To: mlc9852
Either the Bible is true or it isn't, unless you want to pick and choose what may be or may not be true, rendering the entire Bible useless, IMHO. The Bible has many contradictions and errors. That does not render it useless, IMHO. It just means that people make mistakes. Whether the mistakes were made because the writers were incapable of comprehending what God was telling them, or because the translation was in error, or because a book was included in the Bible when it should not have been, or whatever, does not make it useless.
If we can observe certain evidence that contradicts the Bible it does not mean that God does not exist. That would be a logical fallacy. It does not mean that the Bible was not inspired by God. It just means that sometime in the past men made mistakes. That is the way that I look at it. I do not have any problem with this.
77 posted on
10/14/2005 10:31:47 AM PDT by
wyattearp
(The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
To: wyattearp
I don't think it prudent to engage in a "how literal is the Bible" debate using the Bible as a base of discussion. Scientists discover evidence of evolution, in the form of facts, eg. "this fossil is x years old and has qualities similar to y and z" or "this gene in animal x looks a whole lot like this gene in animal y." The Creationists then must offer an alternate explanation to the mounting evidence, which, as the evidence increases, they must attribute more and more to God planting evidence to make it appear as though evolution exists. When undecided people hear these arguments forced out into the open, they see more and more that the Creationist viewpoint is not in line with the typical ethical model for God.
On the other hand, an argument about the Bible quickly degrades into circular reasoning. "The Bible is God's word because the Bible says it is God's word." Of course, this will never be stated outright, so the sheer absurdity of that viewpoint is never openly revealed in the conversation.
Notice that apart from a couple of responses, my argument has failed to create debate. Mostly, that is because Creationists prefer the easy turf of "how true is the Bible?"
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson