Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: spunkets
Me: " Jesus interpreted Genesis literally."

You: "He did not. "

Actually, He cited Adam and Eve as a pattern for marriage. He treated the existence of Sodom literally. He treated the deluge literally. He treated Moses literally.

Regarding signs, I am not a sign-seeker. I am a truth seeker. The fact is that Jesus performed many signs. His resurrection is the most important of those signs. Jesus was kind enough to not perform a "sign" for the wicked. That sign would necessarily be fire from heaven to consume them.

Science is not truth-seeking. It is knowledge-seeking. Knowledge is a good thing, but is not the same as truth.

"The unceertainty [sic] principle has nothing to do with the claim made."

Yes it does. My point is that you cannot know everything by scientific observation. We know what happened on 9/11 historically, not scientifically. Yes, science will confirm the facts; but it cannot stand alone.

Take crime scene investigation. Why have witnesses? If all we need is scientific observation, just send in a scientist to the crime scene. With careful observation he will deduce with absolute certainty what took place and who is the culprit. Right?

"It's a science class. Scripture doesn't belong there, because it's not a science book. The cut from Gen 3 I gave you says plainly that man came from dust and will return to it. That is what science has found and you argue with it. You are also attempting to conjure up miraculous signs evident in the history of dust with ID, even though you were told they are not there."

I am no expert on current evolutionary opinions, but I was under the impression that evolutionists think man descended from life that came from the ocean, not from earth.

And you use circular reasoning. You make an arbitrary rule that only a certain set of opinions are valid then proceed to invalidate anyone who disagrees. Last time I checked, my school science books contained historical information about who made certain discoveries and how. Most of them used other tools like mathematics. By your logic, I could say you should not use math in the physics class because this is a science class not a math class. Or you might want to remove any references to HOW scientific discoveries were made, since that would be teaching history instead of science.

What you so arrogantly and inaccurately infer by your arbitrary rule is that the Bible has no merit other than promoting sectarian religious beliefs. The truth is the Bible is also great literature. It also contains important and reliable historical data. It also influenced history greatly. It also contributed largely to the legal philosophy of our nation. The moral ideas of property ownership, personal freedom, sanctity of life, etc. are greatly influence by the Bible. Contrary to your opinion, the Bible is also scientific. Learning the Bible is essential to a good education, though I do not think anyone should be forced to study it.

"Science is rational thought"

I hope you realize that science is more than just thought.

You quote from the Bible. Do you actually believe the Bible?
587 posted on 01/23/2005 11:26:45 AM PST by unlearner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 572 | View Replies ]


To: unlearner
"He treated Moses literally. He cited Adam and Eve as a pattern for marriage."

Matt 19:3-9,
Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”
“Haven't you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”

“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Moses said his laws came from God. God contradicts that and says the law came from Moses and the motivation for it was the hardness in their own hearts.

"He treated the existence of Sodom literally. He treated the deluge literally."

Luke 17:20-
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you.”

Then he said to his disciples, “The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. Men will tell you, ‘There he is!’ or ‘Here he is!’ Do not go running off after them. For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.

“Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.

“It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.

“It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. Remember Lot's wife! Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.”

There's no literal interpretation here, only a reference to the story. Jesus is in fact speaking to everyone in all ages personally here. What He is telling them is to be constantly vigilent and concerned with what is important-in particular, the matters He addressed. The reason is that all will see His coming.

"Jesus was kind enough to not perform a "sign" for the wicked. That sign would necessarily be fire from heaven to consume them."

He gives no sign unless He is personally present. The sign of the resurrection He gives is the Holy Spirit; there is no other. Neither you, nor anyone else can point to proof, or "sign" that He exists other than the presence of the Holy Spirit. That is, because it is His intent for each to either accept, or reject the Holy Spirit on their own accord and grounds. He said so here: Matt 12:31-32
"And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

He also said in Matt 13:...29-30,
“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’
“ ‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’ ”

You have nothing more than was given to all and what was given is the Holy Spirit. Science shows from dust and back to it, nothing more.

"I was under the impression that evolutionists think man descended from life that came from the ocean, not from earth. "

Dust is dust.

" We know what happened on 9/11 historically, not scientifically."

I know what happened scientifically. History and all other knowledge that fails a rational test is rubbish.

"by your arbitrary rule is that the Bible has no merit other than promoting sectarian religious beliefs."

I told you the Bible is not a science book, nor can it be used as such. I pointed out what God said was important. He was a carpenter, yet there's no mention of even how to build a toolbox, or any comment on the particular utilities of various woods.

"The moral ideas of property ownership, personal freedom, sanctity of life, etc. are greatly influence by the Bible.

They are not topics of science.

" Contrary to your opinion, the Bible is also scientific."

No, it is not. The rainbow is due to Raleigh scattering. The mechanism is the same reason the sky is blue. The rainbow existed before the flood. Post an example of science from the Bible.

598 posted on 01/23/2005 12:45:27 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 587 | View Replies ]

To: unlearner
By your logic, I could say you should not use math in the physics class because this is a science class not a math class.

That is about the DUMBEST statement I have ever seen. Math is used to model physical principles. There is NO physics without math. On the other hand, it is not required to know what originated the processes to understand how the work.

616 posted on 01/23/2005 1:42:09 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 587 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson