto her, Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the Lord hath heard thy affliction.
That means a child was in there. or here ..

Genesis 19:36
Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father
So it is quite correct when killing the little people in the womb is called child sacrifice!

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #586

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:21 am The water was brought here by God in the bible. You have no science to address or refute that.
The Bible does not say the water was brought here by God.
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.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #587

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:22 am
brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:13 am
"We know from geology that it never happened" is based on the millions of observations and pages of documents from hundreds of thousands of known people carrying out research and verification all over the world for many decades adding to the accumulated wealth of knowledge about our world.
False. None of that says there was no flood.
That is precisely what all of it says. There is evidence from all over the world that indicates the biblical global flood did not occur and could not have occurred.
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.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #588

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:25 am
brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:18 am
dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 12:54 am If a woman was great with child, that is calling it a child! Even in Genesis we see this.
Nope. It was just an early way of saying that a woman was pregnant. If it was really a child then surely it would be included in the census.
Nope. A child was in there.
Genesis 16:11
And the angel of the Lord said unto her, Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the Lord hath heard thy affliction.
That means a child was in there. or here ..

Genesis 19:36
Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father
So it is quite correct when killing the little people in the womb is called child sacrifice!
With child means pregnant. You can change the meaning to prop up your emotional argument, but that makes no difference to what is the truth.
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.

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #589

Post by dad1 »

brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:34 am
dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:21 am The water was brought here by God in the bible. You have no science to address or refute that.
The Bible does not say the water was brought here by God.
Oh. Let's hear Him tell us Himself then

Genesis 7:4
For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #590

Post by dad1 »

brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:37 am
dad1 wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:22 am
brunumb wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:13 am
"We know from geology that it never happened" is based on the millions of observations and pages of documents from hundreds of thousands of known people carrying out research and verification all over the world for many decades adding to the accumulated wealth of knowledge about our world.
False. None of that says there was no flood.
That is precisely what all of it says. There is evidence from all over the world that indicates the biblical global flood did not occur and could not have occurred.
You are mistaken. There are aspects of it that are interpreted incorrectly. The evidence itself says nothing of the sort though.

Post Reply