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
- 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 #641Oh man, next we'll be hit with the Brothers Grimm doctrine.dad1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 7:04 pmI disagree. Jesus said one thing and you say another. Overruled.brunumb wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:21 pmNonsense. The Bible is a book of claims. Nothing with any supernatural connotations has been verified. A lot of the allegedly historical records have not been verified. The Bible needs verification before it can be used to support any arguments based on what it contains. Applying faith is worthless. Faith is not a virtue. Faith can be used to prop up beliefs that are patently false along with those that are true. It is useless as a means of determining truth.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #642Yes. We do.
No. We have Jesus promising that He would send His Spirit to some in order that they get the words exactly right. We also have people that knew Him firsthand write their accounts like Peter and John. Paul also met Jesus and was taught by Him later miraculously. It was not done in secret.All we have is hearsay.
As one writer put itWe can't even be sure that biblical Jesus even existed.
"“Tiberius was the most powerful man in the world of his day. Jesus was one of the poorest, belonging to the peasant class as a Jewish carpenter. He even died the most shameful death, a slave’s death, on a cross during Tiberius’ reign. Yet we have far more reliable written sources and closer to the time of Jesus’ actual life and death than this Caesar of Rome."
https://seanmcdowell.org/blog/the-histo ... for-caesar
Engaging in denial that Jesus lived is akin to believing there was no last week.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #643I prefer them over evo lies.
By parroting and slang? Or have you more depth?I do so by showing how theist claims're empty as the donation bucket at a thieves convention.
I am not sure how you think I could put truth to truth? I take the bible as truth. So if you have some science that exposes that as false why are we seeing this sort of spam posting (after you promised you were leaving but didn't)?No. The insinuation is that if you could put truth to your claims you wouldn't hafta keep railing about how science can't help you put you no truth to your claims.
The idea here is that you are supposed to talk science and bring it clearly and concisely to bear on any point you are trying to say that science knows.
That was to help with the dog you spoke about in your drawer. Of course that was made up anyhow. Maybe you think it is a science claim?In what was does the smell of laundry help the theist prove their claims?
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #644There is no end to the number of beliefs you could choose. The folks here that chose a science belief, though, need to have a grip on things and be able to talk turkey about specifics in defending their religion.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 11:20 pmOh man, next we'll be hit with the Brothers Grimm doctrine.dad1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 7:04 pmI disagree. Jesus said one thing and you say another. Overruled.brunumb wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:21 pmNonsense. The Bible is a book of claims. Nothing with any supernatural connotations has been verified. A lot of the allegedly historical records have not been verified. The Bible needs verification before it can be used to support any arguments based on what it contains. Applying faith is worthless. Faith is not a virtue. Faith can be used to prop up beliefs that are patently false along with those that are true. It is useless as a means of determining truth.
- 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 #645That's on you. Evolution's a fact.
If theist claims had any depth, maybe my responses would be a bit depthier.dad1 wrote:By parroting and slang? Or have you more depth?JK wrote: I do so by showing how theist claims're empty as the donation bucket at a thieves convention.
Such is a question for the claimant.dad1 wrote: I am not sure how you think I could put truth to truth?
That doesn't make it so.dad1 wrote: I take the bible as truth.
I have no doubt you believe a book of fairy tales.dad1 wrote: So if you have some science that exposes that as false why are we seeing this sort of spam posting (after you promised you were leaving but didn't)?
But do link to and quote verbatim, where I've promised anything of the sort.
I was under the impression members of the moderator team could not also be on probation.dad1 wrote: The idea here is that you are supposed to talk science and bring it clearly and concisely to bear on any point you are trying to say that science knows.
Well how bout that. You believe biblical tales, but draw the line at tales of dogs getting into sock drawers.dad1 wrote:That was to help with the dog you spoke about in your drawer. Of course that was made up anyhow. Maybe you think it is a science claim?JK wrote: In what way does the smell of laundry help the theist prove their claims?
But since I can't prove my dog's a sock junkie, I'll retract that bit.
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 #646What we have is someone writing down promises and attributing them to Jesus. Nothing about Jesus can be verified. You believe because you were inculcated with that belief, not because there is any irrefutable evidence that any of it is true. The book is the claim, not the 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 #647Why would it not be? Evolving was a God given created trait for life here. In fact the adapting and evolving that went on in Adam's day was lightning fast compared to today. However, all adapting and evolving started with the created kinds! Science has nothing to say about that. The modern theory of evolution is a religious dogma founded on misconceptions, unbelief, and pure faith alone.
I don't think we'll hold our breath.
If theist claims had any depth, maybe my responses would be a bit depthier.
You were the one declaring what truth was or was not.Such is a question for the claimant.
No. We believe because it is true. Believing is not what makes it true.That doesn't make it so.
We can see that you call Scripture fairy tales. So tell us, what inspired the little hot soup to pop out the entire universe?I have no doubt you believe a book of fairy tales.
Not sure what that means or if there was a point.I was under the impression members of the moderator team could not also be on probation.
No. Actually a dog sniffing your drawer would not surprise me.Well how bout that. You believe biblical tales, but draw the line at tales of dogs getting into sock drawers.
OK, your first retraction is noted.But since I can't prove my dog's a sock junkie, I'll retract that bit.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #648You know John was a liar...because...?
Nothing about Jesus can be verified.
By who? Science? Hahaha
not because there is any irrefutable evidence that any of it is true.
I disagree. I agree with this instead
Acts 1:3
To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God
Can we see you present your first lifeform for forty days and your singularity speck? No. Not for a second, because they are made up fantasy.
Your claim about the book is a claim, not evidence. Such scoffing was predicted in the book in these days. You are evidence for the book!The book is the claim, not the 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 #649I challenge you to show you speak truth regarding the following...
1. God exists.
2. God can give stuff.
3. Traits are among the given.
4. Evolution is one of those given traits.
I challenge you to show you speak truth in the following...In fact the adapting and evolving that went on in Adam's day was lightning fast compared to today.
5. Adam existed.
6. Evolution was lightning fast in Adam's day.
Who or what do you propose created these "kinds"?However, all adapting and evolving started with the created kinds!
Says the bible promoter.Science has nothing to say about that. The modern theory of evolution is a religious dogma founded on misconceptions, unbelief, and pure faith alone.
Then what's all that about faith?...
No. We believe because it is true. Believing is not what makes it true.
I make no claims regarding the early universe.We can see that you call Scripture fairy tales. So tell us, what inspired the little hot soup to pop out the entire universe?
Retracting unsupportable claims is the honorable thing to do.dad1 wrote:OK, your first retraction is noted.JK wrote: But since I can't prove my dog's a sock junkie, I'll retract that bit.
Let's see how you do regarding your above challenged claims.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #650God is above the ability of science to deal with. The innumerable proofs for God fall outside the sandbox of science. Why post that question on a science forum?JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Fri Dec 09, 2022 11:01 pm I challenge you to show you speak truth regarding the following...
1. God exists
2. God can give stuff.
If we see a trait in a creature, or all creatures that were created, how would it possibly not be a part of the way they were created? It fits all the evidence we do have, the fossil record, etc. However, since science cannot detect anything to do with God, it falls under the firm category of belief alone. When people pretend science does or could or should cover these things, it is inevitable that we see that only faith is involved in reality, not fact or evidence itself, knowledge or science in any real sense of the word.3. Traits are among the given.
4. Evolution is one of those given traits.
Since it is established here by all responses so far, that science has no possible way of knowing, the only way to speak the truth about what and when and how God created is to read His word on the matter. Now, within that framework, using both the evidence from science and Scripture, it is a simple matter to deduce that whatever happened back then happened in a short time period. This we know because Adam did not live all that long ago. Then, looking at the fossil record, we see that many different creatures that are very similar existed. That would likely mean that these similar creatures, for the most part, adapted and changed (evolved) from the same original created kind. Elementary.I challenge you to show you speak truth in the following...
5. Adam existed.
6. Evolution was lightning fast in Adam's day.
Science has no way of knowing. They simply use a belief that there is no God since they can't see Him, and explain it all accordingly.Who or what do you propose created these "kinds"?
It doesn't matter who says it if it is true.Says the bible promoter.Science has nothing to say about that. The modern theory of evolution is a religious dogma founded on misconceptions, unbelief, and pure faith alone.
Faith does not mean if we choose to try to believe, that this then is what makes God true, or history, or last week, or creation etc. He must first be true, and then when we 'plug in' to the power, we partake also. (have faith grow)Then what's all that about faith?...
No. We believe because it is true. Believing is not what makes it true.
But does science? Ever heard of the big bang?I make no claims regarding the early universe.
Great, and since science can support NO origin claims with anything but belief, do the honorable thing!Retracting unsupportable claims is the honorable thing to do.