Calling out Robbie Carobbie.

Originally posted by bbarr
Since, by and large, you've ignored the substance of my post, I'll just post it again:

Second, if you claim that God exerts agency here indirectly, by creating physical laws and properties which themselves explain these phenomena, then isn't that just the strategy of accommodation you are rejecting in the case of evolution? I'm not here particularly interes ...[text shortened]... determine which strategy you should use in any particular case? I am honestly curious here.

actually its not that i ignored the substance of your post, i never really understood it to be honest. You see Mr Barr i am not an intellectual nor do i profess to be an intellectual, thus when i encounter posts such as yours, through the great diversity of language the thoughts themselves are often cloaked or at best a little hazy if you do not mind me saying. Its not in any sense a deficiency on your part, i just find that when things are explained in simple terms the thoughts themselves shine through rather than having to wade through the language to find them, hold them up to reason and only then evaluate them 🙂

it seems to me that i have given my interpretation of scripture in that these mechanisms that you referred to from the physical world are evidence of Gods love, for they produce phenomena which appeal to our senses making life what it is. If this is not an interpretation then i do not know what is.

the context itself is the determining factor of whether a scriptural reference is to be viewed as literal or figurative. It is as in chess relative to the context or as we are want to say, the position. Take for example water, there are many figurative and illustrative usages for water, is there not? the water of life, tumultuous seas of mankind, here is one,

(Job 29:23) . . .And they waited for me as for the rain, And their mouth they opened wide for the spring rain. . .

on the other hand there are simply descriptions of the cycle itself which require no interpretation,

(Ecclesiastes 1:7) . . .All the winter torrents are going forth to the sea, yet the sea itself is not full. To the place where the winter torrents are going forth, there they are returning so as to go forth. . .

thus if i have understood you correctly, the context is the deciding factor of a literal or a figurative evaluation.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
It has nothing to do with cider and beer. If you simplify this much, you'll never be able to understand. And that's perhaps the reason of your current understanding to science. You simplify too much.

i am a simple peasant, i like simple things, they are clear and unambiguous.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
actually its not that i ignored the substance of your post, i never really understood it to be honest. You see Mr Barr i am not an intellectual nor do i profess to be an intellectual, thus when i encounter posts such as yours, through the great diversity of language the thoughts themselves are often cloaked or at best a little hazy if you do not min ...[text shortened]... stood you correctly, the context is the deciding factor of a literal or a figurative evaluation.

Sorry, I thought you were a native English speaker. I forget this is an international site sometimes. I'll try to simplify the point. But please let me know if you continue to have trouble with the language...:

Scripture says God created life on Earth. Scripture also says that God draws up drops of water. Scientists leave God out of their explanation of life of Earth, they prefer abiogenetic and evolutionary explanations. Scientists also leave God out when talking about evaporation, they prefer chemical explanations. Some people want to show that Scripture does not rule out abiogenesis and evolution. These people interpret Scripture non-literally. They think God created life by using physical laws and processes, including abiogenesis and evolution. You think this is a mistake, and that we should interpret Scripture literally on the issue of creation. But you don't think we should interpret Scripture literally when it comes to evaporation. When it comes to evaporation, you think God causes it by using physical laws and processes. So, you rule out one type of interpretation of Scripture when it comes to the creation of life, but you use that very same type of interpretation of Scripture when it comes to evaporation. I want to know why you treat these things differently.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i am a simple peasant, i like simple things, they are clear and unambiguous.

That's why you often are so wrong.

Originally posted by bbarr
Sorry, I thought you were a native English speaker. I forget this is an international site sometimes. I'll try to simplify the point. But please let me know if you continue to have trouble with the language...:

Scripture says God created life on Earth. Scripture also says that God draws up drops of water. Scientists leave God out of their explanation cripture when it comes to evaporation. I want to know why you treat these things differently.

Its not so much the language i was just never one for revelling in verbosity.

what is it about the context defining the interpretation of scripture that yet evades you? you are drawing broad generalisations and attributing values where none exist.

If you want to show that created does not actually mean created in the literal sense then be my guest, if you want to show any link from scripture to any biological processes, then also you are most welcome. I did not state, and we must be quite clear on this, that the meaning of God drawing up water means that he literally does so, that was your interpretation, not mine, thus you are attributing to me values that i do not have and then drawing conclusions on the basis of those assumptions.

I shall say it once more in the hope that it may percolate into your psyche, there is no scriptural nor scientific evidence that God has used the process of abiogenesis nor the evolutionary process, if you would like to provide some, then you are most welcome. As for me i do not treat anything differently, the context is the deciding factor on specific interpretation of scripture, hopefully this is now clear, God knows i provided references illustrating the point.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
while I am flattered in your interest dear Noobster whether the church of England or the Catholic church or any other so called Christian organisation accepts the theory of evolution is neither here not there for they accept many non scriptural ideas and practices. The fact of the matter is, and we have been through this before, God knows we have be ...[text shortened]... theory of evolution to create and diversify the many varied forms of life that we see today.[/b]

the mark of a true zealot: all others are wrong, he is right.

a church 1000 years old, another 500 years old. had lots of times to figure stuff out. but they failed because... they are either not possesed by god's spirit as the jws (or whatever cult the carrobie is) are, or they are stupid, or they are downright evil for intentionally warping the belief. we are also talking about a church whom christ established through peter and that paul guy.

but the jws come. through divine inspiration or simply outstanding intelligence, they figure out how the catholics and the orthodox were wrong all along. very impressive. they also are sure they are right and everyone else is wrong.

here is another awesome example of logic and awesomeness. the carrobie calls the catholics for not presenting scriptural evidence of their claims. or supporting claims that actually contradict the bible. what claims? what contradictions? where are your arguments that the catholics really mess the bible up?

God has used evolution (an assertion for which there is no scriptural basis nor scientific basis (that is why they vehemently deny the flood, the creation of humans and assert that everyone who does not share their views are ignorant) even though these things were taught by Christ). What they have in fact done is abandon the teachings of Christ and have supplanted it with a materialistic view of the emergence of life, whether they accept this or not, that is what they have done.

is it your honest opinion that those that embrace evolution have forsaken Jesus? That to be a christian requires you to believe in a book christ himself changed mostly all of it? that to be a christian requires you to take 1 or 2 sentences christ said about genesis as something other than metaphors? Jesus holds himself holds genesis unimportant, proof of that is the extensive sermons he gave about the origin of life, oh wait he didn't give any.

I believe in God. And i hold evolution to be currently the best theory we have about the development of life. And therefore i hold god to be responsible of triggering evolution. There is no scriptural basis because i don't need any. Just as you read the bible and believe you have found the ultimate interpretation, i too believe some parts of it are wrong and i refuse to believe them.

Also while we are on the subject of making claims that have no scriptural base, what do you call that awesome interpretation of the 7 days of genesis you once gave us? how the stars weren't really created before the plants, how the clouds diffused the light(what light? from where). Just thinking about it makes me cringe.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Actually, we have been here before, and it is quite clear that Jesus does not teach against evolution. You take his teaching on marriage and twist it around to be a scientific statement about creation.

surely he must have some other biblical verse where jesus speaks against evolution. not just the "man and woman shall become one" bit. i mean this is robbie carrobie. he wouldn't make such a claim with only one reference(that was meant for another subject altogether), would he?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
the mark of a true zealot: all others are wrong, he is right.

a church 1000 years old, another 500 years old. had lots of times to figure stuff out. but they failed because... they are either not possesed by god's spirit as the jws (or whatever cult the carrobie is) are, or they are stupid, or they are downright evil for intentionally warping the belief. ...[text shortened]... e clouds diffused the light(what light? from where). Just thinking about it makes me cringe.

sorry Zapansy i am uninterested in your caustic diatribe, if you have anything of substance to post, perhaps any evidence that God has used either abiogenesis or the evolutionary hypothesis, then let us know, answers on a postcard addressed to Robbie carrobie, courtesy of RHP, spirituality forum. make sure you lick the stamp!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Hi, yes, its vewy vewy intwesting Mr.Barr, what he is referring to is the water cycle or as you so accurately describe it, 'meteorological phenomena'.

This like other cycles, the nitrogen cycle for example are mechanisms put in place by God for the healthy functioning of the planet. These are rather amazing self perpetuating mechanisms which ra ...[text shortened]... foodstuff for our enjoyment, different seasons, cleansing the planet of pollutants etc etc.

is he required to direct every atom in the nitrogen cycle? or is that simply a process that doesn't require god intervention?

you speak of countless laws put forth by god. does he have to constantly regulate each of them or not? and if he doesn't, why is it so hard to understand that he triggered evolution as another phenomenon, just like the nitrogen cycle? why wouldn't evolution be a testament of the awesomeness of god?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
surely he must have some other biblical verse where jesus speaks against evolution. not just the "man and woman shall become one" bit. i mean this is robbie carrobie. he wouldn't make such a claim with only one reference(that was meant for another subject altogether), would he?

actually Zapansy the onus is not on me to provide any evidence, but on you people who have made the assertion, for i myself can provide lots of scriptural references which refute the claim.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
is he required to direct every atom in the nitrogen cycle? or is that simply a process that doesn't require god intervention?

you speak of countless laws put forth by god. does he have to constantly regulate each of them or not? and if he doesn't, why is it so hard to understand that he triggered evolution as another phenomenon, just like the nitrogen cycle? why wouldn't evolution be a testament of the awesomeness of god?

evidence?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sorry Zapansy i am uninterested in your caustic diatribe, if you have anything of substance to post, perhaps any evidence that God has used either abiogenesis or the evolutionary hypothesis, then let us know, answers on a postcard addressed to Robbie carrobie, courtesy of RHP, spirituality forum. make sure you lick the stamp!

actually, these posts are for galveston mostly. you are a waste of time. maybe he will see some sense.

and also, i enjoy pointing flaws in the logic of others. it is my morning exercise. you however make it so freakin simple. in fact, i doubt there are a lot of people on these forums that would be unable to point how inane your comments on the spirituality forums are.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
evidence?

evidence of what? i was asking questions. you want me to prove questions?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
evidence of what? i was asking questions. you want me to prove questions?

yawn, when you have any evidence for your assertions, other than your usual caustic diatribe you can let the forum know, unanswered speculative questions dont count as evidence. you know the thing, anything scriptural linking God to the evolutionary process, anything scientific linking God to the evolutionary process, any teaching of Christ linking god to the evolutionary process, anything will do Zapansy.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yawn, when you have any evidence for your assertions, other than your usual caustic diatribe you can let the forum know, unanswered speculative questions dont count as evidence. you know the thing, anything scriptural linking God to the evolutionary process, anything scientific linking God to the evolutionary process, any teaching of Christ linking god to the evolutionary process, anything will do Zapansy.

Just his usual retorics, his method of avoid questions he cannot answer.