posted
Day 1 let there be light.... Day 4 sun, moon and stars.... after Day 3 dry land and plants. That particular bit is why I'm no longer a young earth creationist. I can't figure out how to take that literally, or accept the paradox.
I can accept the paradox of Free Will and Predestination, but I just can't get around this one in any sort of literal fashion. And I never saw CRI adress it satisfactorily when I went to their museum or was reading their literature.
posted
As for the "eternal statutes," I have read it explained (explained away if you want to be critical) very differently. It is an Eternal Statute because it was given by an Eternal Deity. Therefore, it is a statement of WHO gave it rather than Longevity of the Law itself.
I have also read it explained that the Laws are not eternal, but the precepts they represent are eternal. Thus, loving others, keeping the body healthy, obedience to Deity, etc. are the underlying eternal elements of proscriptions.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I think heaven is in the physical universe... just kinda hidden.
It does say he made the stars... I don't know that it means he made them that specific day. According to the KJV, it can mean he didn't make them that day. But I don't read Hebrew, so it's not like I can look at the original.
Is the war in heaven a Christian belief? *shrugs* I'm a Christian, so I guess it works for me. I was pretty sure there was plenty of stuff in the OT about it, especially in Isaiah.
Posts: 2880 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess I'm alone in my desire to be right, above all else. But what else matters, besides being right? I'm serious.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: As for the "eternal statutes," I have read it explained (explained away if you want to be critical) very differently. It is an Eternal Statute because it was given by an Eternal Deity. Therefore, it is a statement of WHO gave it rather than Longevity of the Law itself.
I have also read it explained that the Laws are not eternal, but the precepts they represent are eternal. Thus, loving others, keeping the body healthy, obedience to Deity, etc. are the underlying eternal elements of proscriptions.
Doesn't really work with the original text. "Chukat olam l'doroteichem" means "it is a forever statute for your generations". The translation of "olam" as "eternal" is because "forever" sounds weird in that context. It's clear in the original that it's the law itself that is forever, and not the Giver.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Katarain: It does say he made the stars... I don't know that it means he made them that specific day. According to the KJV, it can mean he didn't make them that day. But I don't read Hebrew, so it's not like I can look at the original.
It does say He created them that day.
Then again, we've always believed that the light created on the first day was not generated by stars, and was not something we're familiar with today.
quote:Originally posted by Katarain: Is the war in heaven a Christian belief? *shrugs* I'm a Christian, so I guess it works for me. I was pretty sure there was plenty of stuff in the OT about it, especially in Isaiah.
Hmm... not that I've ever seen. And I've been through Isaiah fairly comprehensively.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by c.t.t.n.: I guess I'm alone in my desire to be right, above all else. But what else matters, besides being right? I'm serious.
So I'll take the question seriously. In my opinion, doing right can be more important than being right. Also... I don't know if you're married, but if you are, you probably won't be for long if you feel that way about being right.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is it impossible for God to have created heavens/earth and yet that not mean the entire universe? Why are heavens and universe synonyms? Is that said anywhere?
Would it be impossible for God to create stars as far as people on earth could see? Couldn't heavens simply mean the environs surrounding the earth? Or the atmosphere?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by c.t.t.n.: I guess I'm alone in my desire to be right, above all else. But what else matters, besides being right? I'm serious.
So I'll take the question seriously. In my opinion, doing right can be more important than being right. Also... I don't know if you're married, but if you are, you probably won't be for long if you feel that way about being right.
lol
Truer words were never spoken.
Apologies for the double post.
I just agreed to let my wife spend $50 on some new clothes and I know it's better if we save the money, as we need to budget pretty tightly. But with some unfortunate events occurring recently and her getting a new job I felt I could break down for $50 so she could have some new clothes when she starts.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, your interpretation of the original text doesn't work for me, so guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dan_raven, just because someone has faith does not mean something good, necessarily. What they have faith IN is what really matters.
Ron, my comment was an explanation of Judaic belief that it is more important to keep one self according to the scriptures than it is to police the rest of the world.
I agree that having faith is not always a good thing, if what you have faith in is bad. However, I have only my own heart and mind to direct me to which faith is "right".
What I've found is far too often over zealous Christians (and Muslims, and New Age Wiccans etc) are so determined to help me pick what they believe is "right" that they loose track of doing what is right.
This doesn't even count the Christofascists (if we can have Islamifascists, we should acknowledge the Christofascists out there.) who are more concerned that everyone else obeys Biblical Morals and Biblical Science that they forget to obey them as well. "Thou Shall Not Bear False Witness" makes no exception for evangelism.
quote:what else matters, besides being right?
5) Learning what is right. 4) Love and being loved. 3) Teaching what is right. 2) Understanding what is right. 1) Doing right.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by msquared [in reference to the chicken and egg debate]: Genisis says that God created all the birds in the sky and the animals on the ground, or something like that.
But a chicken is a bird on the ground.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The chicken was once a bird in the air, but he was the snake's minion in the Garden. Satan could never have succeeded in tempting Eve if the chicken hadn't been in the background saying "Yeah, yeah, you tell her Snake."
It didn't really get mentioned, but when the snake lost his legs, the chicken got his wings clipped.
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: As for the "eternal statutes," I have read it explained (explained away if you want to be critical) very differently. It is an Eternal Statute because it was given by an Eternal Deity. Therefore, it is a statement of WHO gave it rather than Longevity of the Law itself.
I have also read it explained that the Laws are not eternal, but the precepts they represent are eternal. Thus, loving others, keeping the body healthy, obedience to Deity, etc. are the underlying eternal elements of proscriptions.
Doesn't really work with the original text. "Chukat olam l'doroteichem" means "it is a forever statute for your generations". The translation of "olam" as "eternal" is because "forever" sounds weird in that context. It's clear in the original that it's the law itself that is forever, and not the Giver.
Which still provides you zero support for your contention that Christians think that God lies.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
We've had this discussion about the age of the earth at least once before. In this thread the point came up that Moses is responsible for recording the Genesis account of the creation of the earth, that Moses probably saw the whole process in a vision, that the vision was probably not presented in real time (at least not without lots of popcorn and potty breaks), and that Moses probably assigned the time base for the events that he observed in the vision.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
then what are you saying cttn? Doesn't seem like you've contributed anything terribly constructive here.... Why did you start this thread at all?
posted
My point is, hatrack consensus means exactly squat, from my point of view. The average hatracker is about 24, and of above average intelligence. I'm only in my early 30's, and I already know I've got another several decades of basic learning to even begin to feel basically competent. Hatrack...knows....almost....nothing, in the aggregate.
In my personal experience, in the subject areas I know the most about, Hatrack looks the dumbest to me.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:My point is, hatrack consensus means exactly squat, from my point of view.
Were you under the impression that anyone thinks "hatrack consensus" means anything?
I'm still wondering what the point of this thread is. Is it to just pull Hatrack down a peg or two? Was there some movement to make Hatrack consensus the basis for foreign policy, and you're trying to save the country from that?
What, exactly, is the point of saying "You all are dumber than you think you are (in the aggregate - nothing personal)"?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you go to stamp collector meetings and shout "They're only pieces of paper! You shouldn't like them!"
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
So what you missed first-semester civility? A poll is not an attempt at discussion. It is an attempt to draw out people you disagree with.
Posts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: The love of hatrack is nothing to prize. That's my point. I used to feel differently
I don't think this is a reflection of "hatrack" as a forum but a reflection on your own personal state at the moment, obviously you still care or you wouldn't have started this thread at all.
So let's talk about it. What made you change your mind? Why did you feel that it meant something?
posted
Banna, I was too young and ignorant to know it was meaningless. And of course I care. up until...right now.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am still trying to figure out why this thread is such a low mark? We've had pro and con discuss rationally their reasons for believing. We've had a few attempts at wit and humor, and we've had CTTN say, "See, you aren't so smart after all."
I am unsure what CTTN would consider smarter? The total flaming of the idea of YE or the total unyeilding support of it? Would a simple Y/N vote by everyone have proven our eliteness?
CTTN could you explain where we failed?
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually went and checked the age/religion demographic thread, but it the results were just tabulated by religion and over/under 30, as the thread's intent was to find out if the forum was primarily composed of "young Mormons." Anyway, 30% of the respondents were over 30 and 70% under. But since the youngest responding was 15, most were in their 20s, and there were quite a few in their 40s and 50s, I would "eyeball" the average as high 20s. Of those responding, of course.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Being loved is not meaningless. However being loved by an intangible conglomerate entity of diverse human beings such as hatrack probably isn't realistic.
Why would you look for such a place in order to be loved in the first place? Hatrack is a wonderful support network but it is individuals that establish relationships with each other and give and receive love that create meaning in life. While a forum can sometimes provide the means of communication between those individuals it isn't a sentient being that can love on its own as a living organism.
So we've established that you feel unloved. What else?
quote:Originally posted by Katarain: The average hatracker is 24? Since when?
I'm 24 it must be true.
c.t.t.n: What exactly do you plan to accomplish by this whole Hatrack isn't anything special schtick?
Do you plan to walk out of it gracefully? I guess I don't understand where this is all coming from, or where you are going with it.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
cttn is feeling unloved by hatrack, and now that they are older and wiser, they think that being loved by a forum is probably meaningless, but they still care so that they need to demonstrate to everyone else in a personal manner that it is meaningless because if everyone agrees that it is meaningless then they think they will feel better, and they are getting attention in the mean time which also makes them feel better, even though it is negative attention rather than being loved. At least it is being noticed rather than overlooked.
(how's my synopsis cttn?)
AJ (sorry didnt' realize it was cttn not cttm)
Posts: 11265 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
fugu13, when you enter into the debate between creationists and evolutionists, you have to follow the arguments back and forth all the way, as far as they go, to their conclusion. Don't assume that just because evolutionists have come up with a "response" they have really answered the creationists' arguments and successfully dismissed their evidence. That's what they hope you will do. Follow the arguments back and forth to see what creationists say in response to the attempts to refute them.
That website you gave a link to is obviously propagandistic. You can see that just from the black and white "picture" of Dr. Humphries they selected, that makes him look like a crazy fanatic. (That is not the way he really looks.) Looking through the text, I do not see well-reasoned arguments, only gratuitous insults and cheap shots. That is not a responsible website.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
