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

Skip to comments.

The Case Against Intelligent Design. The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name.
The New Republic ^ | 8/11/05 | Jerry Coyne

Posted on 08/15/2005 9:18:06 AM PDT by hc87

Exactly eighty years after the Scopes "monkey trial" in Dayton, Tennessee, history is about to repeat itself. In a courtroom in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania in late September, scientists and creationists will square off about whether and how high school students in Dover, Pennsylvania will learn about biological evolution. One would have assumed that these battles were over, but that is to underestimate the fury (and the ingenuity) of creationists scorned.

The Scopes trial of our day--Kitzmiller, et al v. Dover Area School District et al--began innocuously...

(Excerpt) Read more at tnr.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anothercrevothread; creationism; crevolist; enoughalready; evolution; intelligentdesign; makeitstop; notagain
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420421-428 last
To: bondserv
"Thank you for posting this information.It clears up some things I have seen twisted in the past."

You're welcome. I was forced to post major excerpts from the commentary because even though I have pointed people to my profile page (click my screen name), many are too emotionally immature to "go there".LOL

421 posted on 08/17/2005 10:14:33 AM PDT by Matchett-PI (The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law overarching rulers and ruled alike)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: js1138
"The fact that God exists does not demonstrate He has the attributes you ascribe."

Mere men get to "ascribe" to God what attributes He's allowed to have???? Puuuleeeeze. LOL

I have to get to work and don't have time right now to respond to your assertion in any detail. I'll get back to this after bit.

In the meantime, you should carefully read this link and let it actually sink in: Why Bible Critics Do Not Deserve the Benefit of the Doubt

422 posted on 08/17/2005 10:36:09 AM PDT by Matchett-PI (The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law overarching rulers and ruled alike)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 420 | View Replies]

To: malakhi

"Sorry, Matchett, but I don't agree with your preferred Biblical "experts". Nor does that disagreement make me "emotionally immature"." ~ malakhi

Really? So what _rational reason_ would you give for not agreeing with these statements, then?:

"Let's anticipate and toss off the obvious objection: "Why did God make the Bible so hard to understand, then?" It isn't -- none of this keeps a person from grasping the message of the Bible to the extent required to be saved; ____where the line is to be drawn____ is upon those who gratuitously assume that such base knowledge allows them to be competent critics of the text, and make that assumption in absolute ignorance of their own lack of knowledge -- what I have elsewhere spoken of in terms of being "unskilled and unaware of it."

And is my observation to this effect justified? Well, ask yourself this question after considering what various fields of knowledge a complete and thorough (not to say sufficient for intelligent discourse, though few even reach that pinnacle, especially in the critical realm) study of the Bible requires:

Linguistics/language -- indeed three languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Criticizing the Bible in English is a hallmark of critics, who must inevitably resort to one of several excuses: "The translators obviously thought this was good enough, so that settles it." It never occurs to them to ask why a certain translation choice was made, or to make a critical study of the word in question as needed; in a most extreme case -- veteran readers know to whom I refer -- we have persons who think that it is impossible for there to be any new insights into ancient languages, and will openly reject out of hand any more recent study suggesting a word or words have a more nuanced or different meaning than the chosen English word. It is also ridiculous to assume that even the matched English word can be vested with the same contextual significance as the original word -- any bilingual can attest that there are plenty of examples between languages of words that do not adequately capture all nuances when they are used to translate another word. A reader has added that English itself has changed, not only in the hundreds of years since the KJV, but also in the last decades since the NIV was written (which is the reason there is a new TNIV coming out, and why we now even have word studies on the KJV!).

Literature -- One prominent critic advises people to "read the Bible like a newspaper." That is absolutely the worst advice that can be given for reading any text that isn't a newspaper. The genres of the Bible include narrative, poetry, proverbial literature, wisdom discourse, a treaty (that's what Deuteronomy is, believe it or not!), legal codes, genealogies, biography (that is what the Gospels are!), personal letters and general letters, rhetoric (an art form in the ancient world), riposte, and apocalyptic. Treating each one as a newspaper -- written yesterday and with our own ideas in mind -- is a mistake constantly made by critics who impose their own absurd genre-demands on the text.

Textual criticism -- this is a specialized field of determining the original state of a text.

Archaeology -- a field with many sub-fields of it's own, which may involve knowledge of geography, geology or chemistry.

Psychology -- the study of human behavior, essential to understanding the motives of persons in a text; yet most people do not even have basic knowledge of their own psychology! This aspect is complicated by the variance in human behavior we note in our next entry:

Social sciences -- it is in this field that we have found the most ignorance among critics, and not much less of it in others. It would shock the average pew-sitter to be told such things as that: persons in the world of the Bible did not have what we would call an internal conscience; or that Biblical society was heavily focused on honor, much like Japan's culture. No, most assume that people everywhere and at every time have been pretty much the same. That's one of the biggest mistakes a critic can make.

History/historiography.

Theology/philosophy -- obviously!

Logic -- oh yes -- we know, most critics think they have a handle on this one; but most have done little more than memorize the names of a few fallacies, and then look for them everywhere they go. Sadly this is the one area in which people are mostly "unskilled and unaware of it" -- or else, they presume that this is all they need, and never bother to study in any other area.

Miscellaneous -- I may think of more later, but as a catch-all, for example, you may have to learn a bit about biology (for example, if someone says the Bible teaches wrongly about the ostrich's living habits) or other areas.

Excerpted from:
Why Bible Critics Do Not Deserve the Benefit of the Doubt
http://www.tektonics.org/af/calcon.html


423 posted on 08/17/2005 10:50:29 AM PDT by Matchett-PI (The very idea of freedom presupposes some objective moral law overarching rulers and ruled alike)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 382 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
Matchett-PI: "I can think of four just off the top of my head - maybe others will have some free "play time" to add to the list:

Ah, yes, I remember that. You cited four claims that I never made to prove that you're not a liar. This following your lie that Wayne Carley referedd to evolution as religion.

People like you are the reason that intelligent people consider creationists to be liars.
424 posted on 08/17/2005 1:08:52 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
Thank you for posting this information.It clears up some things I have seen twisted in the past.

You're going to take the word of someone who has demonstratably falsified quotes in the past?
425 posted on 08/17/2005 1:09:53 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
This fool [or 'man'] wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth." - Martin Luther"

Notice he says "Sacred Scripture" with a direct reference to Joshua 10:13. These are the man's own words.

Beware of holding steadfastly to a particular interpretation of Scripture and/or a scientific model, which may be in error.

Are these your words? This is what I have been arguing about in the first place. I have no problem with this. But I would say many on your side do.

426 posted on 08/17/2005 1:18:00 PM PDT by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
You became an atheist when you were 10 years old, based on ideas of God that you learned in Sunday School. Your ideas about God haven't changed since.

I would say this is much more of a problem for the YECs. They haven't progressed beyond a 4th grade level in their understanding of religion (6000 yr old earth and Noah's ark) or science (monkeys morphing into humans).

427 posted on 08/17/2005 1:21:26 PM PDT by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Not sure what, if any side your on, but you define the level of intelligence and courtesy of 'your side' of this discussion.
And buddy you make it look like an accident, a train wreck HA HA HA HA.
And then you run off and never answer any questions either. Whats up with that?

People like you are the reason that intelligent people consider creationists to be liars.

What bogus BS! What is this one of the strawman or other false arguments you put forward?
I'll give it a name. It is the 'best of the best' contributions by Yours Truly Dimensio
428 posted on 08/17/2005 3:19:11 PM PDT by mordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420421-428 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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