Replies

I read your "earlier post" and this one too.. there seems to be way to many questions and allusions to questions.. couched in snarky similes.. to approach seriously..

This forum works best with simple questions not all tangled up like a birds nest.. However; the time-line on when/how the earth was "formed" and the time-line of when humans appeared/were created could be different.. Not the same at all.. Overlooking the possibility Genesis ch 1-3 might be mostly metaphorical.. if not completely..

This planet maybe took zillions of "years" to age/percolate but humans may be fairly recent additions to it.. That is if "time" is indeed lineal at all.. Except from a human perspective..

If the third person on this planet did not come from the first two.. a huge yarn must be constructed.. You know, science fiction.. Because science fiction must be very logical else whats the point.. Science fact/reality need not be logical at all.. Reality has nothing to prove..

Adam and Eve could be composites and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil may be metaphorical.. as well as the Tree of Life.. Being locked into a linear time-line could be the "first-mistake".. generating a birds nest of other errors.. The Bible could be constructed on the "KISS" principle.. How did Jesus walk on unfrozen water?.. Did he?.. Or is that merely legend?..

Thank you both for sharing your insights, dear brothers in Christ!

I agree with hosepipe that it is much more productive to simplify the questions you'd like answered and to present them one at a time.

It is also helpful to concentrate on the questions themselves rather than the parties involved or prior dialogues.

These two steps would help all of us to follow and perhaps learn or contribute along the way.

[[Or is that merely legend?..]]

If it’s merely legend, and if everythign is open to subjective interpretation, and becomes allegory, or metaphor, then we have no reason to accept ANYTHING in God’s word as literal. Do we pick and hcoose which accounts to take literally? which to take metaphorically? If we can’t trust the I am, can’t trust the TRUTH, can’t figure out which is actually literal, and which is metaphorical, then there are no absolutes to cling to, and everythign becomes subjective, and nothing becomes right or wrong.

To: hosepipe (in 1127) and Alamo-Girl (in 1129):

Because the two of you both responded similarly and seem in agreement, I'm responding to the both of you at once here.

Said Hosepipe:
I read your "earlier post" and this one too.. there seems to be way to many questions and allusions to questions.. couched in snarky similes.. to approach seriously..

Oh, so first my reasoning falls apart and I'm suckered into something, and now I'm couching alluded questions in snarky similes? oh I wonder what I'll do next! ha ha.

But seriously, have you not done exactly what TXnMA did? Have you not accused me without demonstrating a single one of your accusations as true? What am I to think? How can I honestly come to any other conclusion?

Said Hosepipe:
This forum works best with simple questions not all tangled up like a birds nest..

Well, TXnMA's original question to me about how my reasoning could fall apart to let me get suckered into believing YEC - his original question was simple enough. And I answered it as simply as I could - as a matter of fact I bared my soul so as to speak - for any to poke holes in - if they can - in other words, I explained how I had arrived at my current position on the matter - which is what he had asked.

And besides, I don't believe my questions are tangled up like a bird's nest or whatever you call it. They seemed perfectly logical to me.

Said Hosepipe:
However; the time-line on when/how the earth was "formed" and the time-line of when humans appeared/were created could be different..(Emph. Mine.)

Ahh-huh! Could be?! Hmm. I could be a 747.. Or the king of old England.. or the son of papa-knew-Guinness.. Or a millionaire... But I'm probably not and all the the things I could be but can't demonstrate are sort of besides the point.

As a scientist, I'd rather discuss the facts - the things that we do know - rather then whimsical "could be's".

Said Alamo-Girl:
Thank you both for sharing your insights, dear brothers in Christ!

Thank you kindly for that encouragement! I really appreciate it.

I agree with hosepipe that it is much more productive to simplify the questions you'd like answered and to present them one at a time.

But you see I have found that folks who look at a list of questions and refuse to answer them all are just about as likely to look at any single one of them and refuse to answer that one as well. It's not like my approximately 8 questions were hard, lengthy, or confusing:

Said MrJesse:
1: Did God create Adam and Eve, or did all life start from a single primitive cell?
2: At what point did non-man become man? Has it happened yet?
3: At what point did the generations become literal?
4: Was Noah an actual person?
5: Was Abraham an actual person? What about Issac, Jacob?
6: What about Jacob's 12 sons? King David? Solomon?
It is clear that you don't believe in the 6-day 7k year ago creation. But what exactly do you believe?
7: Do you believe that Noah built the ark?
8: And that God closed the door thereon?

It would be quite easy for someone to just copy those into their reply and insert their answers - and now I've even numbered them so as to make it easier still!

And it doesn't make sense to break those questions across multiple posts because they are really all interrelated, asking "Exactly where do you draw the line between Biblical literalness and allegory?"

Said Alamo-Girl:
It is also helpful to concentrate on the questions themselves ...

Exactly! It is extremely helpful to concentrate on the questions themselves. And that's what I did in explaining how I've arrived at my position when TXnMA wanted to know how my reasoning fell apart such that I could be suckered as he put it. And concentrating on the questions is exactly what I did when I asked about "Was Abraham a real person" and so on.

continued Alamo-Girl:
... rather than the parties involved ...

Again, I agree! But you see, the other parties are refusing to concentrate on the questions. Both TXnMA have accused me of different things like being suckered into things or couching alluded questions, and, with all do respect, and even in your most kind way, you yourself wrote your whole little post almost entirely about the parties involved (myself and hosepipe) and prior dialogs and you completely neglected to address any of the actual questions at hand!

I'm not saying that you were wrong saying that which you did - but that, as you just demonstrated, sometimes it is needful to also talk about the undesirable actions of the parties or prior dialogs.

continued Alamo-Girl:
... or prior dialogues.

I'm not sure what you're talking about on this one. TXnMA's challenge to me was number 837 and my response to it was 874 on the same thread. What's the prior dialog?

Said Alamo-Girl:
These two steps would help all of us to follow and perhaps learn or contribute along the way.

Absolutely! I'm doing my best. But sometimes folks come along and try to prove their point by saying unfounded insulting things, then go away as if they were right and I was wrong, even though they never actually demonstrated that I was wrong. But when we try to have a discussion, but we refuse to discuss certain foundational issues, and if we are silent about dishonesty, we are going to find ourselves working on an unstable foundation - for a house built not upon truth cannot stand.

However, your points are valid and the two steps are good - but I think I can add two more steps to those:

If we wish to insult or decry as wrong someone's views or understanding of science, we MUST be absolutely sure to also demonstrate that our claims are true and explain. And secondly, if we discover that someone was right and we were wrong and we insulted them thinking that they were wrong, we MUST apologize.

In today's world of perverted reality, when the major social theme is "There's no such thing as wrong; just don't get caught", it is extremely important for us to remember that as Christians, we live for a higher calling - that of following Jesus Christ - who calls us to be extremely honest, "Let your yes be yes, and your no be no. Anything beyond that is of evil." Jesus said. (Matthew 5:37)

Dialogging with a dishonest person as if they were honest only hurts them - it does not help them.

Now, let's get on to the facts!

Thanks very much, and you all have a wonderful day!

-Jesse